|
Zerg is OP lategame.
Having accepted that,
Terran/Protoss SUPER lategame is OP.
Problem now is that Zerg 17-25min max into 30min remax lategame is too good. And game usually ends around here or Terran/Protoss gets crippled so hard.
If Terran/Protoss manage to survive this period, and get 5+ base with nearly unlimited resource, then Terran/Protoss can remax as fast as Zerg and get enough gas intensive units.
40min+ into the game, you can mass production buildings like Zerg, and have raven/ghost or whatever gas heavy protoss units at this point.
If any of you play a custom game "phantom mode," you know Terran/Protoss unit compositions are generally better due to virtually unlimited resource after 1 hour.
Imagine if you are asked to pick 1 race with unlimited amount of resource and infinity production buildings, and fight each other. I doubt Zerg is the best with this condition.
In normal 1v1, it is very rare to get to that point, so Zerg lategame is said to be OP.
Super lategame, or end game unit composition has been always Terran/Protoss favored, and it should be so. It's just that it is very hard to reach there. So, we need some tweaks either by delaying Zerg lategame, or making Terran/Protoss super lategame come early.
|
Carriers are the answer to PvZ lategame, but we just can't get them out in time.
|
On July 16 2012 10:48 xsnac wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 10:37 larse wrote:
Now the balance situation is even worse than Terran in 2010 and 2011. The Terran domination is most just centered on GSL but not in NA and EU in 2010 and 2011. It's slightly lean to Terran favor in NA and EU in 2010 and 2011, but people obviously exaggerate the Terran domination outside Korea and GSL. Don't forget that MC and Nestea had their best results in 2010 and 2011. puma ?any1 ?
ex bw korean pro anyone?
|
On July 16 2012 10:52 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 10:50 xsnac wrote:On July 16 2012 10:43 Big J wrote:On July 16 2012 09:18 larse wrote:On July 16 2012 05:40 Big J wrote:On July 16 2012 05:30 Snowbear wrote:On July 16 2012 05:04 Big J wrote:On July 16 2012 04:42 Crying wrote:
you guys are joking right
zerg not cost efficient???
BL/Infestor???
Ling/Ultra/Baneling/Infestor???
You joke right?
And you know that actually if protoss makes air to deal with BLs they die to a fungal?
And if we build colossus the zerg can pop 15corrupturs and NO BLINK can deal but not enoughly good Cost of Baneling per supply: 100/50 Cost of Broodlord per supply: 75/62,5 Cost of Infestor per supply: 50/75 Cost of Corruptor per supply: 75/50 Cost of Ultralisk per supply: 50/33,3 Cost of Zergling per supply: 50/0 Now let's compare them to what Protoss and Terrans use against them: Cost of Medivac per supply: 50/50 Cost of Viking per supply: 75/37,5 Cost of Tank per supply: 50/41,6 Cost of Thor per supply: 50/33,3 Cost of Marauder per supply: 50/12.5 Cost of Marine per supply: 50/0 Cost of HT and (HT-) Archon per supply: 25/75 Cost of Mothership per supply: 50/50 Cost of Colossus per supply: 50/33,3 Cost of Immortal per supply: 62,5/25 Cost of Stalker per supply: 62,5/25 Cost of Zealot per supply: 50/0 So no, in even supply the "usual" Zerg endgame army just costs way more (and is therefore not "costefficient") than the "usual" P/T army. Funny enough, if you start using more and more Archons and a mothership and add in HTs (25/75) for carpet storming and replace stalkers with carriers (75/41,6), Protoss does very well because then they use armies that actually cost a similar amount of minerals and gas. Similar for Terrans that use Ravens (50/100) and BCs (66,6/50) and the occasional ghost (100/50) to EMP and snipe Infestors. If there is a problem with BL/Inf/Cor or Ultra/bling/inf (or whatever exact mixture of units is best), it is that zerg gets such