|
Northern Ireland23745 Posts
On July 18 2012 11:48 Heavenlee wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 11:43 m0ck wrote:On July 18 2012 11:33 VTPerfect wrote:On July 18 2012 11:28 m0ck wrote:We're talking about the best ZvP-player in the world, it seems rather strange to base any conclusions around whether he does well in the match-up or not - and let's not pretend like he is unbeatable either. Mana and Sase might have a word to say about that. To say that he "lazily walked over" Hero and MC doesn't seem like a fair description of the matches. They were close matches with some pretty major mistakes on especially Hero's part. 2-base all-in against a 2-base spine-crawler fortified zerg with infestors? To say that "roach-ling" holds off any protoss aggression/all-in is simplistic and borderline disingenuous (not to say wrong) - it is certainly possible to force for example hydras with heavy air play. And a lot more goes into a defence than simply building roaches and lings, including scouting/reading your opponent, having units at the right timing and having the right mix of units. AS we've seen again and again, very few zergs are able to do that and very few zergs have the APM to do it. Let's not forget that the best ZvP-players, Stephano and DRG, both are 380-400 APM players. In any case, the statistics in Korea tells another story than your lament of racial imbalance - the match-up actually seems balanced. But maybe that is just because of 'stupid' zergs? http://minus.com/mLvjZlHez/1g yeah... when zerg dominates 90% of all the tournaments for the past 2 months, I guess the 1 stat that says zerg doesnt dominate proves everything wrong. its just a matter of how long the unfair imbalance that is propelling zerg into so many undeserved tournament positions will continue. or maybe all the good players decided to go zerg 2 month ago maybe... It is a problem, who do we balance for. The best or the rest? I agree that outside of Korea, zerg seems dominant at the moment. But you just don't see that pattern in Korea. Why is that and what can be done about it? It doesn't seem to make much sense to say that the match-up is inherently broken when among the best players in the world there is no evidence of such. Unfortunately you are basing your assumptions off a stupid chart that has been heavily criticized for excluding many zerg-dominated tournaments and matches, which makes it more like 60% to 40%. Here, I'll quote this for you: Show nested quote +The Korea TvZ numbers really shocked me. So I went through just the current GSL's numbers so far. Keep in mind that many of these games will be included in July results. TvZ is right now 28-47. 37% win rate for Terran, 63% win rate for Zerg. In other words, even more imbalanced than the June International results.
I'm pretty sure that even Blizzard has admitted that a 20% gap in a matchup indicates a balance issue. Of course this is only one tournament (albeit with a large sample size and the highest skilled players in the world), but still.
GSL Code A+S TVZ
Nestea v STC 2-0
SuHoSin v MVP 1-2
Sniper v Supernova 1-2
YuGiOh v MKP 1-2
Symbol v MKP 2-0
DRG v Maru 2-1
Violet v Maru 2-1
Leenock v Ryung 0-2
Leenock v Taeja 0-2
Violet v MVP 2-0
Symbol v MKP 2-1
DRG v Ryung 2-1
Nestea v Supernova 2-0
Nestea v Supernova 2-1
Monster v Jjakji 0-2
YuGiOh v Harrier 2-0
Freaky v Bomber 1-2
Losira v Hack 1-2
Total: 25-21
GSTL TVZ
Life v TL 1-0
Life v Slayers 1-0
Symbol v Fnatic 1-0
Losira v TSL 1-0
Symbol v IM 3-0
Moon v IM 1-0
Byul v IM 1-0
Annyeong v Fnatic 1-0
Moon v Prime 2-0
BBong v TSL 0-1
Sniper v Fnatic 2-0
Coca v Prime 3-0
KingKong v HoSeo 0-1
Curious v HoSeo 0-1
Ragnarok v FXO 0-1
Shine v FXO 1-0
Hyun v HoSeo 1-1
Symbol v HoSeo 0-1
Revival v HoSeo 1-0
Lucky v Startale 1-1
Leenock vs Startale 1-0
Total: 22-7
Grand Total: 47-28. 63% Z v 37% T.
Equally, it seems that in the individual leagues it's a lot more even, I'd say because Terrans can still prepare specific builds for GSL matches that are map or opponent specific, unlike the teamleagues (unless they were sent out to specifically snipe)
2. The
|
On July 18 2012 11:53 Heavenlee wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 11:50 Protosnake wrote:
...Zergs could still go up to three bases. There were plenty of builds that were centered around taking a safe third base while denying the protoss third.
And they were not safe at all, since they were relying on a 2base push supposed to do damage and thus secure a late 3rd. TLDR : Do damage or die, which is pretty much all-in-ish Note that the Stephano push is also pretty much all-in, as if he does not do enough damage in the early game he usually die 2-3 min later, but the 3rd base up allow for more options No, you're just making a random statement. Infestor/ling for instance could hold off an aggression while securing a third base. You have no proof behind your statement at all so I see no reason to even address your points. The winrates were fairly even at the time that zerg was not basically gifted a free third base and a 15+ worker advantage at 8:00. The Stephano roach/ling push is an all-in but we aren't discussing that. His build can go into the push if he scouts a fast third, and it can also be slightly altered to take care of two base-allins with the same general concept.
You tell me you're not gonna make a random statement, then proceed to make a completely random statement
Ling/infestor isnt solid since the neural nerf, any form of colossus aggression just destroyed it and that was the prime reason people came back to mass muta build
Also Zerg isnt "gifted a free third base and a 15+ worker advantage at 8:00", even when pretty much every Protoss 2 base all-in have been figured out you still see High level Zerg get crushed by it just because of how powerful it is.
