|
On May 06 2013 09:23 BeyondCtrL wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2013 03:05 tomatriedes wrote:On May 06 2013 02:18 Emzeeshady wrote:On May 06 2013 01:33 Big J wrote:On May 06 2013 00:33 FakeDeath wrote:On May 06 2013 00:13 Big J wrote:On May 05 2013 23:14 FakeDeath wrote:On May 05 2013 23:02 diverzee wrote:
How can someone waste so much time, writing posts so long and yet so lacking in conveying anything close to a message? Thus shamelessly and single-handedly derailing a thread. If I was butchering my first language like that I would be so embarrased.
I think some issues with Zerg balance, and the mirror matchup in particular would be solved if Hydralisks were given higher damage to aerial targets. They would make a harder counter to mutalisks, and they would fare better against a skytoss army. Their strength vs ground based targets is good in all matchups (perhaps too strong in ZvP?) but as anti-air units they are weak (even phoenices are good at picking them off.)
Why are the mutalisks regenerating so fast? What lack in balance is that supposed to address? They are likely too strong vs Protoss, and too strong vs Zerg. I believe that by weakening the mutalisk and making the hydralisk stronger that the balance of ZvP and the diversity of units displayed in ZvZ both improve. Mutalisk was buffed due to WM. Spore not requiring evo was also due to WM. Phoenix got their +1 range. Toss player all go Stargate these day in fear of Mutalisk play. Buffing Hydra as a better AA is good idea but it must be a very slight buff. But it won't change ZvZ. In order for Muta to be not dominant in ZvZ, you must nerf Muta. Muta gives insane map control. So i got no idea why Blizz buff spores. Didn't they say that they wanted to buff zergs midgame options when they nerfed the infestor and the mutalisk regeneration and the hydralisk speed at lair the burrow and overlord speed at hatchery tech were the results? Whatever it is, I think the main problem is simply that in the midgame when you don't have a lot of money to spend, the mutalisk counts get very high and they never die. It's similar in PvZ if you don't use phoenixes and don't allin, the mutacount just gets so high and the defense needed is just so much more expensive than in TvZ (mines, marines, repairable turrets) when you defend with hydralisk/infestor stalker/archon/HT. So you have to dedicate much more to defense and can't expand/pressure as much as a Terran while the mutas just heal up and harass and heal up... I think it would be easiest to just remove the tissue regeneration or remove. However, though the superspores may not work alone, I think it is the right idea. Make defending mutalisks somewhat cheap, so that the mutalisk player can't control your army movement as hard as right now. One thing I want to point out still is that even in WoL we had that ling/bling/infestor/ultralisk style popping up for some time in ZvZ. It never really became standard, but I believe a huge part of this was how much infestors countered zerglings/banelings. With the weaker infestor, I think zergling based play alone is already stronger than it used to be, and the mutalisk might not even be as much of an issue. It's rather that the zergling alone may dominate the matchup and the mutalisk may just be a result of this, as it is one of the only units that can really combat zergling/baneling in terms of mapcontrol AND combatabilities in ZvZ. (the roach obviously can do so to a certain extend, but skipping hydras in favor of a strong roach army isn't really viable with the mutas in the picture, and so we come back to zerglings/banelings being really costefficient) Yeah it is the right idea. But they won't remove tissue regeneration. If they did,they would need to reduce WM damage output and Phoenix +1 range Mutalisk buff and Hydra speed upgrade was given in relative to Infestor overall nerf. I don't think PvZ Mass Muta is a issue. It just that P standard play is to go stargate all the time. And that's why PvZ has kinda become one-dimensional. Oh, I don't think mass muta is an issue in PvZ. I also don't think it's stale that Protoss kind of has to be ready in the midgame (and only in the midgame! a lategame mutaswitch won't do very much to a Protoss who sits on 50supply of AA capable units like Stalkers and Archons and Void Rays and has a templar archives and blink already) to switch into phoenixes. After all, the alternative PvZ playstyle seems to be to open very stale with robo and then turtle to either a ground- or an airdeathball. I think ZvP is actually in a better place then it has been for a long time. Mutas, Swarm host and Hydra focused compositions are all viable in the mid game making for much better variety then wings. For the first time in a long time we are seeing a plethora of new ZvP strategies. Not to mention that Ultras are way more fun to watch then BLs and void rays are more fun to watch than Colossi. +1 ZvP is a lot more dynamic now and is becoming a really fun match up to watch. So much better than BL + infestor walkover or immortal/sentry all-in every game. The MU is definitely more dynamic, but more on the Zerg side. Aside from some cool all-ins Protoss players do the same thing every standard game, yet Zerg can choose from several diverse strategies and compositions to meet that on equal footing (and certain maps lending advantages). Playing Protoss standard nowadays, in PvZ, feels like I'm playing as a Zerg at the end of WoL, though not quite as bad. I think this discussion is becoming really hard because the balance of the game is becoming really good, maybe we need to change the topic to: Is the game fun to play/watch?. A game might be balanced, not necessarily fun to play or watch and, I think, that the objective of balance must be accompanied by such questions: What if we have a perfectly balanced game? Can we make changes so that the game remains balanced, but more fun?
