| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Assirra
Belgium4169 Posts
On July 21 2012 11:39 Hellfury wrote: Why the hell are roaches the only unit in the game strong enough to be considered a "unit composition" completely on their own? yea cause we never see blink stalkers on their own... | ||
|
Shiori
3815 Posts
On July 21 2012 12:12 Assirra wrote: yea cause we never see blink stalkers on their own... Let me know when 200/200 Blink Stalkers is considered a solid macro build.... | ||
|
Assirra
Belgium4169 Posts
On July 21 2012 12:21 Shiori wrote: Let me know when 200/200 Blink Stalkers is considered a solid macro build.... Nice try but that was not what the poster i replied was talking about. you can't adjust the question when the answer is not to your liking... | ||
|
Zanno
United States1484 Posts
On July 21 2012 11:39 Hellfury wrote: Why the hell are roaches the only unit in the game strong enough to be considered a "unit composition" completely on their own? even though they're a boring 1a unit, they're still really unique, because even though they're cost efficient, they're not at all supply efficient that's more or less the main reason why. if you're going to build roaches, you can't halfass it, you really need to commit to it, because they don't share attack ups with ling/bane it's like someone took the ineffectiveness of a max protoss vs terran dynamic in bw and doubled it. i really don't think it's a big deal, because it's become pretty clear you can't stay on roach forever, you just need it to either go for a timing or hold the line while you get to hive tech roaches are pretty much a solid how-to guide for future rts games on how to design a unit that excels at timing attacks | ||
|
Jermstuddog
United States2231 Posts
On July 21 2012 11:39 Hellfury wrote: Why the hell are roaches the only unit in the game strong enough to be considered a "unit composition" completely on their own? This statement... I don't even... Blink Stalkers being the primary example of a single massable unit that is actually good, but lets talk about other common (and not-so-common) single-unit strats. Mass marines works all game long, actually marines are pretty much THE unit that defines the ZvT MU from both sides. If Zerg can't kill them fast enough, he loses, if he can, he wins, doesn't really matter what the support units are from there, everything else really just exists to make the marines live longer, nobody is scared of siege tanks or medivacs without marines in the immediate vicinity. Hell... Marines define the entire Terran race. Even Blizzard has acknowledge them as the most OP unit in the game, I still don't understand why Blizzard refuses to touch the unit. Lings have proven to be a rather viable option for very long portions of ZvP. While they may not be enough to end games with, they are plenty enough to take map control and secure multiple expansions while simultaneously applying pressure to your opponent, or at least keeping him in his base. Add drops and banelings and you've got a game-ending army. Mutas are much like lings in the sense that they're not very good at ending games themselves, but they have the power to put zerg so far ahead that it becomes nearly impossible to lose. Thors, while not the scariest unit in the game, can be pretty damn scary if you just max out on them. Getting enough Thors and just a handful of SCVs to repair them in TvZ means that Zerg really has one chance to clear the whole army out or just lose the game. Trying to remax vs a thor-based army is not fun and attacking with anything less than a maxed out army is fairly pointless given how fast thors kill everything Zerg has. Carriers, while they may sound like a laughable suggestion, are quite potent in the PvZ MU. If Protoss actually manages to get to the 6+ amount with decent upgrades, they actually become nearly impossible to deal with due to their crazy high DPS. At any rate, I'm done. Quit complaining about Roaches... they're really not that good, and Zerg would almost always rather be making something else, but really, when roaches are being massed, what else is viable? | ||
|
DJSub
Indonesia261 Posts
TvT: I don't see much change, since most pros go marines/tanks/medivacs. Probably more lategame banshee harass will be used? TvP: Again, not much change since mech is rarely used lategame. Probably mech will be slightly more feasible now? TvZ: This will help Terran against Zerg's composition switch, since usually you don't upgrade air until you see broods. Now vikings come pre-upgraded if you research the mech upgrade. Any feedback is appreciated | ||