|
On July 18 2012 11:35 Heavenlee wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 11:28 m0ck wrote:We're talking about the best ZvP-player in the world, it seems rather strange to base any conclusions around whether he does well in the match-up or not - and let's not pretend like he is unbeatable either. Mana and Sase might have a word to say about that. To say that he "lazily walked over" Hero and MC doesn't seem like a fair description of the matches. They were close matches with some pretty major mistakes on especially Hero's part. 2-base all-in against a 2-base spine-crawler fortified zerg with infestors? To say that "roach-ling" holds off any protoss aggression/all-in is simplistic and borderline disingenuous (not to say wrong) - it is certainly possible to force for example hydras with heavy air play. And a lot more goes into a defence than simply building roaches and lings, including scouting/reading your opponent, having units at the right timing and having the right mix of units. AS we've seen again and again, very few zergs are able to do that and very few zergs have the APM to do it. Let's not forget that the best ZvP-players, Stephano and DRG, both are 380-400 APM players. In any case, the statistics in Korea tells another story than your lament of racial imbalance - the match-up actually seems balanced. But maybe that is just because of 'stupid' zergs? http://minus.com/mLvjZlHez/1g Mana won with two immortal/sentry all-ins when the build was new and Stephano hadn't played against it. He now knows the proper response and I doubt he would lose to it again. Stephano losing 1-2 to Sase...because one best of three from Spring Arena says a lot? No one said he was unbeatable in the first place. The same chart, which I've seen counters against for not including a ton of matches, says that TvZ is terran favored. Excuse me if I don't take it seriously. And you don't force hydras with heavy air play, no one does that unless it's double stargate, in which case hydra nydus can beat it, or any massive attack in general. And no, neither of them are 400 APM players.
Yes, they are:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=327898
The only zerg player with a relatively low APM I can think of is Nestea, and I think it's fair to say that his strength does not lie in the late game.
Concerning TvZ, results from this season of GSL would seem to indicate that the match-up is terran favored. The circumstances around the format of GSL might have something to do with that, but the latest results seem to indicate that Korean terrans have learned how to deal with the new queen and what it does to the balance of the match-up. Look at GSL, GSTL, OSL and ESV and tell me where the great imbalance is. I don't see it.
I agree that the "get to BLs to win" isn't very fun to watch, and that it is a problem with every zerg match-up. But it is not necessarily one indicative of imbalance and they are almost completely necessary for zerg in order to be aggressive after the period of roach-bling pressure/all-ins are over. How do you break a terran without BLs? You don't, it is very rare to see a zerg be cost-effective when attacking without them.
The same can be said of zerg vs protoss. What other combination of units allows you to be aggressive once protoss has more than 140 supply? Perhaps the ultras, infestor and blings that symbol showcased, but then seed seemed to have an answer for that. The most reliably strong composition? BLs.
|
Like, the GSL format very rarely indicates true balance. Fruitdealer was winning when Zerg was underpowered just by pure outskill and build studying. Same for some of Nestea's wins. You can actually get very far in the GSL by carefully studying your opponent and making new builds. Naniwa almost beat DRG in a matchup he doesn't even feel confident in with some crafty build switches. It doesn't mean that Naniwa is suddenly a PvZ specialist; it just means that he found a weakness in DRG that he took a gamble on and it paid off.
I have no idea why Zerg players in this thread are arguing that either something is an a-move kill everything composition or it sucks. Yeah, you have to transition into different stuff in order to counter Colossus if you started off on Infestor/Ling, but beating Colossus isn't the point of Infestor/Ling. Similarly, Protoss players who go Colossus can't stay on Colossus if you go Mutas. Hell, they might have a build order loss if they made too many Sentries and Immortals in such a situation.
I don't like how people point to Symbol's play, note his creativity, and then immediately dismiss it because Protoss has answers? Uh, yeah, that's how the game works. If there isn't an answer to a composition, then it's overpowered. The point of a composition is to exploit weaknesses while your opponent tries to adjust to counter you. That's why, say, Colossus pushes are good (because they can do damage when you try to tech to BLs, but has to back off when BLs/Corruptors come out) but Infestor/BL is overpowered (because it pretty much kills anything and slow pushes across the map).
|
On July 18 2012 11:54 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 11:48 Heavenlee wrote:On July 18 2012 11:43 m0ck wrote:On July 18 2012 11:33 VTPerfect wrote:On July 18 2012 11:28 m0ck wrote:We're talking about the best ZvP-player in the world, it seems rather strange to base any conclusions around whether he does well in the match-up or not - and let's not pretend like he is unbeatable either. Mana and Sase might have a word to say about that. To say that he "lazily walked over" Hero and MC doesn't seem like a fair description of the matches. They were close matches with some pretty major mistakes on especially Hero's part. 2-base all-in against a 2-base spine-crawler fortified zerg with infestors? To say that "roach-ling" holds off any protoss aggression/all-in is simplistic and borderline disingenuous (not to say wrong) - it is certainly possible to force for example hydras with heavy air play. And a lot more goes into a defence than simply building roaches and lings, including scouting/reading your opponent, having units at the right timing and having the right mix of units. AS we've seen again and again, very few zergs are able to do that and very few zergs have the APM to do it. Let's not forget that the best ZvP-players, Stephano and DRG, both are 380-400 APM players. In any case, the statistics in Korea tells another story than your lament of racial imbalance - the match-up actually seems balanced. But maybe that is just because of 'stupid' zergs? http://minus.com/mLvjZlHez/1g yeah... when zerg dominates 90% of all the tournaments for the past 2 months, I guess the 1 stat that says zerg doesnt dominate proves everything wrong. its just a matter of how long the unfair imbalance that is propelling zerg into so many undeserved tournament positions will continue. or maybe all the good players decided to go zerg 2 month ago maybe... It is a problem, who do we balance for. The best or the rest? I agree that outside of Korea, zerg seems dominant at the moment. But you just don't see that pattern in Korea. Why is that and what can be done about it? It doesn't seem to make much sense to say that the match-up is inherently broken when among the best players in the world there is no evidence of such. Unfortunately you are basing your assumptions off a stupid chart that has been heavily criticized for excluding many zerg-dominated tournaments and matches, which makes it more like 60% to 40%. Here, I'll quote this for you: The Korea TvZ numbers really shocked me. So I went through just the current GSL's numbers so far. Keep in mind that many of these games will be included in July results. TvZ is right now 28-47. 37% win rate for Terran, 63% win rate for Zerg. In other words, even more imbalanced than the June International results.