an army way before Terran and Protoss, which can't switch into their respective "perfect armies" (so armies that don't use marines or marauders or stalkers) easily in the lategame. Let's imagine a maxed ling bling infestor ultra army. It will kill the terran army (unless the zerg fucks up). The zerg will remax faster, and the terran will lose his expansions. Zerg is maxed and can put more money in his eco. How can the terran ever win??? A maxed ling/bling/infestor/Ultra army gets DESTROYED by a maxed Tank/Thor/Hellion(Ghost) army and can't even fight a maxed BC/Raven force. If you insist on going bio or biomech against Zerg in the lategame, then you have to avoid big main army engagements at all costs, because the Zerg army is simply stronger, because it is simply way more costly. Again, I'm not saying that the game is balanced in the lategame, because the transitioning is too hard for Terran and the "timing window" for Broodlords therefore is way to big. (while the same does not hold for Protoss; transitioning into Archons (Warpgatebased) and Mothership (only one needed) is quite OK) This is not entirely true. BL/Inf/Cor or Ultra/bling/inf will beat Terran on creep with the same supply and even perfect split and perfect positioning of tanks. But when off creep it's true that Terran can beat that zerg late-game composition. You can try that in the unit tester. Yeah, I just did try it and the Thor/Tank composition wins against Ultra/bling/Infestor that sandwitches it open field. Though I forgot to add creep, so it might actually be quite even on creep if zerg can get a full surround. Setup was 8 Thors 12 tanks 84 supply, 4200minerals/3100gas 8 Ultras 48 banelings 6 Infestors (throwing ITs) 84supply, 5400minerals/3700gas 5Thors, 5Tanks (though 3nearly dead) left over. http://drop.sc/222629Though I do agree (and never said differently) that BL/Inf/Cor beats such a composition. i dont see the point of going 48 banelings ?? there is no bio . and baneling die faster then speedlings . go for speedlings instead and see what happens , flank from 2 sides aswel and use creep I don't either see the point. It was not my idea to use this composition. But I mean, if we add zerglings and add hellions, the outcome will be just worse for the zerg.
remove banelings add zerlings . dont add helions dont add nothing new . just dont mortph 48 zerlings into banelings . thats it . and all zergs flank from 2 sides try that aswel .
btw about balance : i got pissed how protoss has to do something and commit to an attack*4 gate +1 preasure* or some sort of indirect damage*stargate opening* before 9 minute mark to not get rulled over at 11 minute mark by maxxed out zerg on roach and speedlings . and after you did this you still have to defend by the 12 minute mark maxxed out zerg meanwhile zerg just a move with a maxxed out army while grabbing a 4'th , if he fails wich happens 50% of times , he will tech up to broodlords and infestors with tones of spines in his 4'th .
p.s. the only way protoss can kill zerg imho before broodlords is when zerg does absolutely no damage with his roach 200/200 timing . and that my friend is near impossible . hopefuly mothership core will allow protoss to secure a 3'd much easier so we can keep up with zerg macro .
|
On July 16 2012 11:04 xsnac wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 10:52 Big J wrote:On July 16 2012 10:50 xsnac wrote:On July 16 2012 10:43 Big J wrote:On July 16 2012 09:18 larse wrote:On July 16 2012 05:40 Big J wrote:On July 16 2012 05:30 Snowbear wrote:On July 16 2012 05:04 Big J wrote:On July 16 2012 04:42 Crying wrote:
you guys are joking right
zerg not cost efficient???
BL/Infestor???
Ling/Ultra/Baneling/Infestor???
You joke right?
And you know that actually if protoss makes air to deal with BLs they die to a fungal?
