|
On August 19 2011 02:06 DragonDefonce wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2011 05:57 Bluerain wrote:On August 17 2011 04:24 DragonDefonce wrote:On August 17 2011 03:41 BUfels wrote:On August 17 2011 03:13 xlava wrote:On August 17 2011 03:10 Aletheia27 wrote:
With regard to infestors being overpowered, I feel like the argument goes along the same lines as how forcefields were considered overpowered for toss players. I think people just haven't learened to adapt to them yet and adjust their play. Just my 2 cents. Kind of. Except that Zerg doesn't depend on infestors for surviving. Without sentries Protoss dies to every early game aggression. Zerg can live without infestors. Forcefields aren't overpowered, they're a necessity. Yes, they definitely do. You can't beat turtle protoss 200/200 deathball without them. The deathball is already good enough(and turtle protoss is getting popular again), it does not need a buff. Neither zerg nor terran is supposed to beat toss in 200/200 fight. Like ever. Zerg loses the initial fight but takes out as much of the deathball as it can and win by resupplying. If zerg is even with protoss in a 200/200 fight, something is wrong. And the current state of the game is so that with hive tech and infestors, zerg can beat protoss deathball. If you break even in a max army fight as protoss, you are as good as dead. And this "turtle toss" doesn't work on a fundamental level because of broodlords. The only thing more ridiculous than turtling against broodlords would be to turtle against tanks this would be true if ur macro sux and the protoss army is so good that ppl who have bad macro can still win just by turtling to a 200 max army. so many times i play a masters toss who floats 2k minerals but still only have 7-8 gates LOL? if ur actually good u can remax just as fast with mass gateways. so NO 200 army shuld be even across all races if composition is good. the reason protoss usually wins is cus zerg is going a tier 2 army comp of roach corruptor in order to get ahead in bases and get map control. if the zerg has tier 3 units, it should be even or ahead of toss since zerg tier 3 is more inaccessible. Let me rephrase myself since it seems I wasn't being very clear. Terran or Zerg army SHOULD NOT BE ABLE to straight up beat Protoss in 200/200 fight (with the exception of Terran mech). The problem with the game at the current state is that they are perfectly capable of doing so.
Why shouldn't they? You still aren't being very clear.
|
I don't like the extent to which a Terran can turtle on an island. It gets really annoying when the game should be 10 minutes, but he floats and it ends up being 30 minutes and a waste of my time.
|
On August 19 2011 02:06 DragonDefonce wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2011 05:57 Bluerain wrote:On August 17 2011 04:24 DragonDefonce wrote:On August 17 2011 03:41 BUfels wrote:On August 17 2011 03:13 xlava wrote:On August 17 2011 03:10 Aletheia27 wrote:
With regard to infestors being overpowered, I feel like the argument goes along the same lines as how forcefields were considered overpowered for toss players. I think people just haven't learened to adapt to them yet and adjust their play. Just my 2 cents. Kind of. Except that Zerg doesn't depend on infestors for surviving. Without sentries Protoss dies to every early game aggression. Zerg can live without infestors. Forcefields aren't overpowered, they're a necessity. Yes, they definitely do. You can't beat turtle protoss 200/200 deathball without them. The deathball is already good enough(and turtle protoss is getting popular again), it does not need a buff. Neither zerg nor terran is supposed to beat toss in 200/200 fight. Like ever. Zerg loses the initial fight but takes out as much of the deathball as it can and win by resupplying. If zerg is even with protoss in a 200/200 fight, something is wrong. And the current state of the game is so that with hive tech and infestors, zerg can beat protoss deathball. If you break even in a max army fight as protoss, you are as good as dead. And this "turtle toss" doesn't work on a fundamental level because of broodlords. The only thing more ridiculous than turtling against broodlords would be to turtle against tanks this would be true if ur macro sux and the protoss army is so good that ppl who have bad macro can still win just by turtling to a 200 max army. so many times i play a masters toss who floats 2k minerals but still only have 7-8 gates LOL? if ur actually good u can remax just as fast with mass gateways. so NO 200 army shuld be even across all races if composition is good. the reason protoss usually wins is cus zerg is going a tier 2 army comp of roach corruptor in order to get ahead in bases and get map control. if the zerg has tier 3 units, it should be even or ahead of toss since zerg tier 3 is more inaccessible. Let me rephrase myself since it seems I wasn't being very clear. Terran or Zerg army SHOULD NOT BE ABLE to straight up beat Protoss in 200/200 fight (with the exception of Terran mech). The problem with the game at the current state is that they are perfectly capable of doing so.
