Designated Balance Discussion Thread - Page 338

On July 30 2012 03:13 ReaperCo wrote:
My dream in sc2 now is that dustin nerf zerg so we become a insane race in the balance prospective, and we have to fight thats where zerg belonngs. Then the terrans can come with there tanks like they want and just crush everything.

On July 30 2012 03:16 Toastie.NL wrote:

...?

On July 30 2012 03:20 ReaperCo wrote:

i'm serious. I rather be nerfed and be respected then be op and whined on.

On July 30 2012 03:32 convention wrote:

I think I understand what you are saying. Image if symbol had his massive breakthrough back when zerg was considered weak, he would be considered one of the best players by everyone. But since he makes his huge breakthrough right after the queen buff, there will always be people that think (unjustly) that he is only good because the queen buff made zerg OP.

On July 30 2012 04:00 Zane wrote:

While I agree that Symbol is a really good player, you have to admit a lot of good zerg players suddenly became top contenders in the period following the patch. But hey, maybe it's just a coincidence. Maybe one of them had a revelation a shared it with the others, hive mind style.

On July 30 2012 02:56 ReaperCo wrote:

Maybe it is psychology after the ghost nerf terrran feels weak for some reason and after some time they become as good as before,

On July 30 2012 06:33 Shiori wrote:
I want to see a Zerg prove to me how the Roach is not cost-efficient against Protoss next time they say their units are weak but numerous.

On July 30 2012 06:49 BeyondCtrL wrote:


Even though in a 1v1 situation a roach is extremely efficient against a Stalker. However, I think at the highest levels Protoss is quite cost efficient against roaches due to FF. Even though it depends, skill wise, more on the Protoss to make the engagements cost efficient I don't think we can state that roaches, as a unit, are cost efficient when you consider army comps.

On July 30 2012 07:23 etofok wrote:
Once you put down a gas it is 1:1 ratio and workers mining them both with about equally speed, so that "2.5 ratio" is totally BS.

On July 30 2012 07:23 etofok wrote:
Once you put down a gas it is 1:1 ratio and workers mining them both with about equally speed, so that "2.5 ratio" is totally BS.

On July 30 2012 06:33 Shiori wrote:
I want to see a Zerg prove to me how the Roach is not cost-efficient against Protoss next time they say their units are weak but numerous.

On July 30 2012 07:23 etofok wrote:
Once you put down a gas it is 1:1 ratio and workers mining them both with about equally speed, so that "2.5 ratio" is totally BS.

On July 30 2012 06:27 BeyondCtrL wrote:
The balance is quite OK at the moment in all the match ups at the moment since anyone can win at any time, but the quality of the balance and how interesting the games are based on it is arguable, particularly vZ MUs. We are experiencing a Z dominance for the moment because of a psychological momentum gained from the buff and recent surge of victories. In a game where confidence is so vital it can make a race appear "OP". You have to admit that there are a lot of P and T that are playing from a position of inferior confidence.

Even watching these MUs it becomes even more painfully clear where you are watching, what feels like, an uphill battle where P and T are thinking: i) Oh no I can't let Z be to comfy early-mid game I have to harass or do some timing. ii) I can't compete with their late game army which is so powerful how do I not die until the late-late game? iii) I'm trying a lot of new/adjusted builds and nothing is working, what can I do? Consider, especially, iii, where T and P are trying to adjust to this new Zerg dominance. You can't expect to miraculously find a build to counter their style, there are going to be a lot of failures, especially as the game matures it becomes progressively harder and harder to iron out new builds. This repeated failure definitely causes damage to confidence in players.

Now lets consider the actual balance. When you consider the armies it's quite clear that both Terran and Protoss are more cost efficient and thus Zerg need more units to be competitive. As many people have pointed out in this thread there seems to be a slight advantage for the Zerg in this regard because they can make too many units. Thus the cost efficiency of the other two armies are greatly reduced. We can rule out an imbalance in the unit department and hone into the macro mechanics. Zergs should be ahead in the supply count and base count but at the moment it seems that the supply count is a bit too high. This allows the Zerg to control the game from early to late game which then tapers off at the late-late game. We know there are some really powerful builds that can really kill the Zerg which can't be ignored but we also need to acknowledge the lack of choice for the other races in more standard/macro builds to be competitive. This is why we see a lot of these timing builds off 2 bases mostly because they are the most cost efficient.