I'm pretty sure that even Blizzard has admitted that a 20% gap in a matchup indicates a balance issue. Of course this is only one tournament (albeit with a large sample size and the highest skilled players in the world), but still.
GSL Code A+S TVZ
Nestea v STC 2-0
SuHoSin v MVP 1-2
Sniper v Supernova 1-2
YuGiOh v MKP 1-2
Symbol v MKP 2-0
DRG v Maru 2-1
Violet v Maru 2-1
Leenock v Ryung 0-2
Leenock v Taeja 0-2
Violet v MVP 2-0
Symbol v MKP 2-1
DRG v Ryung 2-1
Nestea v Supernova 2-0
Nestea v Supernova 2-1
Monster v Jjakji 0-2
YuGiOh v Harrier 2-0
Freaky v Bomber 1-2
Losira v Hack 1-2
Total: 25-21
GSTL TVZ
Life v TL 1-0
Life v Slayers 1-0
Symbol v Fnatic 1-0
Losira v TSL 1-0
Symbol v IM 3-0
Moon v IM 1-0
Byul v IM 1-0
Annyeong v Fnatic 1-0
Moon v Prime 2-0
BBong v TSL 0-1
Sniper v Fnatic 2-0
Coca v Prime 3-0
KingKong v HoSeo 0-1
Curious v HoSeo 0-1
Ragnarok v FXO 0-1
Shine v FXO 1-0
Hyun v HoSeo 1-1
Symbol v HoSeo 0-1
Revival v HoSeo 1-0
Lucky v Startale 1-1
Leenock vs Startale 1-0
Total: 22-7
Grand Total: 47-28. 63% Z v 37% T. Equally, it seems that in the individual leagues it's a lot more even, I'd say because Terrans can still prepare specific builds for GSL matches that are map or opponent specific, unlike the teamleagues (unless they were sent out to specifically snipe) 2. The
It's hard to say in the first place because it does come down to individual skill in the end. Either way the guy's argument doesn't hold any particular merit because you have matches like MKP v Yugioh, MVP v Suhosin, Jjaki v Monster, Freaky v Bomber, to a lesser extent Supernova v Sniper, and the GSL is such a specific format with so many things going on behind it---map specific preparation, big skill differences, surprise builds, analyzing your opponent's scouting patterns, etc. However I think almost every pro in Korea would admit that TvZ is imbalanced---I've heard it from MC, DRG, I think Nestea, MVP, lots of Koreans in general complaining on stream. The hundreds of games accounted for by the chart outside of Korea are...what, the Korean Weeklys where it may be the biggest mismatch of all time of Code S players versus B-team no names?
|
You know there's something wrong with Zerg when Greg fucking Fields admits that Zerg is strong.
|
On July 18 2012 12:00 m0ck wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 11:35 Heavenlee wrote:On July 18 2012 11:28 m0ck wrote:We're talking about the best ZvP-player in the world, it seems rather strange to base any conclusions around whether he does well in the match-up or not - and let's not pretend like he is unbeatable either. Mana and Sase might have a word to say about that. To say that he "lazily walked over" Hero and MC doesn't seem like a fair description of the matches. They were close matches with some pretty major mistakes on especially Hero's part. 2-base all-in against a 2-base spine-crawler fortified zerg with infestors? To say that "roach-ling" holds off any protoss aggression/all-in is simplistic and borderline disingenuous (not to say wrong) - it is certainly possible to force for example hydras with heavy air play. And a lot more goes into a defence than simply building roaches and lings, including scouting/reading your opponent, having units at the right timing and having the right mix of units. AS we've seen again and again, very few zergs are able to do that and very few zergs have the APM to do it. Let's not forget that the best ZvP-players, Stephano and DRG, both are 380-400 APM players. In any case, the statistics in Korea tells another story than your lament of racial imbalance - the match-up actually seems balanced. But maybe that is just because of 'stupid' zergs? http://minus.com/mLvjZlHez/1g Mana won with two immortal/sentry all-ins when the build was new and Stephano hadn't played against it. He now knows the proper response and I doubt he would lose to it again. Stephano losing 1-2 to Sase...because one best of three from Spring Arena says a lot? No one said he was unbeatable in the first place. The same chart, which I've seen counters against for not including a ton of matches, says that TvZ is terran favored. Excuse me if I don't take it seriously. And you don't force hydras with heavy air play, no one does that unless it's double stargate, in which case hydra nydus can beat it, or any massive attack in general. And no, neither of them are 400 APM players. Yes, they are: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=327898The only zerg player with a relatively low APM I can think of is Nestea, and I think it's fair to say that his strength does not lie in the late game. Concerning TvZ, results from this season of GSL would seem to indicate that the match-up is terran favored. The circumstances around the format of GSL might have something to do with that, but the latest results seem to indicate that Korean terrans have learned how to deal with the new queen and what it does to the balance of the match-up. Look at GSL, GSTL, OSL and ESV and tell me where the great imbalance is. I don't see it. I agree that the "get to BLs to win" isn't very fun to watch, and that it is a problem with every zerg match-up. But it is not necessarily one indicative of imbalance and they are almost completely necessary for zerg in order to be aggressive after the period of roach-bling pressure/all-ins are over. How do you break a terran without BLs? You don't, it is very rare to see a zerg be cost-effective when attacking without them. The same can be said of zerg vs protoss. What other combination of units allows you to be aggressive once protoss has more than 140 supply? Perhaps the ultras, infestor and blings that symbol showcased, but then seed seemed to have an answer for that. The most reliably strong composition? BLs.
Alright, so they do have 400 apm. But estimated APM is quite a bit lower, your APM spikes dramatically during things like spreading creep since it's just a series of random clicks (often off point from what I've watched from DRG and Stephano streams, taking many clicks to get it to go down) and especially when producing units.
The other stuff, I just showed you why the results are wrong. The matchup is zerg favored 25-21 in GSL there, and overwhelmingly zerg favored in the GSTL.
|
The other stuff, I just showed you why the results are wrong. The matchup is zerg favored 25-21 in GSL there, and overwhelmingly zerg favored in the GSTL
These are the result of a post-patch month, hard to say in such a short pan of time if it's the result of a metagame shift or an actual imbalance
I personally think it's a bit of both, but it's just too soon to say
|
On July 18 2012 11:59 Protosnake wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 11:53 Heavenlee wrote:On July 18 2012 11:50 Protosnake wrote:
...Zergs could still go up to three bases. There were plenty of builds that were centered around taking a safe third base while denying the protoss third.