|
mannerless
Brazil86 Posts
On July 21 2012 13:20 DJSub wrote: I would like to share an idea on how to slightly buff Terran lategame, without really changing their early game. I'm not sure if this has been discussed before. I think a good way is to combine mech and air upgrade into a single upgrade (ie. mech+air attack and mech+air armor). This will make Terran reach upgrade faster and less costly. TvT: I don't see much change, since most pros go marines/tanks/medivacs. Probably more lategame banshee harass will be used? TvP: Again, not much change since mech is rarely used lategame. Probably mech will be slightly more feasible now? TvZ: This will help Terran against Zerg's composition switch, since usually you don't upgrade air until you see broods. Now vikings come pre-upgraded if you research the mech upgrade. Any feedback is appreciated Yes man, that's a great suggestion. In fact the current upgrade layout for Terran was just carried over from Brood War without being given much thought to. I mean, Ship Plating lvl 1 costs 150/150 while all the rest is 100/100? That's the kind of thing that isn't game changing but just retarded. Terran should have infantry & machine upgrades and that's it, I wouldn't even mind armor being more expensive (keep ship plating costs). I mean, look at the easy time Protoss has with upgrades and as for Zerg they got the huge macro to back up their upgrade costs. | ||
|
bayside
United States82 Posts
I feel as a whole that the constant remax theory has became uncontrollable as of the past couple months, I picked up zerg for 2 matches, and can beat diamond players easily (Currently I am a Protoss Plat/Dia Level player, can beat dia-masters at PvT pretty easily, and Plat-Dia at PvP, but I can not win a single PvZ without doing a 2 base allin) I think that the solution currently would be to raise the cost of roaches from 25 gas to 50 gas to make them have the same gas/supply as Stalkers. This will really help expand on more mech plays in ZvT, and make things such as 3 base before gas extremely weak because they will not be able to afford that many roaches to defend against 2base pressure. I think that if you did raise the gas cost, we would see a lot more even matches going into the lategame (cant just spam roaches, and be able to tech up into your hive tech stupidly) Does anyone else feel that this could be a possible solution to a more balanced SC2? I don't feel that Zerg is too OP but when Ok pro-players come out of the cracks by the hoards, it is kind of ridiculous. Do you think that the Zerg being strong is just a part of the Meta and will get figured out? On a side note, I have been adapting the Bisu build to see how it plays out, however it just seems that if you do go a phoenix/DT build you seem to kindve put yourself in a hole(spore crawlers), also I have been trying to do collosus drops on mineral lines, but the delay in firing just makes it unworthwhile without loads of practice and you lose 500 mins/200 gas if you lose it. | ||
|
sieksdekciw
240 Posts
On July 21 2012 14:42 bayside wrote: Do you guys think that the Zerg Macro Mechanics are broken? Yes. Any race that could safely reach an economic advantage and maintain it, is broken. Zerg has an eco advantage by default. Even builds like 3 cc or constantly cb probes can't saturate and have high enough income as a normal zerg build. | ||
|
Chaggi
Korea (South)1936 Posts
On July 21 2012 14:42 bayside wrote: Do you guys think that the Zerg Macro Mechanics are broken? I feel as a whole that the constant remax theory has became uncontrollable as of the past couple months, I picked up zerg for 2 matches, and can beat diamond players easily (Currently I am a Protoss Plat/Dia Level player, can beat dia-masters at PvT pretty easily, and Plat-Dia at PvP, but I can not win a single PvZ without doing a 2 base allin) I think that the solution currently would be to raise the cost of roaches from 25 gas to 50 gas to make them have the same gas/supply as Stalkers. This will really help expand on more mech plays in ZvT, and make things such as 3 base before gas extremely weak because they will not be able to afford that many roaches to defend against 2base pressure. I think that if you did raise the gas cost, we would see a lot more even matches going into the lategame (cant just spam roaches, and be able to tech up into your hive tech stupidly) Does anyone else feel that this could be a possible solution to a more balanced SC2? I don't feel that Zerg is too OP but when Ok pro-players come out of the cracks by the hoards, it is kind of ridiculous. Do you think that the Zerg being strong is just a part of the Meta and will get figured out? On a side note, I have been adapting the Bisu build to see how it plays out, however it just seems that if you do go a phoenix/DT build you seem to kindve put yourself in a hole(spore crawlers), also I have been trying to do collosus drops on mineral lines, but the delay in firing just makes it unworthwhile without loads of practice and you lose 500 mins/200 gas if you lose it. I think it's pretty broken in late game, and infestors are way too good. | ||