And if we build colossus the zerg can pop 15corrupturs and NO BLINK can deal but not enoughly good Cost of Baneling per supply: 100/50 Cost of Broodlord per supply: 75/62,5 Cost of Infestor per supply: 50/75 Cost of Corruptor per supply: 75/50 Cost of Ultralisk per supply: 50/33,3 Cost of Zergling per supply: 50/0 Now let's compare them to what Protoss and Terrans use against them: Cost of Medivac per supply: 50/50 Cost of Viking per supply: 75/37,5 Cost of Tank per supply: 50/41,6 Cost of Thor per supply: 50/33,3 Cost of Marauder per supply: 50/12.5 Cost of Marine per supply: 50/0 Cost of HT and (HT-) Archon per supply: 25/75 Cost of Mothership per supply: 50/50 Cost of Colossus per supply: 50/33,3 Cost of Immortal per supply: 62,5/25 Cost of Stalker per supply: 62,5/25 Cost of Zealot per supply: 50/0 So no, in even supply the "usual" Zerg endgame army just costs way more (and is therefore not "costefficient") than the "usual" P/T army. Funny enough, if you start using more and more Archons and a mothership and add in HTs (25/75) for carpet storming and replace stalkers with carriers (75/41,6), Protoss does very well because then they use armies that actually cost a similar amount of minerals and gas. Similar for Terrans that use Ravens (50/100) and BCs (66,6/50) and the occasional ghost (100/50) to EMP and snipe Infestors. If there is a problem with BL/Inf/Cor or Ultra/bling/inf (or whatever exact mixture of units is best), it is that zerg gets such an army way before Terran and Protoss, which can't switch into their respective "perfect armies" (so armies that don't use marines or marauders or stalkers) easily in the lategame. Let's imagine a maxed ling bling infestor ultra army. It will kill the terran army (unless the zerg fucks up). The zerg will remax faster, and the terran will lose his expansions. Zerg is maxed and can put more money in his eco. How can the terran ever win??? A maxed ling/bling/infestor/Ultra army gets DESTROYED by a maxed Tank/Thor/Hellion(Ghost) army and can't even fight a maxed BC/Raven force. If you insist on going bio or biomech against Zerg in the lategame, then you have to avoid big main army engagements at all costs, because the Zerg army is simply stronger, because it is simply way more costly. Again, I'm not saying that the game is balanced in the lategame, because the transitioning is too hard for Terran and the "timing window" for Broodlords therefore is way to big. (while the same does not hold for Protoss; transitioning into Archons (Warpgatebased) and Mothership (only one needed) is quite OK) This is not entirely true. BL/Inf/Cor or Ultra/bling/inf will beat Terran on creep with the same supply and even perfect split and perfect positioning of tanks. But when off creep it's true that Terran can beat that zerg late-game composition. You can try that in the unit tester. Yeah, I just did try it and the Thor/Tank composition wins against Ultra/bling/Infestor that sandwitches it open field. Though I forgot to add creep, so it might actually be quite even on creep if zerg can get a full surround. Setup was 8 Thors 12 tanks 84 supply, 4200minerals/3100gas 8 Ultras 48 banelings 6 Infestors (throwing ITs) 84supply, 5400minerals/3700gas 5Thors, 5Tanks (though 3nearly dead) left over. http://drop.sc/222629Though I do agree (and never said differently) that BL/Inf/Cor beats such a composition. i dont see the point of going 48 banelings ?? there is no bio . and baneling die faster then speedlings . go for speedlings instead and see what happens , flank from 2 sides aswel and use creep I don't either see the point. It was not my idea to use this composition. But I mean, if we add zerglings and add hellions, the outcome will be just worse for the zerg. remove banelings add zerlings . dont add helions dont add nothing new . just dont mortph 48 zerlings into banelings . thats it . and all zergs flank from 2 sides try that aswel . btw about balance : i got pissed how protoss has to do something and commit to an attack*4 gate +1 preasure* or some sort of indirect damage*stargate opening* before 9 minute mark to not get rulled over at 11 minute mark by maxxed out zerg on roach and speedlings . and after you did this you still have to defend by the 12 minute mark maxxed out zerg meanwhile zerg just a move with a maxxed out army while grabbing a 4'th , if he fails wich happens 50% of times , he will tech up to broodlords and infestors with tones of spines in his 4'th . p.s. the only way protoss can kill zerg imho before broodlords is when zerg does absolutely no damage with his roach 200/200 timing . and that my friend is near impossible . hopefuly mothership core will allow protoss to secure a 3'd much easier so we can keep up with zerg macro .
For non-Zerg having to pressure Zerg is and has been starcraft game design since broodwar.
Larva mechanics makes it possible for Zerg to go drone only or unit only production while Terran/Protoss produce both at the same time. So, Terran/Protoss has to pressure Zerg to force units instead of drones.
There needs to be balance there as you and many pointed out, but you cannot deny this game design/concept itself.
|
Carriers are not actually good lategame PvZ. That Ret game was thrown away. Carriers had nothing to do with it. MC could have made mass Zealots and won given Ret's massive blunder.
The entire matchup is utterly Zerg favoured. The two best PvZ players (MC/Hero) were utterly dominated by a Stephano who, while playing well, did not break out anything other than Roach/Ling every single game. Alicia and Puzzle are also extremely strong Protoss players, with the latter having the best micro of any Protoss (yes, better than MC's). And yet, it still wasn't enough to even put up a fight against the combo of Ret and Stephano.