And they were not safe at all, since they were relying on a 2base push supposed to do damage and thus secure a late 3rd. TLDR : Do damage or die, which is pretty much all-in-ish Note that the Stephano push is also pretty much all-in, as if he does not do enough damage in the early game he usually die 2-3 min later, but the 3rd base up allow for more options No, you're just making a random statement. Infestor/ling for instance could hold off an aggression while securing a third base. You have no proof behind your statement at all so I see no reason to even address your points. The winrates were fairly even at the time that zerg was not basically gifted a free third base and a 15+ worker advantage at 8:00. The Stephano roach/ling push is an all-in but we aren't discussing that. His build can go into the push if he scouts a fast third, and it can also be slightly altered to take care of two base-allins with the same general concept. You tell me you're not gonna make a random statement, then proceed to make a completely random statement Ling/infestor isnt solid since the neural nerf, any form of colossus aggression just destroyed it and that was the prime reason people came back to mass muta build Also Zerg isnt "gifted a free third base and a 15+ worker advantage at 8:00", even when pretty much every Protoss 2 base all-in have been figured out you still see High level Zerg get crushed by it just because of how powerful it is.
Colossus aggression destroys it but mutas destroy quick colossi builds, with current overlord speed it's pretty scoutable. You naming the counter to the build does not make the buld non-viable. You see high level zergs get "crushed by it" maybe 50% of the time, and especially more lately besides DRG just being mindnumbingly greedy versus Hero, because that 50/50 is better than going into a macro game with a disadvantage.
I'll find you examples of some games. Nerchio v Yonghwa, 8:24---> 55 to 41 workers with 9 more on the way from Nerchio. Another, 9:25--> 66 to 47.
|
On July 18 2012 10:57 Heavenlee wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 10:50 Big J wrote:On July 18 2012 09:11 Heavenlee wrote:On July 18 2012 08:59 wcr.4fun wrote:On July 18 2012 08:55 Wombat_NI wrote:On July 18 2012 08:51 wcr.4fun wrote:On July 18 2012 07:58 TeamBreezy wrote:On July 18 2012 07:30 Big J wrote:On July 18 2012 06:46 Shiori wrote:On July 18 2012 06:25 Charon1979 wrote:
[quote]
I can understand the terran pov, but I really cant stand you toss jumping on the bandwagon. PvZ ist stale, boring to watch and boring to play but its balanced. Blame Warp in mechanic.
In TvZ Terra is at a slight disadvantage at the moment, maybe it needs a fix, maybe not. But I really really hate these bigot statements: "When the MU was balanced I had a 70% winrate against zerg, now it dropped to 30%... wtf! Zerg OP!"
The same with progamers "There just a few top ZvT Players like DRG (51,6%) because zerg players suck in general and terran players just are naturally gifted, work harder, are more intelligent and handsome (worst winrate of the worst TvZ player still > 50%)
And to be honest... I really enjoy the queen buff as it helped a ton to stabilize ZvZ. In no way is PvZ balanced when one race can only 2base all-in. And no, this isn't up for debate. Macro PvZ is incredibly Zerg favoured since every P pressure has been neutered to the point of uselessness. Everyone sees this except you, and you keep talking as if the matchup being balanced is something everyone should agree on. Either stop misrepresenting my point of view or stop replying to me. You have yet to make an actual argument with regard to anything I've said. You've stepped over into pointlessly Zerg biased whining. You mean it's retarded that Protoss can't take a third good enough, due to roaches? Yes it is! You mean it's retarded that Zerg is forced to go 3bases superearly to not get outmacroed by a FFE build but on the flipside can only hold 50% of the Protoss allins, because this greedy strategy makes it very hard to actually hold them? And don't come with "Zerg has to fuck up to not defend the allin". After all it's Protoss that have the possibility to "FF better" as well a lot of the times (which is not easy, but a lot of times it also comes down simply to FFs). you know why Protoss' started to FFE in the first place?? Because zerg's were taking an extra base regardless. Being down 2 bases to 3 is better than 1 base to 2. Zerg's only get 33 percent more income than protoss 3 bases to 2, where as Zerg's double Protoss' income 2 bases to 1. This is called meta game. Adapting to what works best against common zergs. If zerg's didn't expo 3 bases they would have more units therefore hold off Protoss All-in's even easier. What am i saying, 3 base Zerg's hold off any Protoss 2 base all-ins 85 percent of the time so nvm. You know it takes a lot of sentries to FF, and which they have no dps. The big difference, Zerg's can lose the 3rd base, re-expand and win the game. Protoss fail all-in is automatically lose. No; try taking a third against 3 gate expand. That'd be kinda dumb though, there's no need for the superfast 3rd which is a response to an FFE to pump out your economy when you're racing a relatively uneconomic opener I understand that. He was saying 'zergs can take third regardless what P is doing', but that's not true at all. I understand 3 gate expand came before 1 gate expand, but I never played during the time that 1 gate expand was popular so can't comment on that. But I know for sure that zergs weren't taking thirds versus 3 gate expand. I just had an issue with saying 'Z can take third regardless of what P is doing.' We see Stephano do the same opener every time---a surge of lings and maybe a few roaches for map control, then he is completely safe to do whatever he wants and god forbid the toss attempts to take a quick third or apply any light pressure. He is either safe to expand, drone, tech, or all three at once, while maintaining the possibility of denying the protoss third while going up to four base. We even see zergs have learned to be greedier than before in some cases, such as Ret v Puzzle on Cloud Kingdom where he held off a two base all-in while taking his fourth instead of a macro hatch, and teching up to infestors. Some toss are now doing 1 gate expands because zergs don't recall how to handle them, but after a couple games of practice and looking back a bit they will---make speed on your zerglings and delay your third and prevent them from ever taking an expansion. Again, the zerg will have an economic advantage if they play properly. Either way the zerg will have an economic advantage going into the midgame. Just because in the past zergs suicided a ton, didn't understand timings or scouting patterns, etc. and made the win ratio even or sometimes even toss favored when a new all-in