|
On July 09 2012 07:14 TibblesEvilCat wrote:
My issue is the maps are HUGE! i mean really? were talking 2 min rush distances for some of these maps, i think there needs to be some scale down with some maps.
You can always proxy 
Anyway sometimes big maps can be good for terran as it makes broodlords so useless:
http://www.gomtv.net/2012gsls3/vod/67586
|
On July 09 2012 07:14 TibblesEvilCat wrote:
i don't understand why people are stressing so bad, if the changes are really that horribley bad, changes will made or unmade etc.
My issue is the maps are HUGE! i mean really? were talking 2 min rush distances for some of these maps, i think there needs to be some scale down with some maps.
To understand what that means to a lowish zerg player?
* can scout a push happening late and still have 1-2 rounds of units to defend
pro player
* scout push happening, setup awsome flanks, and still get to 90 drones comfortabily etc
that my issue, if players played some of the more oldschool maps vs there freinds, you'll see that you can still do timing pushes that punnish zerg for not doing everything correct there side
Why do you feel entitled to be able to not only crush the "push" but get 90 drones in the process? That's inherently imbalanced.
edit: nvm i read your post wrong, apologies
|
its not the zergs fault the huge maps on display play to there strengths.
|
On July 09 2012 07:18 neoghaleon55 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2012 07:16 Willzzz wrote:Yes but you once you test it out and find that it works it becomes the new default. Hellions were default between the queen buff, but they weren't default until they were 'discovered'. Oh and I play terran But yeah queens seem to do too many jobs for just one unit, they are too versatile. ...kind of like the marine...wouldn't you agree?
marine is stopped by aoe; i.e. blings, fungal, storm, collossi; its the base unit of a terran army, like the stalker is for protoss in many cases, and the ling is for zerg. queen isnt suppsed to be a macro unit (boosting economy through injects, as well as insane creep spread) and at the same time able to stop all aggro. Theres supposed to be some thought process in making a decision in RTS games. Why strategize when making 4-6 queens puts the zerg race in autopilot mode?
|
On July 09 2012 07:18 neoghaleon55 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2012 07:16 Willzzz wrote:Yes but you once you test it out and find that it works it becomes the new default. Hellions were default between the queen buff, but they weren't default until they were 'discovered'. Oh and I play terran But yeah queens seem to do too many jobs for just one unit, they are too versatile. ...kind of like the marine...wouldn't you agree?
Marines have big weaknesses as well though.
Early game queens win.
Mid game they can't fight on creep.
Late game they get owned by fungal.
There is no real window where marines are uncontested.
Early game queens can defend against all terran threats, marines, reapers, hellions, banshees. Within that early window zerg can build a lead that terran has to somehow equalise.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On July 09 2012 06:53 Shiori wrote:
I think everyone's missing the bigger problem: neither Protoss nor Terran have any way of dealing with lategame Zerg reliably. Whether it's the massive, scaling economy which benefits from stacked Larva, or the potency of the Infestor/BL, both races have an incredibly hard time playing standard against lategame Zerg armies. While it's certainly true that there are numerous problems existing for mid and early game XvZ, mostly insofar as pressure has been totally stifled by patch after patch, the true problem is that this pressure is necessary. No matchup should be on a timer. Period.
Please don't give me any ridiculous examples about lategame TvP in BW. It's not the same. I want a dynamic matchup in XvZ, and right now we don't have it. Archon Toileting, trying to out-multitask your opponent, and so on are just gimmicky bandaids on the problem that is lategame Zerg. I'm not entirely sure how to fix it, but it needs to be a real change, or we're going to keep alternating between strategy X being too strong in he midgame and summarily being nerfed so that that race can't actually play anymore.
The real problem isn't that Terran's early game is/was too strong, or that Protoss's all-ins are/were too strong. Maybe they were, and maybe they still are, but it doesn't matter because that's the only way to play against Zerg. I desperately, dearly want to macro against Zerg, and on ladder I often do, but any time I know I'm playing someone who has good mechanics, I all-in, because even if we're evenly skilled, he'll beat me in a macro game just due to the obscene power of BL/Infestor compositions. Terrans work the same way. Of all the GM Terrans I know, not a single one wants to get into a macro situation against a player they know is skilled. They will always go for some sort of all-innish pressure opening, and only macro if it pays off.
This is bad, and I'm sick of hearing people just lament this particular change or that particular change or pretend that things can be fixed by increasing the movement speed of the BC or some bullshit. The problem is that Zerg's economy is untouchable for most of the game barring all-in pressure, and that Zergs think the level of economy they are allowed right now should be the baseline, so that whenever a strategy is developed that reliably denies 80 Drones before 10 minutes, they complain that it's overpowered. It's not. You shouldn't be getting that many Drones by 10 minutes, because it means you're fucking miles ahead.