This is not a statement of Zerg being immune to anything thrown at them but rather a consideration of whether a larva minimal early game defense is beneficial. If we can compare to BW for a moment we can see that larva management was a lot more crucial in all stages of the game. With queens being quite good at holding off practically all early game pressures a lot of the hard decisions of larva management are downplayed. I do not feel like, after some thought, that a nerf to queens or larva inject is needed. What I feel like is needed are small adjustments.

Remove queen range and make it an upgrade from the hatchery. Even though the range buff affects the hellion openings most directly it also makes the queen a lot more effective in all base defense engagements. By making it a researchable upgrade it doesn't revert any buff and still allows at least a good defense against the powerful hellion openings. The pro side of this is that Zerg has to invest at least something and is a perfect option to either get or ignore - not something gained for something completely free (thinking off concussive shells). Obviously it should be cheap but should cost some gas with a timing not too fast but something any Zerg can comfortably attain as a reward when they scout properly, or deadly if they do not. I feel like this would put a greater emphasis on better scouting from the Zerg and more intense denying of it by the Terran. It would add to the skill cap and open up the strategy rather than completely removing it.

Even though Zergs can power very hard on drones and really dominate the macro game it can't be directly blamed on larva inject. Nerfing larva inject would make those devastating 2-base all ins unstoppable and thus imbalanced. Still we are left with the fact that Zergs have a bit more than is balanced. In my opinion this is because Zergs can take a 3rd extremely quickly and hold it easily in standard conditions. Since Zergs need to be a base ahead to be cost efficient that being able to hold that 3rd should be easy and hard to be taken down by the P/T. This leaves the the timing of the 3rd as suspect. We all know too well how Zerg can massively out supply their opponents and it really boils down to the time it takes for them to take and fully saturate that 3rd. This allows an explosion of supply compared to the opponent. It doesn't last forever but it does accelerate the production a bit too far and creates too much pressure for the opponent which forces 2 base timings. The easiest way to delay the timing of the 3rd would be to incorporate destructible rocks or neutral buildings at the 3rd.

This results in, unlike a nerf to larva inject, no production nerf in the early or late game which the Zerg needs. There is the consideration that this would make the 2 base all ins against the Zerg slightly stronger, and honestly more attractive (also consider that it's very map dependent), however, on the other side it relieves that time bomb pressure and makes the avenues of mid game pressures/skirmishes instead of all ins a lot more attractive. Better players who are confident will in most cases opt for longer macro based games coupled with the option of mid-game skirmishing will result in less boring all ins and more exiting mid-games which transition into better late games.

Now I'd like to discuss the Infestor ability fungal. I personally feel quite torn on it and consider my aforementioned solutions quite adequate. Still it seems that this ability is quite controversial and vehemently discussed across the community. If we look at the history of fungal and Infestors it's actually quite comical really: even though fungal was changed from an 8s root and received buffed damage in return, in an era where Infestors were barely used because they were "crap", I would wager that practically all Zergs would want the old 1.0 fungal if they had a choice. Infestors went from completely underused and under appreciated to the staple unit of the Zerg in ALL match ups. Though somewhat akin to FF in the fact that it disables micro the biggest difference between them is that FF does not disable abilities, movement, or deal direct damage in a large area. We can see now that there are plenty of ways to counter act FF smartly even if they are placed well. The fungal is instant and disables some abilities, movement, and deals direct damage.

One of the greatest synergies of fungal, especially since Infestors are core units in every MU, is how it allows Zergs to completely own the air in cooperation with Corruptors. Corruptors already defeat the AA of the other factions cost effectively even without using their corrupt ability and when they engage in conjunction with fungals there are very few options for either P/T to engage Zergs in the air. What this results is in the removal of many strategies that could be utilized through more air play. I think that fungals not rooting air units should be tested on the PTR at least (damage unchanged). Even though Carriers/BC+Ravens are quite potent P/T still has to invest a lot of infrastructure while Broodlords being standard in ZvP/T allows Z the ability to create a lot of Corruptors to compete. This would open up more viable avenues to approach that BL/Infestor army.