I know it's vogue to claim that Stephano/Ret were just playing amazing or that the Protoss players all played bad, but this trend of Zerg dominance is becoming impossible to deny. Stephano played fine, but not particularly amazingly. Ret played very, very poorly but won sheerly because of how awful anything other than a 2base all-in is. MC utterly outclassed him and Ret threw away the only game he was sure to win (maxed BLs etc. MC was going to lose that game until Ret gave it to him).
Let's stop saying moronic things like "PvZ is overall balanced but poorly designed." No. It's poorly designed and Zerg is way too strong. The only thing Protoss has in that matchup is Immortal/Sentry all-ins. Every single other strategy is actually horrible, and I'm not exaggerating.
And @Orek: yes, in BW Zerg had Larvae, but they didn't have Inject. This means that Zerg had to invest in additional Hatcheries and expansions in order to actually take advantage of their production. In any non-mirror XvZ, Zerg gets a guaranteed free third base by default. The other player is forced to do a very preventable pressure in order to be even with a Zerg who is playing utterly standard. That is NOT something that was true in BW.
Protoss has three basic tech trees, and only one of them is viable against Zerg. Stargate is catastrophically terrible and should be removed from the game. Blink is okay but very all-in and loses straight up to Roach/Ling pressures. Robotics Facility into fast third is the safest and gives some scouting information, but it's very passive or very all-in; there's no option to pressure like Zerg can with small Roach/Ling pressures in front of an expansion.
The game of Starcraft comes down to basically three things: economy, production, and army. Zerg has the best of all three by default in both TvZ and PvZ. This isn't balanced. You can twist it every which way you want, but the race is by concept broken and needs some serious nerfs if we ever want to see any decent competition again. If Zerg units were actually as inefficient as Zerg players claim they are, it'd be okay, but aside from the Hydralisk, every Zerg unit is amazing in more than one scenario. In addition, every early game pressure has been systematically nerfed because Zerg players claim that it's too risk free and robs them of map control/early third. You are not entitled to these things. 2 Queens should not be able to beat 1 Void Ray. You should need to respond with either a lot of Spores or some Hydras when a Protoss decides to open Stargate. Yes, going Hydras delays other tech, but going Stargate delays the fuck out of the Protoss player too, so it's not fair for you to be able to defend it without batting an eyelid or deviating at all. Same with every other Protoss pressure.
Bottom line: fast third into Roach Ling should not be the hard counter to every Protoss strategy, and 6 Queen fast third should not be the hard counter to every Terran strategy. Period.
|
problem: zerg is imba
solution; unpatch
consequence zerg might not win everything
|
the problem with this zerg mechanics is just, as long as the zerg builds the right ratio of drones/units at the right moment to allways barely survive he will allways be ahead of the terran/toss in economy.
And since the game gets more figgured out from day to day, the zergs know the timings better and better, as well they got the best scouting possibilitys of all 3 races (creep, overloards, changelings, zerlings,(( fast as fuck, cheap as fuck, and can even get burrowed))) additional to that, they KNOW that the terran protoss, does HAVE TO attack....while the terran protoss knows the zerg does not have to attack, but still could.
that is the reason zergs are owning everything today, and terra just sucks terrible......tvp is kinda balanced but much harder to play for t.....and tvz gets more unbalanced with every day, because every day the game gets figgured out more and the zergs know the timings better and better and the can build the perfect amount of drones/units......the queen change was in no way the reason zerg got so OP the last weeks......
|
Queens need to have their range reduced by 1, that way both queens and hellions must micro against one another... It reduces teh strength of queens used lategame in army compositions, reduces the effectiveness of queens overall, and still allows queens (which are naturally robust against hellions) to do damage to them instead of getting kited on and off creep.
With 4 range they might be able to be kited off creep but certainly not on creep.
The problem is that blizzard decided to give queens 2 more range instead of 1...
Why...
|
Like, the Queen change isn't the problem; it's showing us what the problem is. In a game where both players don't make major mistakes, the Zerg player wins. I'm going to be totally honest: if Zerg were suddenly balanced today, a lot of players on ladder would get demoted. This isn't a bad thing. They'd be demoted because they think Sc2 is about just hitting Injects, spreading Creep, and knowing when to not make Drones. That's not true though. It should ideally be about pressuring and handling pressure, deviating from standard builds in order to gain an advantage, and multitasking to catch your opponent off balance.