Umm... Protoss can reproduce units much faster than terran can. How would terran ever stand a chance in a maxed out game if they always lost the engagements too?
Even the zerg part is arguable. There's no such thing as a "straight up 200/200" fight, because unit compositions and player micro are always a huge factor.
|
Mana just 2-0'd Puma the winner of the NASL in a convincing manner. Protoss OP now right? I have yet to read a half decent point be made except split your units. The game is working its way towards balance it's not the game's fault that an individual cannot play to a race's strength's and be aware of their weaknesses. The funny thing about all this, is that Protoss is complaining about issues that the other races have already said screw it and forgot about. For example, zerg doesn't have any early game scouting but protoss and terran told us to shut up and sac 2 overlords and use a drone and mineral walk. That being said zerg doesn't have observers and the only person a toss can blame for not getting a robo is their self.
Terran QQ's about banelings and fungal and the answer was to either use ghosts or split better. Protoss QQ's about ghosts, the answer is to use high templar or split better but instead they just wanna QQ about imbalance. As of right now any protoss QQ is a matter of ignorance or laziness as your race has plenty of options available but most of the race is boxed into one line of thinking and is scared to break out. Zerg has no harrass except roach rushes, we QQ about it and instead of anything changing we decide collectively that if we cant harass we'll just expand like bosses and win the economic game. So how about you guys break out of the 2-base syndrome kthxbai.
|
On August 19 2011 02:06 DragonDefonce wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2011 05:57 Bluerain wrote:On August 17 2011 04:24 DragonDefonce wrote:On August 17 2011 03:41 BUfels wrote:On August 17 2011 03:13 xlava wrote:On August 17 2011 03:10 Aletheia27 wrote:
With regard to infestors being overpowered, I feel like the argument goes along the same lines as how forcefields were considered overpowered for toss players. I think people just haven't learened to adapt to them yet and adjust their play. Just my 2 cents. Kind of. Except that Zerg doesn't depend on infestors for surviving. Without sentries Protoss dies to every early game aggression. Zerg can live without infestors. Forcefields aren't overpowered, they're a necessity. Yes, they definitely do. You can't beat turtle protoss 200/200 deathball without them. The deathball is already good enough(and turtle protoss is getting popular again), it does not need a buff. Neither zerg nor terran is supposed to beat toss in 200/200 fight. Like ever. Zerg loses the initial fight but takes out as much of the deathball as it can and win by resupplying. If zerg is even with protoss in a 200/200 fight, something is wrong. And the current state of the game is so that with hive tech and infestors, zerg can beat protoss deathball. If you break even in a max army fight as protoss, you are as good as dead. And this "turtle toss" doesn't work on a fundamental level because of broodlords. The only thing more ridiculous than turtling against broodlords would be to turtle against tanks this would be true if ur macro sux and the protoss army is so good that ppl who have bad macro can still win just by turtling to a 200 max army. so many times i play a masters toss who floats 2k minerals but still only have 7-8 gates LOL? if ur actually good u can remax just as fast with mass gateways. so NO 200 army shuld be even across all races if composition is good. the reason protoss usually wins is cus zerg is going a tier 2 army comp of roach corruptor in order to get ahead in bases and get map control. if the zerg has tier 3 units, it should be even or ahead of toss since zerg tier 3 is more inaccessible. Let me rephrase myself since it seems I wasn't being very clear. Terran or Zerg army SHOULD NOT BE ABLE to straight up beat Protoss in 200/200 fight (with the exception of Terran mech). The problem with the game at the current state is that they are perfectly capable of doing so.