I think the turbo-vacs are adding a lot to the game. It allows for much less risky harass, which means more is going on around the map. I wish the other races had something that would allow them harass as risk free. I feel like zerg does have zerglings, but the oracle (which I think is what protoss's harass form is suppose to be) isn't that strong at harassment. I think with PvZ, only recently have people started to really pressure with the idea of recall in mind. I'd like to see more of that, and I think it definitely is a viable form of safe harassment from protoss against zerg (see Naniwa's PvZs from dreamhack). It definitely is more enjoyable to watch than WoL was at any point in my opinion (miles ahead of the end of WoL).
I personally enjoy watching tempest (see Parting v Flash, game 1). They do allow protoss to "punish" the army stalemate that can make PvT boring at times.
TvZ feels like the mid 2011's in WoL where there was constant pushes by terran, except with tanks replaced by mines. I personally like tanks more in those pushes because it gave mutas something to pick off and force marines to guard the tanks. But I do like that terran can pressure zerg again. What do other people think about watching mines over tanks?
|
On May 05 2013 22:44 Orek wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2013 20:36 Ghanburighan wrote:On May 05 2013 13:07 Wombat_NI wrote:
Demi I'm quite articulate, and patient as hell at reading long posts, but your recent posts are horrible jargon-fuelled intellectual wankery. It doesnt enable good discussions to form from the interesting ideas you have laid out because it is painful to read.
@Rabiator, I agree with much of what you say but I don't really get your motivation. SC2 has been out for a good while now, if such wholesale changes were to even be countenanced by Blizzard I would eat my own shoes. Do you dislike SC2 as it is now, or simply think it can be a lot better than its current design allows for? It says something about Demi's posts that someone is more willing to read Rabiator's posts.. No offence to either, but I've started to skip the posts of both recently. Which isn't to say that the discussion should not happen, but I might not be the only one who comes to this thread looking for different content. Don't worry. I'm with you. Make your post concise, don't write a thesis-long rebuttal, and do discuss balance. Then, more people will actually read what is written, which might include interesting points.
Do you realize that with "concise" posts you cant explain a problem sometimes? I mean Demi got asked about "which game theory" a few pages back when he didnt explain it in the post. Just shoving some numbers in a post about how unit stats should be in your opinion isnt going to cut it and ... as I am trying to show every time ... what about problems which are created by "the general game design"? With an attitude like yours you simply dont want to even try to understand ...
On May 05 2013 22:34 submarine wrote:
The central problem is, that the oracle has no synergy with the phoenix. These units do not work together at all. You either build a few of one or the other.
Now imagine they had a nice synergy. You would build a oracle for detection early and then add phoenix. Then you go and harass with both of them together. After the harass gets shut down you still have a oracle as detection and as scout, and phoenix to hunt down drops or mutas.
To achieve that synergy, the oracle needs to be changed quite radically. It should have an attack that works together with the phoenix lift, and maybe it should be able to recharge energy of other units somehow. If the changes to the oracle are done right, stargate openings will be less of a coin-flip an more stable. The Damage potential of early all ins would be lower, while the units build retain a bigger usefulness in the rest of the game.
I am afraid blizz will never make such drastic changes after release.
Starcraft should be kept simple to keep it easy and flexible and having yet another "only hits ground" harrassment unit isnt a good idea IMO. With ever more units for each race Blizzard has to "do something new" with each one and this will result in more "niche unit design" with less flexible units.
Personally I am missing the Shield Battery and maybe the Oracle could be changed into a "defensive caster" by being able to recharge shields of units around it ... it could end up with a "BW Terran bio" type of army with a lot of Archons and Oracles together. Obviously the precise mechanic would need to be determined, but in the end Blizzard probably wont do it ...
|
On May 06 2013 09:35 convention wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2013 09:23 BeyondCtrL wrote:On May 06 2013 03:05 tomatriedes wrote:On May 06 2013 02:18 Emzeeshady wrote:On May 06 2013 01:33 Big J wrote:On May 06 2013 00:33 FakeDeath wrote:On May 06 2013 00:13 Big J wrote:On May 05 2013 23:14 FakeDeath wrote:On May 05 2013 23:02 diverzee wrote:
How can someone waste so much time, writing posts so long and yet so lacking in conveying anything close to a message? Thus shamelessly and single-handedly derailing a thread. If I was butchering my first language like that I would be so embarrased.