It's so frustrating to read this thread sometimes because people don't understand that since Zerg's economy is so fucking steroided right now, anything which fixes the matchups will mean that ZERG IS WEAKER AND CAN'T DREAM OF GETTING A 15 MINUTE BL FORCE.
When a Terran/Protoss can 'risk-free' stop you from purely Droning in the early game, that's the way it should be. It's not imbalanced that they can do this. You should never be able to purely Drone against someone who's playing standard. Never. It's fucking obscene to even suggest that. You shouldn't be taking a free third at 5 minutes against someone who didn't fast expand.
100% true imo
There is no way Zerg should have that many drones up that early in the game. First, maps were too small, Zergs had great difficulties evaluating when and where their opponents will be attacking, it was bad. Then maps became a little bigger, zergs had to scout carefully and be map-aware, controlling Xel naga towers and shit to prevent their opponent to just walk in their naturals by surprise. That was great IMHO. But now, maps are so BIG, even if they don't scout the incoming aggression very early, they have such an economy and such a creep spread that even you hit at a great early-mid timing like 11 or 12, you either have to kill the creep (which is impossible to fight on with Terran) or to walk on it and stim the fuck out of your MMM ball for half the map trying to out pace your opponent. Even so, there is a chance the zerg will still have enough to at least put up a fight or outright kill your army. I don't think it's the way it should be. I think zerg should have to make a choice between making units or drones. At the moment, they are making 80 drones and then max out. In every match up they can get away with making at least 60 or 70 drones BEFORE even the Terran/Protoss think about getting out on the map. So maybe, maybe Terrans need a buff, maybe the metagame will make this change and all will be balance once again but i agree with Shiori, there was always a problem with how zergs can power up so much if you don't touch them, even before the patch but there were ways to deal with that at least a little, at least making them have to be afraid a little. Making 80 drones in 10mins without havind to worry so much and get away with three bases before pool shoudn't happend.
|
On July 09 2012 07:23 TibblesEvilCat wrote:
yea but larger the map, the macro the game is force into as zerg can counter timing pushes easier. and everyone knows zerg given the time can get that 4base bl,infestor army up quick, as a t player you can;t counter everything,
i read your post wrong, and i see what you mean, but it's hard to understand you when your grammar is so poor...
"yea but larger the map, the macro the game is force into"
uh what?
|
On July 09 2012 07:23 TibblesEvilCat wrote:
its not the zergs fault the huge maps on display play to there strengths.
On a large map broodlords are simply too slow, on a smaller map terran can pressure before broodlords.
You play differently on different maps.
On a large map it makes sense for terran not to do a timing, but harass and build up a late game army of their own.
|
sorry my eng not very good.
larger maps force macro play, as zerg has more time to prepare maybe too much time to prepare.
things like proxy play etc are what i would call cheese, and must do damage to win or not come out behind. play that shouldnt be forced into just because other play wont work. which is the current problem,
my point being = MAPS ARE TOO BIG
willzzz let pm? so not to clutter thread
|
On July 09 2012 07:28 Willzzz wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2012 07:23 TibblesEvilCat wrote:
its not the zergs fault the huge maps on display play to there strengths. On a large map broodlords are simply too slow, on a smaller map terran can pressure before broodlords. You play differently on different maps. On a large map it makes sense for terran not to do a timing, but harass and build up a late game army of their own.
There is NO Terran late game army that really have a great efficient, reliable unit. EMP has too small a radius to be really efficient and even cloak can be very easily countered by some affordable Seers and Snipe was nerfed to oblivion, Ravens efficiency is luck based and is not a "reliable" unit, thors don't do shit beside tanking some damage and deal with a badly spread BL army...i won't talk about BCs because well they are BCs
|
I really think the game is = more balanced then people realise as BL speed can and should be abused. It simply isn't being at the moment by majority of players as they are still playing the same deathball v deathball
I admit Zerg has the best deathball in vast majority of 18-24 minute encounters..only very late game Battleship/Ravens/Vikings or Stalker Carrier can beat it and the amount of gas makes this strategy very unreliable.
The answer is whilst Zerg is using apm on macro Toss and Terran should be building up maximum opportunity for multiple harrass. Terran does to a point but Toss rarely does...build more than one warp prism ffs
|
On July 09 2012 06:53 Shiori wrote:
I think everyone's missing the bigger problem: neither Protoss nor Terran have any way of dealing with lategame Zerg reliably. Whether it's the massive, scaling economy which benefits from stacked Larva, or the potency of the Infestor/BL, both races have an incredibly hard time playing standard against lategame Zerg armies. While it's certainly true that there are numerous problems existing for mid and early game XvZ, mostly insofar as pressure has been totally stifled by patch after patch, the true problem is that this pressure is necessary. No matchup should be on a timer. Period.