do you take any micro into account in that statement ?
|
On August 19 2011 02:24 Bagi wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2011 02:06 DragonDefonce wrote:On August 17 2011 05:57 Bluerain wrote:On August 17 2011 04:24 DragonDefonce wrote:On August 17 2011 03:41 BUfels wrote:On August 17 2011 03:13 xlava wrote:On August 17 2011 03:10 Aletheia27 wrote:
With regard to infestors being overpowered, I feel like the argument goes along the same lines as how forcefields were considered overpowered for toss players. I think people just haven't learened to adapt to them yet and adjust their play. Just my 2 cents. Kind of. Except that Zerg doesn't depend on infestors for surviving. Without sentries Protoss dies to every early game aggression. Zerg can live without infestors. Forcefields aren't overpowered, they're a necessity. Yes, they definitely do. You can't beat turtle protoss 200/200 deathball without them. The deathball is already good enough(and turtle protoss is getting popular again), it does not need a buff. Neither zerg nor terran is supposed to beat toss in 200/200 fight. Like ever. Zerg loses the initial fight but takes out as much of the deathball as it can and win by resupplying. If zerg is even with protoss in a 200/200 fight, something is wrong. And the current state of the game is so that with hive tech and infestors, zerg can beat protoss deathball. If you break even in a max army fight as protoss, you are as good as dead. And this "turtle toss" doesn't work on a fundamental level because of broodlords. The only thing more ridiculous than turtling against broodlords would be to turtle against tanks this would be true if ur macro sux and the protoss army is so good that ppl who have bad macro can still win just by turtling to a 200 max army. so many times i play a masters toss who floats 2k minerals but still only have 7-8 gates LOL? if ur actually good u can remax just as fast with mass gateways. so NO 200 army shuld be even across all races if composition is good. the reason protoss usually wins is cus zerg is going a tier 2 army comp of roach corruptor in order to get ahead in bases and get map control. if the zerg has tier 3 units, it should be even or ahead of toss since zerg tier 3 is more inaccessible. Let me rephrase myself since it seems I wasn't being very clear. Terran or Zerg army SHOULD NOT BE ABLE to straight up beat Protoss in 200/200 fight (with the exception of Terran mech). The problem with the game at the current state is that they are perfectly capable of doing so. Umm... Protoss can reproduce units much faster than terran can. How would terran ever stand a chance in a maxed out game if they always lost the engagements too? Even the zerg part is arguable. There's no such thing as a "straight up 200/200" fight, because unit compositions and player micro are always a huge factor.
Z > P > T in terms of remacro capabililty, so it would make sense for T > P > Z in terms of 200/200 power.
|
On August 19 2011 02:06 DragonDefonce wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2011 05:57 Bluerain wrote:On August 17 2011 04:24 DragonDefonce wrote:On August 17 2011 03:41 BUfels wrote:On August 17 2011 03:13 xlava wrote:On August 17 2011 03:10 Aletheia27 wrote:
With regard to infestors being overpowered, I feel like the argument goes along the same lines as how forcefields were considered overpowered for toss players. I think people just haven't learened to adapt to them yet and adjust their play. Just my 2 cents. Kind of. Except that Zerg doesn't depend on infestors for surviving. Without sentries Protoss dies to every early game aggression. Zerg can live without infestors. Forcefields aren't overpowered, they're a necessity. Yes, they definitely do. You can't beat turtle protoss 200/200 deathball without them. The deathball is already good enough(and turtle protoss is getting popular again), it does not need a buff. Neither zerg nor terran is supposed to beat toss in 200/200 fight. Like ever. Zerg loses the initial fight but takes out as much of the deathball as it can and win by resupplying. If zerg is even with protoss in a 200/200 fight, something is wrong. And the current state of the game is so that with hive tech and infestors, zerg can beat protoss deathball. If you break even in a max army fight as protoss, you are as good as dead. And this "turtle toss" doesn't work on a fundamental level because of broodlords. The only thing more ridiculous than turtling against broodlords would be to turtle against tanks this would be true if ur macro sux and the protoss army is so good that ppl who have bad macro can still win just by turtling to a 200 max army. so many times i play a masters toss who floats 2k minerals but still only have 7-8 gates LOL? if ur actually good u can remax just as fast with mass gateways. so NO 200 army shuld be even across all races if composition is good. the reason protoss usually wins is cus zerg is going a tier 2 army comp of roach corruptor in order to get ahead in bases and get map control. if the zerg has tier 3 units, it should be even or ahead of toss since zerg tier 3 is more inaccessible. Let me rephrase myself since it seems I wasn't being very clear. Terran or Zerg army SHOULD NOT BE ABLE to straight up beat Protoss in 200/200 fight (with the exception of Terran mech). The problem with the game at the current state is that they are perfectly capable of doing so.