Alternating between Droning up to a 200/200 wonder army and taking a 4th behind a pressure that is neither weak nor all-in is not skillful; it's pathetic and shouldn't be a part of the game. I'm not exaggerating. There is nothing interesting about seeing Zerg players react to Stargate by making 2 extra Queens (which do nothing but aid Creep spreading) and pumping Roach/Ling to automatically deny a Protoss third if not win the game. It's not skillful, it's not interesting, and it's not something the Toss can do a damn thing about. The win condition for Zerg shouldn't be "get 8 gases secured." It should be "outplay my opponent by doing my own version of the things he's trying to do." Why is it that TvP, PvP, TvT, and even Z v fucking Z have examples of light pressures from both sides, multitasking, and so on, but only in TvZ and PvZ does Zerg get to sit back and win against passive players, attack players who try to pressure, and win either way unless they overcommit? The non-Zerg player is basically forced to do SOMETHING in order to get the Zerg to react. But the Zerg doesn't need to react in a way that detracts from their actual build, and in fact gains an advantage by reacting properly since every T/P pressure delays something important.
Have you noticed that the only matchup Zerg doesn't get a free third in is ZvZ? Have you noticed that ZvZ is the matchup that a lot of Zergs have trouble winning? It's because you actually need to outsmart and out micro your opponent to win in ZvZ. In ZvT and ZvP, you honestly just need to not fuck up and not get caught with your pants down against some gimmicky play, and you're way ahead. Yeah, you can lose sometimes if you do something stupid or overcommit, but in general, you're in the safe position, not the P/T player. They need to make something happen, not you. It's like if you were playing a game in which one person has to make the other person laugh and the other person just has to not laugh. It's not hard to see that the guy who just has to control himself is going to win, because all the creativity and initiative is coming from the other guy, and those things are both finite.
|
As much as I hate whining/complaining about balance. After watching NASL, and looking at GSTL.
PvZ is definitely Zerg favoured. It was extremely boring, and dull watching non-stop PvZ, but it was worse seeing the same build over and over again from both sides. Only to see the Zerg reacting nearly the exact same way, and win using the same strat over and over again. Every game was FFE->robo/SG -> all in -> zerg defends -> wins...Its tiring to see nearly every Protoss build get countered by the same reaction, Ling/Roach, constantly. This match up seriously needs to be fixed, every time I play on ladder, its pretty much auto pilot, there is no thinking involved. Its stupidly boring...
I can't believe people can say stephano and ret played amazing. I saw the games in person at NASL and I had to bear listening to people, saying stephano/ret played amazing, and people cheer crazily when ret/stephano kills a probe with lings, or get a ling surround. Sure its good, but its nothing special, meanwhile when MC/Alicia/Puzzle/Hero did sick force fields/incredible multitasking/trades. The cheer was not even 10% of what it was for the zergs. I know its the whole foreigner/fan favourtie thing, but still. Also I know this should be in NASL discussion thread.
Its just really stupid seeing every protoss builds get stopped by the exact same zerg build. I can't imagine anyone saying that its not dumb/boring seeing the same build/results happen over and over again. The only time zerg lost was when they made mistakes, or got caught by some gimmck, or vortex... Players should not have to hope that their opponent makes a mistake to win. I agree vortex is op/broken/imba/stupid but without it how do you beat Broodlord, Infestor?
|
Problem: Zergs max on roaches by the 13 min mark
Solution: Increase mineral or gas cost by like 25 or so.
Side Effects: Less Roach ling all-ins, better games.
|
On July 16 2012 12:03 Gtoad wrote:
Problem: Zergs max on roaches by the 13 min mark
Solution: Increase mineral or gas cost by like 25 or so.
Side Effects: Less Roach ling all-ins, better games.
I'd support this. It would make it impossible to both do a huge Roach counter attack and tech at the same time. It would also reduce the numbers of Roaches a lot. Furthermore, it would make Roach maxes actually all-in. You wouldn't be able to go Roach and then suddenly decide to back off, take a 4th, and go Muta all in one smooth movement.
|
I like your recent posts, Shiori. I don't know that I agree, but I like your arguments and certainly respect your obvious passion.