|
Charon1979
Austria317 Posts
I think that the solution currently would be to raise the cost of roaches from 25 gas to 50 gas to make them have the same gas/supply as Stalkers. This will really help expand on more mech plays in ZvT, and make things such as 3 base before gas extremely weak because they will not be able to afford that many roaches to defend against 2base pressure. With a 75/50 Roach why should toss bother going lategame if a 2base all-in now kills Z 100% of the time? | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On July 21 2012 14:42 bayside wrote: Do you guys think that the Zerg Macro Mechanics are broken? I feel as a whole that the constant remax theory has became uncontrollable as of the past couple months, I picked up zerg for 2 matches, and can beat diamond players easily (Currently I am a Protoss Plat/Dia Level player, can beat dia-masters at PvT pretty easily, and Plat-Dia at PvP, but I can not win a single PvZ without doing a 2 base allin) I think that the solution currently would be to raise the cost of roaches from 25 gas to 50 gas to make them have the same gas/supply as Stalkers. This will really help expand on more mech plays in ZvT, and make things such as 3 base before gas extremely weak because they will not be able to afford that many roaches to defend against 2base pressure. I think that if you did raise the gas cost, we would see a lot more even matches going into the lategame (cant just spam roaches, and be able to tech up into your hive tech stupidly) Does anyone else feel that this could be a possible solution to a more balanced SC2? I don't feel that Zerg is too OP but when Ok pro-players come out of the cracks by the hoards, it is kind of ridiculous. Do you think that the Zerg being strong is just a part of the Meta and will get figured out? On a side note, I have been adapting the Bisu build to see how it plays out, however it just seems that if you do go a phoenix/DT build you seem to kindve put yourself in a hole(spore crawlers), also I have been trying to do collosus drops on mineral lines, but the delay in firing just makes it unworthwhile without loads of practice and you lose 500 mins/200 gas if you lose it. Roaches are cheaper than stalkers, because stalkers have better stats, shoot air and have blink (which is way stronger than burrow on roaches) You don't make Mech more playable by nerfing roaches. Attacking Mech with roach is an allin or semiallin that you can scout and that you can learn to defend. The problem with Mech vZ is rather, that you are sitting at home, building up your shiny army for 15-20mins (or even longer if you really try to make it "ultimate") and have no way to win apart from doing some allin timing. (so far so good, that just sounds like playing zerg until now, at least if you replace army with eco and tech) And then when you move out, you are facing an army that mech is not particulary good against (Broodlords; you want to play Air or Air/Mech against them, but not mech). And those SC1 builds simply don't work in SC2. The whole metagame is different and the units are different. Zerg has more drones, so building static defenses in the midgame is not as bad as in SC1. Colossi only do 30dmg per shot, not 125 like reavers. | ||
|
DemigodcelpH
1138 Posts
On July 21 2012 15:59 Big J wrote: Roaches are cheaper than stalkers, because stalkers have better stats, shoot air and have blink (which is way stronger than burrow on roaches) This is why Inject should be nerfed over the units (with infestors and broodlords being the exception to what I just said). This is where the problem with Zerg mostly stems from. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On July 21 2012 16:40 DemigodcelpH wrote: This is why Inject should be nerfed over the units (with infestors and broodlords being the exception to what I just said). This is where the problem with Zerg mostly stems from. Well, larva mechanism is what defines zerg. So yeah, any problem will always come from there as larva = zerg, and injects = 60% of zergs larva. | ||