came out, does not make them currently balanced. Yeah, we get it. Zerg players are too dumb to defend allins and it's not Stephano outclassing his opponents at NASL, but rather just abusing Zerg imbaness. When 2months ago all the whine was about Terrans "not having a chance in TvP" and "having to rely on allins and drops", it was just Protoss players being too dumb to defend them. And yeah, Stephano did the same opener in the NASL finals against Alicia (who btw played horrible). Guess what... MC won two GSL's by basically using 1 build for PvT and PvZ (6gate), and one build for PvP (4gate). Maybe the way stephano does is not really figuered out yet? Or maybe you just have to be on even level with him to win (MC took two games of him and has beaten him several times before). Did you even read anything I said? I said they were too dumb to defend allins which is true. Look at how they defended gateway all-ins in the past and lost all the time, compared to how they almost never lose to them now. Compare how people were recently losing to immortal/sentry all-in and then the better players began to figure out how the engage, and then it made it easier to hold. So yes, they were too "dumb" to defend all-ins, that seriously just can't be argued if you watch this game. Provide proof that Stephano outclassed his opponents instead of taking advantage of zerg being favored at the moment. Can you? No, there is no objective way to prove that he had better timings, map awareness, build orders, etc. or that his build is just a panacea. And I can't prove he didn't outclass his opponents. But we can look at every other game in the state of PvZ and how zerg always seems to magically have an advantage, then it becomes likely that that "outclassing" is because when both play a standard game the zerg has the advantage---since you kind of see them winning everything, zergs that were considered nobodies in the past taking games off great players of both protoss and terran, etc.
Yeah, we look at those PvZs and see a "magical advantage" of 50% winrate. I don't care what advantages you see, but apparently the game is about winning and if those advantages of zerg only lead to 50:50 winrate, they are not advantages in a sense of "overall better off", but just "more absolute income" or "more absolute supply", yet if Protoss combats zerg with mass T2 (blink, immortals) and the occasional Stargate or T3 Archon or Colossus units and zergs only play roaches against it, then Protoss has tech advantages they seem to emphasize on and supplyefficiency advantages that they can emphasize on and it seems to balance out.
|
Personally, I can describe each matchup as follows:
TvZ:
Very favoured towards the Zerg at the moment. The Queen range buff has switched the metagame drastically from "hellion pressure to slow down creep" to either risky macrohard 3 base terran or 5rax/7rax bio aggression early on.
However, I have seen Terrans like DeMusliM beat other pros like Ostojiy (that use ling infestor bane) using just mass MMM bio so I think the issue is more of a micro/engagement/positioning issue.
ZvP:
Currently, ZvP is somewhat balanced except for the fact that Brood Lord, Corruptors and Infestors at their critical mass are simply far too strong to deal with. The best way to deal with Brood Lords has always been Stalkers but they quickly lose their effectiveness when underneath your Brood Lords are mass roaches or even Hydralisks. Oh and Infestors screw up Blinks too.
Motherships work to an extent but you have to have pretty terrible control to get all of your Brood Lords vortexed. Plus eliminating say... 15 Brood Lords en masse relies on the Zerg making that critical an error and the most epic Archon toilet known to man.:
And let's not forget that a Zerg can land a pretty good neural to turn the tables in the case of a Mothership.
I think if a unit needs a buff, it's probably the Void Ray in the later game. Currently, Void Rays aren't even viable as part of a late game comp because even Corruptors, Infestors and Hydralisks pretty much eliminate them quickly. Carriers could work if implemented properly but are very expensive and require significant tech to make... The key to Protoss winning PvZ engagements could be within the Carrier as a unit.
PvT:
This is a matchup that I feel is the most imbalanced. Protoss at the moment are ridiculously strong and perhaps too strong especially in the late game. A lot of Terran builds rely on you dealing pressure in the early or midgame in the hope that one can kill a few workers, punish the fact that your Protoss opponent hasn't anticipated a drop and either get ahead or force a gg straight there.
As a Terran, you have to do multi-pronged attacks (via the form of drops and runbys), engage any armies in an advantageous concave, dodge psionic storms near-pefectly (as two seconds bathing in those things can pretty much one-shot any marines), ideally snipe any Templar before they come near, land perfect EMPs and somehow catch the Protoss off guard. And that is just to win a late game engagement and come out ahead.
As a Protoss, all you have to do is get some templar (about 6 - 8), get some archons (ideally 2 or more), get some colossi (around 3 will do) and back it up with chargelots, sentries and stalkers. Then attack move, throw up guardian shields and occasionally storm.or forcefield your way to either preventing a kiting manouver or splitting up the army.
Personally, I think the future for PvT pre-HOTS is either a buff to Terran from Blizzard or currently found within using the 1/1/1 build. If Terrans master it or find a new variation that makes PvT easy and keep Protoss on their toes, they can do near-impossible-to-stop pushes.
Overall:
This is not balance whine, I am merely suggesting possible avenues to evolve the metagame.
One idea I once had (but am too mechanically bad at implementing) was using Ravens to harass (they are theoretically the most efficient harassment unit in the game because their worker-eliminating arsenal consisting of Auto-turrets are not only energy efficient but durable and last about 180 seconds.... UN-UPGRADED.
|
On July 18 2012 12:17 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 10:57 Heavenlee wrote:On July 18 2012 10:50 Big J wrote:On July 18 2012 09:11 Heavenlee wrote:On July 18 2012 08:59 wcr.4fun wrote:On July 18 2012 08:55 Wombat_NI wrote:On July 18 2012 08:51 wcr.4fun wrote:On July 18 2012 07:58 TeamBreezy wrote:On July 18 2012 07:30 Big J wrote:On July 18 2012 06:46 Shiori wrote:
[quote]
In no way is PvZ balanced when one race can only 2base all-in. And no, this isn't up for debate. Macro PvZ is incredibly Zerg favoured since every P pressure has been neutered to the point of uselessness. Everyone sees this except you, and you keep talking as if the matchup being balanced is something everyone should agree on.