Speaking of Infestors, I wonder if Blizzard should bring back the projectile idea for fungal? I believe it was trialled in a PTR but never saw the light of day. If an Infestor nerf is required, and I am not sure yet that it is, then I'd like to see something like that - hell, I'm not even sure if it qualifies as a nerf. Basically, this will allow P/T to actually split when they see a fungal coming which is micro-intensive, and will add some flavour from a spectator point of view (it would force Zerg to target too). It would be cool, for example, to have non autocast Chargelots activate charge to escape a fungal (and so on). Terrans could (stim and) split; and P/T air units (although those slow VRs will probably still get caught - at least without the speed buff ;-)).
Anyway, just a thought. Still, I think we need to wait a while. Blizzard has been way too patch happy in the past and I'd, personally, prefer that they veered on the side of caution before looking to "fix" the game.
|
Thats actually a good idea, it will make it so much more intense and players with good micro can get rewarded more. like how spliting vs banes/dodging storm is sick. Imagine MKP splitting vs projectile fungal and Hero blink dodging it.
There will be a patch soon nerfing Z, I don't see how blizzard could just ignore all the recent results + DRG/Stephano both saying they cant lose/zerg is OP.
Dennis Schneider @mouzHasuObs
good weekend for zerg huh?! Killer wins WCS South America; Comm wins WCS China; Scarlett wins WCS Canada; Stephano wins NASL. 
|
I'd just like to go out and disclaim that PvZ is my best matchup, and that I win mostly by out-multitasking my opponents with fast thirds with warp prism harassment. I'm upset because I'm sick of being unable to actually watch professional players do well in the matchup, and because it's getting more difficult for me to win playing anything other than 2base all-ins as I move up toward higher and higher Masters level play. I hate all-inning with a passion, but I hate having to do it every single game even more, so I'd really like the race to be balanced out. The mere fact that I'm beating Zergs basically on the strength of my mechanics alone says a lot about the calibre of play required to get Zerg to decent Masters MMR. As long as you know what timings are possible and as long as you know how to Inject decently, you can win a lot of games just by playing completely safely.
|
As a Zerg, I think it's ridiculous how cheap roaches are after saturating 3 bases in the first like 10 mins. Like I said, I think just increasing the cost of roaches by 25 mins or gas would REALLY balance out the 200 food roach ling attacks against the toss who is usually only at 120ish food, and either allining himself or taking a pretty risky and hard to hold third.
|
Why haven't anyone talked about creeptumors? Why the hell they can be cancelled? I mean like it isnt already too easy to spread it...
|
On July 16 2012 12:21 ChEDo wrote:Thats actually a good idea, it will make it so much more intense and players with good micro can get rewarded more. like how spliting vs banes/dodging storm is sick. Imagine MKP splitting vs projectile fungal and Hero blink dodging it. There will be a patch soon nerfing Z, I don't see how blizzard could just ignore all the recent results + DRG/Stephano both saying they cant lose/zerg is OP. Dennis Schneider @mouzHasuObs good weekend for zerg huh?! Killer wins WCS South America; Comm wins WCS China; Scarlett wins WCS Canada; Stephano wins NASL.
lolol Indeed good weekend for zerg. The game definitely looks fine  . I agree with the other people here alot expecially Shiori. I think fixing the queen range is a good fix but will only fix TvZ. It wont tackle the problem in PvZ as well. Obviously, the most efficient way in fixing this situation is finding a way to balance TvZ and PvZ with one fix. Some are say, nerf roaches! But that wont fix TvZ. Some are saying, Nerf queen range! Then PvZ wont change enough to matter.
The only way I am seeing this ending up for zerg is either they get atleast 2 nerf next patch to fix tvz and pvz or one really big nerf that tackle the everything. Either the early game get nerf (queens), or their late game get nerf (gglord death ball of doom).
I personally think the deathball will get nerf because it the shit that affects all match up and will be the best one without altering too much units stats
|
First Post. Here I go.
On the thought of making roaches cost more.... im not sure its really going to change anything. Roaches from my experience are a-moved or split. Zergs don't seem to use the crazy regen available to them. Perhaps it is too micro-intensive for a player? Cause when zerggs really start using the burrowed regen something akin to blink is when zerg terrabad OP.
On the festor 'nerf' , I'd say hell yes. it make for a fascinating pro match and, i feel, a better balance tween races. storm does more damage the fungal but only a special kind of person bathes in the full storm. and terran has nukes and hsm. both are slow to get off and are limited in practicality, but more powerful than either storm or fungal in pur damage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