I'm a Protoss player, and I disagree 100%. Every race needs to be able to win at every point in the game. It's ok if one race has an advantage, but it is never ok when talking about balance to speak in terms of absolutes. If you're not able to beat something, that is the very definition of IMBA. 200/200 Protoss armies are fine, they don't need to be IMBA to make up for a shitty early game.
On August 19 2011 02:16 serge wrote:
Yea protoss should be able to turtle three base until max. That's the definition of macro, right? NR20.
Protoss army is just as mobile as terran bio. No reason to be granted exclusive OP status.
Yeah... no they're not. Sentries are slow, Protoss don't have stim, and medevacs add a huge amount to mobility. Add on the fact that Protoss gets less good in smaller groups while Terran doesn't, and saying that they're "just as mobile" becomes laughable at best.
|
On August 19 2011 02:16 serge wrote:
Yea protoss should be able to turtle three base until max. That's the definition of macro, right? NR20.
Protoss army is just as mobile as terran bio. No reason to be granted exclusive OP status.
You are plain wrong.
I'll use terran bio as example because you mention it.
First, Protoss army is not mobile. It cant run if the engagement is unfavorable because of stim and concussive shell, and because ht are slow, the whole army is dragged down by it. Terran can simply stim and run if they choose to, and every party of terran bio is faster than hts. And I wont even discuss harassment.
Second, You can't beat terran bio with zealot stalker sentry unless its a early timing push. You simply can't. It jsut doesnt work. I wont even explain this further cause its pretty much axiomatic. Because of this if terran and protoss both lose their armies, in the second engagement, Terran will always win because colossus and high templars are slow to replenish, AND because barracks units are better at smaller engagements than larger ones.
Third, if protoss wins the big fight, terran isn't necessarily dead. If protoss loses it, protoss is definitely dead.
Fourth, kind of a sidenote, but by your logic, terran mech should not be granted the "exclusive OP status" and should be able to be fought evenly by simple gateway centric 200 army in a straight up fight.
|
On August 19 2011 02:44 TrickyGilligan wrote:
I'm a Protoss player, and I disagree 100%. Every race needs to be able to win at every point in the game. It's ok if one race has an advantage, but it is never ok when talking about balance to speak in terms of absolutes. If you're not able to beat something, that is the very definition of IMBA. 200/200 Protoss armies are fine, they don't need to be IMBA to make up for a shitty early game.