Please don't give me any ridiculous examples about lategame TvP in BW. It's not the same. I want a dynamic matchup in XvZ, and right now we don't have it. Archon Toileting, trying to out-multitask your opponent, and so on are just gimmicky bandaids on the problem that is lategame Zerg. I'm not entirely sure how to fix it, but it needs to be a real change, or we're going to keep alternating between strategy X being too strong in he midgame and summarily being nerfed so that that race can't actually play anymore.
The real problem isn't that Terran's early game is/was too strong, or that Protoss's all-ins are/were too strong. Maybe they were, and maybe they still are, but it doesn't matter because that's the only way to play against Zerg. I desperately, dearly want to macro against Zerg, and on ladder I often do, but any time I know I'm playing someone who has good mechanics, I all-in, because even if we're evenly skilled, he'll beat me in a macro game just due to the obscene power of BL/Infestor compositions. Terrans work the same way. Of all the GM Terrans I know, not a single one wants to get into a macro situation against a player they know is skilled. They will always go for some sort of all-innish pressure opening, and only macro if it pays off.
This is bad, and I'm sick of hearing people just lament this particular change or that particular change or pretend that things can be fixed by increasing the movement speed of the BC or some bullshit. The problem is that Zerg's economy is untouchable for most of the game barring all-in pressure, and that Zergs think the level of economy they are allowed right now should be the baseline, so that whenever a strategy is developed that reliably denies 80 Drones before 10 minutes, they complain that it's overpowered. It's not. You shouldn't be getting that many Drones by 10 minutes, because it means you're fucking miles ahead.
It's so frustrating to read this thread sometimes because people don't understand that since Zerg's economy is so fucking steroided right now, anything which fixes the matchups will mean that ZERG IS WEAKER AND CAN'T DREAM OF GETTING A 15 MINUTE BL FORCE.
When a Terran/Protoss can 'risk-free' stop you from purely Droning in the early game, that's the way it should be. It's not imbalanced that they can do this. You should never be able to purely Drone against someone who's playing standard. Never. It's fucking obscene to even suggest that. You shouldn't be taking a free third at 5 minutes against someone who didn't fast expand.
+1, good post
User was warned for this post
|
On July 09 2012 07:35 Ireniicus wrote:
I really think the game is = more balanced then people realise as BL speed can and should be abused. It simply isn't being at the moment by majority of players as they are still playing the same deathball v deathball
I admit Zerg has the best deathball in vast majority of 18-24 minute encounters..only very late game Battleship/Ravens/Vikings or Stalker Carrier can beat it and the amount of gas makes this strategy very unreliable.
The answer is whilst Zerg is using apm on macro Toss and Terran should be building up maximum opportunity for multiple harrass. Terran does to a point but Toss rarely does...build more than one warp prism ffs
Good zergs will have nice overlord spread and even if you get viking/void ray to kill them, you spent gas and tech to combat a mineral only unit, that zerg will make anyways. with the larger maps, this means zerg has littery over a minute in some cases to react, when a round of unit takes 25-40 seconds to hatch. that means pressure play past allin isn't an option. forcing you into macro play, everyone knows passive macro play = zerg wins.
*disclaimer, i don't know the actual hatch time of units but i feel its in thoes regions to make zerglings/roaches
|
On July 09 2012 07:35 Ireniicus wrote:
I really think the game is = more balanced then people realise as BL speed can and should be abused. It simply isn't being at the moment by majority of players as they are still playing the same deathball v deathball
I admit Zerg has the best deathball in vast majority of 18-24 minute encounters..only very late game Battleship/Ravens/Vikings or Stalker Carrier can beat it and the amount of gas makes this strategy very unreliable.
The answer is whilst Zerg is using apm on macro Toss and Terran should be building up maximum opportunity for multiple harrass. Terran does to a point but Toss rarely does...build more than one warp prism ffs
Multiple warp prisms are all fine and dandy, but you need a very powerful economy to be able to do things like mass zealot/dt warpins consistently - 4 zealots won't kill anything of significance, and warping more stuff in means you can't escape with it. And for that, you need to be able to expand aggressively behind your harass, which makes the whole deal depend a lot on map architecture. That's why you rarely see Protoss beat Zerg in the lategame on Ohana or Metropolis. It's also why you see lategame PvZ most often on Entombed Valley.
|
On July 09 2012 07:35 Enearde wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2012 07:28 Willzzz wrote:On July 09 2012 07:23 TibblesEvilCat wrote:
its not the zergs fault the huge maps on display play to there strengths. On a large map broodlords are simply too slow, on a smaller map terran can pressure before broodlords. You play differently on different maps. On a large map it makes sense for terran not to do a timing, but harass and build up a late game army of their own. There is NO Terran late game army that really have a great efficient, reliable unit. EMP has too small a radius to be really efficient and even cloak can be very easily countered by some affordable Seers and Snipe was nerfed to oblivion, Ravens efficiency is luck based and is not a "reliable" unit, thors don't do shit beside tanking some damage and deal with a badly spread BL army...i won't talk about BCs because well they are BCs
I think the big problem most people have in TvZ is managing tech switches. Broodlords are ok to deal with if you know they are coming, same with ultras.