Either stop misrepresenting my point of view or stop replying to me. You have yet to make an actual argument with regard to anything I've said. You've stepped over into pointlessly Zerg biased whining. You mean it's retarded that Protoss can't take a third good enough, due to roaches? Yes it is! You mean it's retarded that Zerg is forced to go 3bases superearly to not get outmacroed by a FFE build but on the flipside can only hold 50% of the Protoss allins, because this greedy strategy makes it very hard to actually hold them? And don't come with "Zerg has to fuck up to not defend the allin". After all it's Protoss that have the possibility to "FF better" as well a lot of the times (which is not easy, but a lot of times it also comes down simply to FFs). you know why Protoss' started to FFE in the first place?? Because zerg's were taking an extra base regardless. Being down 2 bases to 3 is better than 1 base to 2. Zerg's only get 33 percent more income than protoss 3 bases to 2, where as Zerg's double Protoss' income 2 bases to 1. This is called meta game. Adapting to what works best against common zergs. If zerg's didn't expo 3 bases they would have more units therefore hold off Protoss All-in's even easier. What am i saying, 3 base Zerg's hold off any Protoss 2 base all-ins 85 percent of the time so nvm. You know it takes a lot of sentries to FF, and which they have no dps. The big difference, Zerg's can lose the 3rd base, re-expand and win the game. Protoss fail all-in is automatically lose. No; try taking a third against 3 gate expand. That'd be kinda dumb though, there's no need for the superfast 3rd which is a response to an FFE to pump out your economy when you're racing a relatively uneconomic opener I understand that. He was saying 'zergs can take third regardless what P is doing', but that's not true at all. I understand 3 gate expand came before 1 gate expand, but I never played during the time that 1 gate expand was popular so can't comment on that. But I know for sure that zergs weren't taking thirds versus 3 gate expand. I just had an issue with saying 'Z can take third regardless of what P is doing.' We see Stephano do the same opener every time---a surge of lings and maybe a few roaches for map control, then he is completely safe to do whatever he wants and god forbid the toss attempts to take a quick third or apply any light pressure. He is either safe to expand, drone, tech, or all three at once, while maintaining the possibility of denying the protoss third while going up to four base. We even see zergs have learned to be greedier than before in some cases, such as Ret v Puzzle on Cloud Kingdom where he held off a two base all-in while taking his fourth instead of a macro hatch, and teching up to infestors. Some toss are now doing 1 gate expands because zergs don't recall how to handle them, but after a couple games of practice and looking back a bit they will---make speed on your zerglings and delay your third and prevent them from ever taking an expansion. Again, the zerg will have an economic advantage if they play properly. Either way the zerg will have an economic advantage going into the midgame. Just because in the past zergs suicided a ton, didn't understand timings or scouting patterns, etc. and made the win ratio even or sometimes even toss favored when a new all-in came out, does not make them currently balanced. Yeah, we get it. Zerg players are too dumb to defend allins and it's not Stephano outclassing his opponents at NASL, but rather just abusing Zerg imbaness. When 2months ago all the whine was about Terrans "not having a chance in TvP" and "having to rely on allins and drops", it was just Protoss players being too dumb to defend them. And yeah, Stephano did the same opener in the NASL finals against Alicia (who btw played horrible). Guess what... MC won two GSL's by basically using 1 build for PvT and PvZ (6gate), and one build for PvP (4gate). Maybe the way stephano does is not really figuered out yet? Or maybe you just have to be on even level with him to win (MC took two games of him and has beaten him several times before). Did you even read anything I said? I said they were too dumb to defend allins which is true. Look at how they defended gateway all-ins in the past and lost all the time, compared to how they almost never lose to them now. Compare how people were recently losing to immortal/sentry all-in and then the better players began to figure out how the engage, and then it made it easier to hold. So yes, they were too "dumb" to defend all-ins, that seriously just can't be argued if you watch this game. Provide proof that Stephano outclassed his opponents instead of taking advantage of zerg being favored at the moment. Can you? No, there is no objective way to prove that he had better timings, map awareness, build orders, etc. or that his build is just a panacea. And I can't prove he didn't outclass his opponents. But we can look at every other game in the state of PvZ and how zerg always seems to magically have an advantage, then it becomes likely that that "outclassing" is because when both play a standard game the zerg has the advantage---since you kind of see them winning everything, zergs that were considered nobodies in the past taking games off great players of both protoss and terran, etc. Yeah, we look at those PvZs and see a "magical advantage" of 50% winrate. I don't care what advantages you see, but apparently the game is about winning and if those advantages of zerg only lead to 50:50 winrate, they are not advantages in a sense of "overall better off", but just "more absolute income" or "more absolute supply", yet if Protoss combats zerg with mass T2 (blink, immortals) and the occasional Stargate or T3 Archon or Colossus units and zergs only play roaches against it, then Protoss has tech advantages they seem to emphasize on and supplyefficiency advantages that they can emphasize on and it seems to balance out.
Yes, that magical 50-50 winrate has lead to 24 zerg tournament wins to 8 protoss wins and 3 terran wins, 40 zerg final appearances to 20 protoss and 10 terran, and 64-49-26 semifinals.
|
TvZ W/L from IPL TAC3(as of posting)
Round 1 Winners Bracket: 4/11
Round 2 Winners Bracket: 4/9
Round 3 Winners Bracket: 4/2
Round 1 Losers Bracket: 6/7
Round 2 Losers Bracket: 5/8
Round 3 Losers Bracket: 2/3
25/40(65 Total games played) = 38% winrate
|
Colossus aggression destroys it but mutas destroy quick colossi builds, with current overlord speed it's pretty scoutable. You naming the counter to the build does not make the buld non-viable. You see high level zergs get "crushed by it" maybe 50% of the time, and especially more lately besides DRG just being mindnumbingly greedy versus Hero, because that 50/50 is better than going into a macro game with a disadvantage.