Its not IMBA. I am not talking about 200 army jsut ending the game. I am talking about the fact that protoss should be able to win the initial engagement of the 200/200 fight. Not win by a landslide, not kill everysingle unit of the opponent's army, jsut win. Not to talk down, but unless you are sub diamond, games are not won by that one big engagement.
|
On August 19 2011 02:19 ZasZ. wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2011 02:06 DragonDefonce wrote:On August 17 2011 05:57 Bluerain wrote:On August 17 2011 04:24 DragonDefonce wrote:On August 17 2011 03:41 BUfels wrote:On August 17 2011 03:13 xlava wrote:On August 17 2011 03:10 Aletheia27 wrote:
With regard to infestors being overpowered, I feel like the argument goes along the same lines as how forcefields were considered overpowered for toss players. I think people just haven't learened to adapt to them yet and adjust their play. Just my 2 cents. Kind of. Except that Zerg doesn't depend on infestors for surviving. Without sentries Protoss dies to every early game aggression. Zerg can live without infestors. Forcefields aren't overpowered, they're a necessity. Yes, they definitely do. You can't beat turtle protoss 200/200 deathball without them. The deathball is already good enough(and turtle protoss is getting popular again), it does not need a buff. Neither zerg nor terran is supposed to beat toss in 200/200 fight. Like ever. Zerg loses the initial fight but takes out as much of the deathball as it can and win by resupplying. If zerg is even with protoss in a 200/200 fight, something is wrong. And the current state of the game is so that with hive tech and infestors, zerg can beat protoss deathball. If you break even in a max army fight as protoss, you are as good as dead. And this "turtle toss" doesn't work on a fundamental level because of broodlords. The only thing more ridiculous than turtling against broodlords would be to turtle against tanks this would be true if ur macro sux and the protoss army is so good that ppl who have bad macro can still win just by turtling to a 200 max army. so many times i play a masters toss who floats 2k minerals but still only have 7-8 gates LOL? if ur actually good u can remax just as fast with mass gateways. so NO 200 army shuld be even across all races if composition is good. the reason protoss usually wins is cus zerg is going a tier 2 army comp of roach corruptor in order to get ahead in bases and get map control. if the zerg has tier 3 units, it should be even or ahead of toss since zerg tier 3 is more inaccessible. Let me rephrase myself since it seems I wasn't being very clear. Terran or Zerg army SHOULD NOT BE ABLE to straight up beat Protoss in 200/200 fight (with the exception of Terran mech). The problem with the game at the current state is that they are perfectly capable of doing so. Why shouldn't they? You still aren't being very clear.
They shouldn't because it takes Protoss longer time and more resources to build up a "deathball."
Not all races should be absolutely equal in every regard.
|
I'd like to say that overall the balance of the game favors cheese and all-ins too much, and would benefit greatly from increased scouting ability and defensive advantage.
I believe the reason there is such a massive terran dominance in korea is that the korean style of play is to take a cheese/all-in/timing build and perfect it to an absolute science. Terran has the best ability to defend against these kinds of aggression, and thus is able to play a more stable game overall.
That, on top of the fact terran has the most options in their cheese/all-in/timing builds that requires precise scouting and reactions to counter.
You can see the low defensive advantage for zerg and protoss by looking at their mirror matchups. Until infestors come out zvz is dominated by early all-in play, where if you miss the point that your opponent stops droning/pulls his drones from gas to mass speedlings, you can easily be caught off guard and lose without a fight. PvP is similar, where before colossus it's a game of stalker numbers and stalker micro.
I would say that the game would be a LOT better if every race were given better early game scouting, in the window after your scouting worker/overlord is chased out, and before obs/overseer. On top of that additional defensive advantage all round, make it an investment, but reactive, so if you scout the cheese/all-in/timing build you have the option of trading longer term econ/army for a solid defence that can be up in time. This will make the game a lot more like BW, where pressure builds were king, forcing the opponent to over-commit to defence early on to secure an econ lead going into mid/late game.
This will then raise the skill-cap immensely, as it will reduce the effectiveness of the pure all-ins where a player can have 100% of the game mapped out and increase the effectiveness of a reactive style of play.