On a large map you can see broodlords coming a mile off and have time to prepare, not to mention killing off a few expos while they slowly drift across the map.
Ultras will come at you a lot quicker, but then you can deal with them pretty well with standard bio/tank. And even if you have useless supply in vikings a good sim city can make up for that.
While a big map makes early/mid game easier for zerg, it makes their late game less powerful because of broodlord speed.
|
Just a question but why cant zergs just attack into you when youre warping in 30 supply at their base? They can always win a basetrade, so why do some zergs wait and take all that harass instead of just going "fuck it ill attack"?
|
On July 09 2012 07:56 -y0shi- wrote:
Just a question but why cant zergs just attack into you when youre warping in 30 supply at their base? They can always win a basetrade, so why do some zergs wait and take all that harass instead of just going "fuck it ill attack"?
walls and forcefields. If they have mutas (which can avoid walls), they often will do it.
But basically walls and forcefields make it impossible to even start a basetrade.
|
On July 09 2012 07:48 TibblesEvilCat wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2012 07:35 Ireniicus wrote:
I really think the game is = more balanced then people realise as BL speed can and should be abused. It simply isn't being at the moment by majority of players as they are still playing the same deathball v deathball
I admit Zerg has the best deathball in vast majority of 18-24 minute encounters..only very late game Battleship/Ravens/Vikings or Stalker Carrier can beat it and the amount of gas makes this strategy very unreliable.
The answer is whilst Zerg is using apm on macro Toss and Terran should be building up maximum opportunity for multiple harrass. Terran does to a point but Toss rarely does...build more than one warp prism ffs Good zergs will have nice overlord spread and even if you get viking/void ray to kill them, you spent gas and tech to combat a mineral only unit, that zerg will make anyways. with the larger maps, this means zerg has littery over a minute in some cases to react, when a round of unit takes 25-40 seconds to hatch. that means pressure play past allin isn't an option. forcing you into macro play, everyone knows passive macro play = zerg wins. *disclaimer, i don't know the actual hatch time of units but i feel its in thoes regions to make zerglings/roaches
So just make 1 viking, that's a mere 75 gas, it's nothing.
Thing is late game a zerg has no supply to make units, he has 90 drones and a bunch of broods/corruptors/infestors. He can't make ling/roach if he is already 200/200.
If you have several little strike forces of marine/marauder that's very hard for him to deal with on a large spread out map.
|
On July 09 2012 08:02 Willzzz wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2012 07:48 TibblesEvilCat wrote:On July 09 2012 07:35 Ireniicus wrote:
I really think the game is = more balanced then people realise as BL speed can and should be abused. It simply isn't being at the moment by majority of players as they are still playing the same deathball v deathball
I admit Zerg has the best deathball in vast majority of 18-24 minute encounters..only very late game Battleship/Ravens/Vikings or Stalker Carrier can beat it and the amount of gas makes this strategy very unreliable.
The answer is whilst Zerg is using apm on macro Toss and Terran should be building up maximum opportunity for multiple harrass. Terran does to a point but Toss rarely does...build more than one warp prism ffs Good zergs will have nice overlord spread and even if you get viking/void ray to kill them, you spent gas and tech to combat a mineral only unit, that zerg will make anyways. with the larger maps, this means zerg has littery over a minute in some cases to react, when a round of unit takes 25-40 seconds to hatch. that means pressure play past allin isn't an option. forcing you into macro play, everyone knows passive macro play = zerg wins. *disclaimer, i don't know the actual hatch time of units but i feel its in thoes regions to make zerglings/roaches So just make 1 viking, that's a mere 75 gas, it's nothing. Thing is late game a zerg has no supply to make units, he has 90 drones and a bunch of broods/corruptors/infestors. He can't make ling/roach if he is already 200/200. If you have several little strike forces of marine/marauder that's very hard for him to deal with on a large spread out map.
No good Zerg has an army consisting of pure brood/infestors/corruptor . 30-50 Lings ( which is not alot of supply mind you ) is enough to deal with anything but really really big drops and are in general not a great idea with Infestors out.
|
50 lings is quite a bit of supply, and he will have to split that between bases, lings aren't that fast on a huge map.
You drop 8 marines behind some minerals and they take out a lot of lings and can just run away if they are surrounded.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