I'll find you examples of some games. Nerchio v Yonghwa, 8:24---> 55 to 41 workers with 9 more on the way from Nerchio. Another, 9:25--> 66 to 47
Yeah, like I said, that's why people went back to muta, because a build that is auto-lose against something as common as a colossus in PvZ isnt "solid"
You see zerg die to all-in all the time, every single Zerg. DRG and Stephano being the current highest ranked Z, you obviously dont see them fall for it very often, but it still happen. The 3rd base and drone advance isnt free in any way.
Also, I dont get why you're bringing up the drone advance in ZvP, obviously Zerg will always try to get ahead in workers, that's because Zerg units arent as cost-effective as protoss units, so being 66worker to 47 or even having 50% more supply than your opponent doesnt mean that you're ahead at all, it's just the standard macro play.
|
On July 18 2012 12:19 Clbull wrote:
Personally, I can describe each matchup as follows:
TvZ:
Very favoured towards the Zerg at the moment. The Queen range buff has switched the metagame drastically from "hellion pressure to slow down creep" to either risky macrohard 3 base terran or 5rax/7rax bio aggression early on.
ZvP
Currently, ZvP is somewhat balanced except for the fact that Brood Lord, Corruptors and Infestors at their critical mass are simply far too strong to deal with. The best way to deal with Brood Lords has always been Stalkers but they quickly lose their effectiveness when underneath your Brood Lords are mass roaches or even Hydralisks. Oh and Infestors screw up Blinks too.
Motherships work to an extent but you have to have pretty terrible control to get all of your Brood Lords vortexed. Plus eliminating say... 15 Brood Lords en masse relies on the Zerg making that critical an error and the most epic Archon toilet known to man.:
And let's not forget that a Zerg can land a pretty good neural to turn the tables in the case of a Mothership.
PvT:
This is a matchup that I feel is the most imbalanced. Protoss at the moment are ridiculously strong and perhaps too strong especially in the late game. A lot of Terran builds rely on you dealing pressure in the early or midgame in the hope that one can kill a few workers, punish the fact that your Protoss opponent hasn't anticipated a drop and either get ahead or force a gg straight there.
As a Terran, you have to do multi-pronged attacks (via the form of drops and runbys), engage any armies in an advantageous concave, dodge psionic storms near-pefectly (as two seconds bathing in those things can pretty much one-shot any marines), ideally snipe any Templar before they come near, land perfect EMPs and somehow catch the Protoss off guard. And that is just to win a late game engagement and come out ahead.
As a Protoss, all you have to do is get some templar (about 6 - 8), get some archons (ideally 2 or more), get some colossi (around 3 will do) and back it up with chargelots, sentries and stalkers. Then attack move, throw up guardian shields and occasionally storm.
PvT is the most imbalanced?? LOL this is probably the funniest post i've read lately. PvT is probably is the most balanced. TvZ is by far the most imbalanced. PvZ, if the protoss doesn't do enough damage, they auto - lose.
Pro- Terran players aren't bitching about tvp, they actually want to play tvp nowadays. It's just TvZ is the only problem. Look at the stats. Nuff said.
One more point, Demuslim, better than anyone here..... even points out, Stephano used the same build every god damn game. EVERY GAME!!! lol. I mean, it gets to a point where you can do the same build and still win every game. Players know what he is going to do and still can't stop him. It's because there's nothing you can do about it lol.
|
I'd like to point out something that it seems EVERYONE is missing here. It was not some stroke of genius, it wasn't protoss or zergs playing differently. What made the Stephano style possible was when warp gate research got a nerf to "fix" pvp. Before that change you could easily punish a greedy third by zerg. Now the warp timing is so late after a forge expand, that you either have to all in to kill their 3rd, or you are stuck on defense trying to hold your own 3rd while hive and a 4th comes out from zerg. Because you can't hit a warpgate timing on zergs 3rd until they've already had time to drone it and then make units.
That fact is that zergs have always had almost perfect scouting in early game zvp, because of how late the first stalker or sentry comes out to push out overlords. (again because you have to forge expand then get gateway then cyber core) They know exactly how many gates and gas you have and what tech you've started that could be used to attack their 3rd. The overlord change didn't affect this, but the queen attack range made any early zealot pressure pointless. (some players would try to force units from zerg by sending zealots before the 3rd was droned up). Zergs will know if you go stargate and they have time to get spores/queens.
Honestly, I think the horrible game design is that the zergs macro mechanic can deny air harass or early crono'd zealot pressure. While giving them creep spread which turns into half map free vision and a free speed boost to the fastest army in the game. Zergs have all these overlords around that they could be using for creep spread and vision, but they don't even have to bother, because tumor creep spread is so much better. Protoss as a race got screwed pretty hard for having crono and warp gate, because crono'ing out warp research triggered so many nerfs to warp gate. Yet 4 gating is still one of the most popular strats in pvp.
I've been saying for over a year, that when zergs started to actually micro at the level that top toss, and terran players have been since almost release, that zerg would seem unstoppable. Up until just the last few months I've been watching the "best" zerg players in the world not even micro back infestors after the energy was used,letting them die pointlessly. Not target firing things like sentries. Not abusing burrow (with trapping units, delaying expansions ect). Now these are all quite common and they make PvZ a nightmare for toss. When that infestor count stays high, or your 3rd gets delayed because of a burrowed ling, or your 2 base gate all in at zergs 3rd gets stopped because of roach burrow.
There are still things zergs are not bothering to use like overseer's contaminate, people call it useless, but if you shut down factory/starport or robo production for over a minute with a few chain contaminates, it's game breaking. I'd bet zergs could even get one off before warp research finished. Warp research another 30 seconds later? That would hurt!
Nydus is still ripe for abuse. Here's a tip zerg players, on many maps with large mains it is impossible for a protoss to forge expand and have vision of his whole main before you can nydus with speedlings into the main. The protoss can't possibly afford to have the natural defended and the main. (especially since protoss won't know it's coming and would have to spend this money blindly!) It's very hard to stop on some maps because it hits long before warp gate is done and you simply can't afford enough pylons to grant vision of your whole main while trying to probe up, crono warp, get gates and tech down, and be ready with enough cannons and FF's in case zerg attempts to break your front. This is also partly why drops have been coming back into favor. You can really exploit protoss's blindness in the early game!