I would love to hear other people's thoughts on this, as I know David Kim has made a brief comment along the same lines. I have hope that in HotS we see the game shift towards this and away from where the game is currently headed.
|
On August 19 2011 02:52 Condor Hero wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2011 02:19 ZasZ. wrote:On August 19 2011 02:06 DragonDefonce wrote:On August 17 2011 05:57 Bluerain wrote:On August 17 2011 04:24 DragonDefonce wrote:On August 17 2011 03:41 BUfels wrote:On August 17 2011 03:13 xlava wrote:On August 17 2011 03:10 Aletheia27 wrote:
With regard to infestors being overpowered, I feel like the argument goes along the same lines as how forcefields were considered overpowered for toss players. I think people just haven't learened to adapt to them yet and adjust their play. Just my 2 cents. Kind of. Except that Zerg doesn't depend on infestors for surviving. Without sentries Protoss dies to every early game aggression. Zerg can live without infestors. Forcefields aren't overpowered, they're a necessity. Yes, they definitely do. You can't beat turtle protoss 200/200 deathball without them. The deathball is already good enough(and turtle protoss is getting popular again), it does not need a buff. Neither zerg nor terran is supposed to beat toss in 200/200 fight. Like ever. Zerg loses the initial fight but takes out as much of the deathball as it can and win by resupplying. If zerg is even with protoss in a 200/200 fight, something is wrong. And the current state of the game is so that with hive tech and infestors, zerg can beat protoss deathball. If you break even in a max army fight as protoss, you are as good as dead. And this "turtle toss" doesn't work on a fundamental level because of broodlords. The only thing more ridiculous than turtling against broodlords would be to turtle against tanks this would be true if ur macro sux and the protoss army is so good that ppl who have bad macro can still win just by turtling to a 200 max army. so many times i play a masters toss who floats 2k minerals but still only have 7-8 gates LOL? if ur actually good u can remax just as fast with mass gateways. so NO 200 army shuld be even across all races if composition is good. the reason protoss usually wins is cus zerg is going a tier 2 army comp of roach corruptor in order to get ahead in bases and get map control. if the zerg has tier 3 units, it should be even or ahead of toss since zerg tier 3 is more inaccessible. Let me rephrase myself since it seems I wasn't being very clear. Terran or Zerg army SHOULD NOT BE ABLE to straight up beat Protoss in 200/200 fight (with the exception of Terran mech). The problem with the game at the current state is that they are perfectly capable of doing so. Why shouldn't they? You still aren't being very clear. They shouldn't because it takes Protoss longer time and more resources to build up a "deathball." Not all races should be absolutely equal in every regard.
Honestly I should be able to just say "Terran Mech" and everyone should understand this idea.
|
You might wanna elaborate on that third point. How is a protoss with 20+ warpgates dead but the terran isnt? How are high templars slower to replenish than for example ghosts?
200/200 mech doesn't always beat a proper 200/200 protoss army either. It doesn't have the OP status, and neither should protoss.
|
I'm just wondering what david kim and company are going to do about the game it is imbalanced. Also when is the next patch we haven't had a patch in ages are we going to have to wait until HotS for a patch or are we going to get one before that anyone know?
|
So are people mostly talking about terran imba here or what race is supposed to be the strongest right now? Please don't let it be my precious Zerg 
|
Bahaha this thread.
Protoss is not underpowered.
|
On August 19 2011 02:24 Seek wrote:
Mana just 2-0'd Puma the winner of the NASL in a convincing manner. Protoss OP now right? I have yet to read a half decent point be made except split your units.
One match means nothing. Not saying something is imba though.
On August 19 2011 02:24 Seek wrote:
For example, zerg doesn't have any early game scouting but protoss and terran told us to shut up and sac 2 overlords and use a drone and mineral walk. That being said zerg doesn't have observers and the only person a toss can blame for not getting a robo is their self.
Zerg's scouting is fine, I don't see why you complain.
You can scout with (speed)lings, overseers, overlords (including sacrificing), drone sent on mineral walk, changelings.