|
xPabt
226 Posts
| ||
|
ErAsc2
Sweden256 Posts
On July 21 2012 14:49 sieksdekciw wrote: Yes. Any race that could safely reach an economic advantage and maintain it, is broken. Zerg has an eco advantage by default. Even builds like 3 cc or constantly cb probes can't saturate and have high enough income as a normal zerg build. This might be a lower level comment than you see on the battle.net forums... The races aren't all the same, Zerg is an economical race, it's one of their core strengths. That doesnt mean Zerg is broken. Zerg is economically better in the midgame, but Protoss on the other hand can hold a 3rd with 1/3 of the Zerg's supply with flawless control. Does that make Protoss broken? No, the races has different strengths. Strength =/= being broken. | ||
|
DemigodcelpH
1138 Posts
On July 21 2012 17:12 ErAsc2 wrote: This might be a lower level comment than you see on the battle.net forums... The races aren't all the same, Zerg is an economical race, it's one of their core strengths. That doesnt mean Zerg is broken. He is well aware of Zerg's primary role. However the Zerg end-game composition is stronger than P and T, and Zerg also has the best caster in the game. When you combine this with having the best economy and map control by default you get a mess. | ||
|
dragonsuper
Liechtenstein222 Posts
HoTs is coming and if it's not perfect (very improbable) this game is going to the void, and i am not referring to the last exp about the protoss. Blizzard is showing us how a former great company can kill itself with bad design choices. LOL and free games are winning spectators from SC2 that is a paying game... it's so idiotic. Starcraft 2 is a good game, but it's nothing if we compare it against Brood War... that was a Masterpiece... this is only a "good game" Diablo 3 is a failed game, so failed that it's absolutely ridicolous. I have always bought blizz games blindly. With hots i will wait for 1 month after buying it at least... i don't want anymore to be scammed by new blizzard vision. User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
SnowFox2ne1
United States52 Posts
On July 21 2012 17:16 dragonsuper wrote: i don't know why you are even discussing about the balance of a game that is already dead... HoTs is coming and if it's not perfect (very improbable) this game is going to the void, and i am not referring to the last exp about the protoss. Blizzard is showing us how a former great company can kill itself with bad design choices. LOL and free games are winning spectators from SC2 that is a paying game... it's so idiotic. Starcraft 2 is a good game, but it's nothing if we compare it against Brood War... that was a Masterpiece... this is only a "good game" Diablo 3 is a failed game, so failed that it's absolutely ridicolous. I have always bought blizz games blindly. With hots i will wait for 1 month after buying it at least... i don't want anymore to be scammed by new blizzard vision. If it is dead. why are you commenting on it? lol a game with a different marketing type? Must mean SC2 is a joke and idiotic. Take your BW fan-boyism and go have a circle jerk with your friends about it. I will give you that D3 sucks pretty bad. Thanks for waiting a month, I'm sure that will solve the problem. SC2 has some problems, but it is still pretty damn good in comparison to a ton of other games out there. Good god you remind me of everyone saying vanilla WoW was good. Take off your rose tinted glasses and realize that shit develops and advances; and just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it isn't good. (Vanilla WoW sucked compared to BC, although it was still not as bad as the new stuff). | ||
|
Neurosis
United States893 Posts
On July 21 2012 17:12 ErAsc2 wrote: This might be a lower level comment than you see on the battle.net forums... The races aren't all the same, Zerg is an economical race, it's one of their core strengths. That doesnt mean Zerg is broken. Zerg is economically better in the midgame, but Protoss on the other hand can hold a 3rd with 1/3 of the Zerg's supply with flawless control. Does that make Protoss broken? No, the races has different strengths. Strength =/= being broken. All the races are economical, that makes no sense. I also cringe every time people say zerg is the "reactionary race", as if protoss or terran somehow aren't. | ||
| ||
|
|
OSC
Korean StarCraft League
OSC
IPSL
Dewalt vs Bonyth
OSC
OSC
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
Replay Cast
Patches Events
|
|
|
EPT