Keep in mind also, that once protoss get's it's 1st probe scout forced out, they are blind. If a zerg keeps his first few lings in good positions you can deny any information. They may see you have a 3rd but that's it. The protoss doesn't know if you are going to fully saturate that 3rd or just put a few drones and then rush, with more drones behind it. I see a LOT of protoss pro's going very skimpy on defense. They will often just have 1 cannon and a single sentry until warp finishes. Zergs who take a 3rd and don't fully saturate it, and suddenly pump roach can often break the front.
I'm only pointing these things out because I still feel like a lot of strategy on the zerg's side of ZvP is under explored. There are a lot of almost free wins that zergs can exploit because of forge expands. Which mean that protoss is almost blind until obs or hallucinate come out (which is a long time) meanwhile zergs have 100% knowledge of protoss. If they start exploiting the fact that most pro protoss players under defend their bases and simply ASSUME that zerg is droning, things will get much more painful for protoss.
But truthfully, zergs don't really have to bother exploring these things if they don't want to. The stephano style doesn't have a counter. There is no build order win possible from protoss. I think this matchup will have more adjustments made in the future.
However, after seeing the total surprise and disbelief from Dustin Browder when Kennigit asked him about the dynamic of vortex, vs neural parasite, (he asks about how the whole match-up comes is decided by a few actions, either the vortex lands or doesn't) Dustin Browder responds by saying he wasn't aware that even happened often, or that motherships were used in PvZ very much. It makes me doubt that there is the depth of understanding needed to really get this match-up into a better place than it's current state of protoss's 2 base all in or 3 base all in. Because truthfully, that is what almost every pro match of pvz looks like right now, it's frustrating to play and boring to watch.
|
On July 18 2012 12:27 Reborn8u wrote:
What made the Stephano style possible was when warp gate research got a nerf to "fix" pvp. Before that change you could easily punish a greedy third by zerg.
That was just a 20sec nerf. If anything, Stephano would open with a 6:30 roach warren instead of 7:00.
|
On July 18 2012 12:30 Protosnake wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 12:27 Reborn8u wrote:
What made the Stephano style possible was when warp gate research got a nerf to "fix" pvp. Before that change you could easily punish a greedy third by zerg. That was just a 20sec nerf. If anything, Stephano would open with a 6:30 roach warren instead of 7:00.
Opening earlier Roaches means you have fewer Drones which impacts your economy since you have to cut workers earlier.
|
On July 18 2012 12:26 Protosnake wrote:Show nested quote +Colossus aggression destroys it but mutas destroy quick colossi builds, with current overlord speed it's pretty scoutable. You naming the counter to the build does not make the buld non-viable. You see high level zergs get "crushed by it" maybe 50% of the time, and especially more lately besides DRG just being mindnumbingly greedy versus Hero, because that 50/50 is better than going into a macro game with a disadvantage.
I'll find you examples of some games. Nerchio v Yonghwa, 8:24---> 55 to 41 workers with 9 more on the way from Nerchio. Another, 9:25--> 66 to 47
Yeah, like I said, that's why people went back to muta, because a build that is auto-lose against something as common as a colossus in PvZ isnt "solid" You see zerg die to all-in all the time, every single Zerg. DRG and Stephano being the current highest ranked Z, you obviously dont see them fall for it very often, but it still happen. The 3rd base and drone advance isnt free in any way. Also, I dont get why you're bringing up the drone advance in ZvP, obviously Zerg will always try to get ahead in workers, that's because Zerg units arent as cost-effective as protoss units, so being 66worker to 47 or even having 50% more supply than your opponent doesnt mean that you're ahead at all, it's just the standard macro play.
And like I said, you can scout if they're going colossi or teching heavily in general and go for mutas, especially with the speed overlords allowing you to scout quite well.
You see them die to all-in all the time, like I already adressed in my previous statement that it's a 50/50 at most. Proxy raxing versus zerg giving a 51% winrate does not make TvZ balanced. And why do people do these two base all-ins that are so hit and miss? Because they don't want to play macro. The lack of cost-efficieny is just an often-repeated myth, zerg is plenty cost-efficient with decent engagements especially when infestors are out on the field. The lack of cost-efficiency often comes to headbutting mass roaches into forcefields, or throwing mass roach at blink stalker/immortal instead of things like high numbers of lings. Should we also discuss the cost efficiency of lings versus stalkers, or storm versus marines?
That worker lead translates to a faster hive which translates to a faster broodlord/corruptor/infestor army and while protoss do have the tech to counteract in the late late game, the zerg ultimate army comes out quite a bit faster because of that advantage.
|
On July 18 2012 12:27 Reborn8u wrote:
What made the Stephano style possible was when warp gate research got a nerf to "fix" pvp. Before that change you could easily punish a greedy third by zerg.
That was just a 20sec nerf. If anything, Stephano would open with a 6:30 roach warren instead of 7:00.
But truthfully, zergs don't really have to bother exploring these things if they don't want to. The stephano style doesn't have a counter. There is no build order win possible from protoss. I think this matchup will have more adjustments made in the future
A lot of counter has already been found, MC super early 6gate pressure, or the immortal-sentry all-in
Stephano just adjusted to these immediatly, by getting a way earlier gas/roach warren, switching upgrade, getting more evo, opening with lings instead of roaches, these little flaws that force him to get less and less greedy are gonna slowly make his build less effective over time
And like I said, you can scout if they're going colossi or teching heavily in general and go for mutas, especially with the speed overlords allowing you to scout quite well.
Well you can scout that he's going colossi, but you still invested massively in melee upgrade and infestor.
You dont really have the time to wait for your spire to finish, even if you do you wont have the gas to make it worthwile, you dont have roachspeed, you dont have the upgrade to make it worth something, you pretty much have no choice
Ling/infestor was dropped for a reason, not saying it's not "viable" but is it a safe solid opening ? I doubt it
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