On August 19 2011 02:24 Seek wrote:
Zerg has no harrass except roach rushes, we QQ about it and instead of anything changing we decide collectively that if we cant harass we'll just expand like bosses and win the economic game
- Infestor burrow -> infested terrans
- Overlord drop (lings and/or other units)
- Mutalisks
- Baneling drop on mineral line
What are you? Gold?
|
On August 19 2011 03:05 darkness wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2011 02:24 Seek wrote:
Mana just 2-0'd Puma the winner of the NASL in a convincing manner. Protoss OP now right? I have yet to read a half decent point be made except split your units.
One game means nothing. Not saying something is imba though. Show nested quote +On August 19 2011 02:24 Seek wrote:
For example, zerg doesn't have any early game scouting but protoss and terran told us to shut up and sac 2 overlords and use a drone and mineral walk. That being said zerg doesn't have observers and the only person a toss can blame for not getting a robo is their self. Zerg's scouting is fine, I don't see why you complain. You can scout with (speed)lings, overseers, overlords (including sacrificing), drone sent on mineral walk, changelings. Show nested quote +On August 19 2011 02:24 Seek wrote:
Zerg has no harrass except roach rushes, we QQ about it and instead of anything changing we decide collectively that if we cant harass we'll just expand like bosses and win the economic game - Infestor burrow -> infested terrans - Overlord drop (lings and/or other units) - Mutalisks - Baneling drop on mineral line What are you? Gold?
Zerg scouting is DEFINITELY not fine. Play early game vs terran then tell me it's fine. All you can do is poke at their front with a speedling and all that will show is 2 supply depots a barracks and 2 marines. When you try to sac an ovy any competant terran player will quickly spot it with a patrolling marine and kill it before it can see anything of value.
|
On August 19 2011 03:09 AustinCM wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2011 03:05 darkness wrote:On August 19 2011 02:24 Seek wrote:
Mana just 2-0'd Puma the winner of the NASL in a convincing manner. Protoss OP now right? I have yet to read a half decent point be made except split your units.
One game means nothing. Not saying something is imba though. On August 19 2011 02:24 Seek wrote:
For example, zerg doesn't have any early game scouting but protoss and terran told us to shut up and sac 2 overlords and use a drone and mineral walk. That being said zerg doesn't have observers and the only person a toss can blame for not getting a robo is their self. Zerg's scouting is fine, I don't see why you complain. You can scout with (speed)lings, overseers, overlords (including sacrificing), drone sent on mineral walk, changelings. On August 19 2011 02:24 Seek wrote:
Zerg has no harrass except roach rushes, we QQ about it and instead of anything changing we decide collectively that if we cant harass we'll just expand like bosses and win the economic game - Infestor burrow -> infested terrans - Overlord drop (lings and/or other units) - Mutalisks - Baneling drop on mineral line What are you? Gold? Zerg scouting is DEFINITELY not fine. Play early game vs terran then tell me it's fine. All you can do is poke at their front with a speedling and all that will show is 2 supply depots a barracks and 2 marines. When you try to sac an ovy any competant terran player will quickly spot it with a patrolling marine and kill it before it can see anything of value.
If it's not fine, why are there so many good zergs who perform well such as Nestea, Losira, DRG, July, etc?
I doubt they win by accident.
|
On August 19 2011 02:56 Bagi wrote:
You might wanna elaborate on that third point. How is a protoss with 20+ warpgates dead but the terran isnt? How are high templars slower to replenish than for example ghosts?
200/200 mech doesn't always beat a proper 200/200 protoss army either. It doesn't have the OP status, and neither should protoss.
Barracks units > gateway units, much more so in a defensive position for obvious reasons. 20 zealots wont break through 10 marauders in a defensive position.
Ghosts, while they do ridiculous damage to shield, are not needed if their are no hts capable of using storm. If HTs had amulet I would say you have a point.
Honestly man, you should not have a problem with what i said unless you think zealot stalker sentry beats MM.
With regards to terran mech, protoss can fight even, not win, it in a straght up fight if it has a good number of well upgraded carriers, which takes just as much time to get as a terran mech army. Otherwise, the only thing that protoss can do is hit and run and not let terran max out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