I think some issues with Zerg balance, and the mirror matchup in particular would be solved if Hydralisks were given higher damage to aerial targets. They would make a harder counter to mutalisks, and they would fare better against a skytoss army. Their strength vs ground based targets is good in all matchups (perhaps too strong in ZvP?) but as anti-air units they are weak (even phoenices are good at picking them off.)
Why are the mutalisks regenerating so fast? What lack in balance is that supposed to address? They are likely too strong vs Protoss, and too strong vs Zerg. I believe that by weakening the mutalisk and making the hydralisk stronger that the balance of ZvP and the diversity of units displayed in ZvZ both improve. Mutalisk was buffed due to WM. Spore not requiring evo was also due to WM. Phoenix got their +1 range. Toss player all go Stargate these day in fear of Mutalisk play. Buffing Hydra as a better AA is good idea but it must be a very slight buff. But it won't change ZvZ. In order for Muta to be not dominant in ZvZ, you must nerf Muta. Muta gives insane map control. So i got no idea why Blizz buff spores. Didn't they say that they wanted to buff zergs midgame options when they nerfed the infestor and the mutalisk regeneration and the hydralisk speed at lair the burrow and overlord speed at hatchery tech were the results? Whatever it is, I think the main problem is simply that in the midgame when you don't have a lot of money to spend, the mutalisk counts get very high and they never die. It's similar in PvZ if you don't use phoenixes and don't allin, the mutacount just gets so high and the defense needed is just so much more expensive than in TvZ (mines, marines, repairable turrets) when you defend with hydralisk/infestor stalker/archon/HT. So you have to dedicate much more to defense and can't expand/pressure as much as a Terran while the mutas just heal up and harass and heal up... I think it would be easiest to just remove the tissue regeneration or remove. However, though the superspores may not work alone, I think it is the right idea. Make defending mutalisks somewhat cheap, so that the mutalisk player can't control your army movement as hard as right now. One thing I want to point out still is that even in WoL we had that ling/bling/infestor/ultralisk style popping up for some time in ZvZ. It never really became standard, but I believe a huge part of this was how much infestors countered zerglings/banelings. With the weaker infestor, I think zergling based play alone is already stronger than it used to be, and the mutalisk might not even be as much of an issue. It's rather that the zergling alone may dominate the matchup and the mutalisk may just be a result of this, as it is one of the only units that can really combat zergling/baneling in terms of mapcontrol AND combatabilities in ZvZ. (the roach obviously can do so to a certain extend, but skipping hydras in favor of a strong roach army isn't really viable with the mutas in the picture, and so we come back to zerglings/banelings being really costefficient) Yeah it is the right idea. But they won't remove tissue regeneration. If they did,they would need to reduce WM damage output and Phoenix +1 range Mutalisk buff and Hydra speed upgrade was given in relative to Infestor overall nerf. I don't think PvZ Mass Muta is a issue. It just that P standard play is to go stargate all the time. And that's why PvZ has kinda become one-dimensional. Oh, I don't think mass muta is an issue in PvZ. I also don't think it's stale that Protoss kind of has to be ready in the midgame (and only in the midgame! a lategame mutaswitch won't do very much to a Protoss who sits on 50supply of AA capable units like Stalkers and Archons and Void Rays and has a templar archives and blink already) to switch into phoenixes. After all, the alternative PvZ playstyle seems to be to open very stale with robo and then turtle to either a ground- or an airdeathball. I think ZvP is actually in a better place then it has been for a long time. Mutas, Swarm host and Hydra focused compositions are all viable in the mid game making for much better variety then wings. For the first time in a long time we are seeing a plethora of new ZvP strategies. Not to mention that Ultras are way more fun to watch then BLs and void rays are more fun to watch than Colossi. +1 ZvP is a lot more dynamic now and is becoming a really fun match up to watch. So much better than BL + infestor walkover or immortal/sentry all-in every game. The MU is definitely more dynamic, but more on the Zerg side. Aside from some cool all-ins Protoss players do the same thing every standard game, yet Zerg can choose from several diverse strategies and compositions to meet that on equal footing (and certain maps lending advantages). Playing Protoss standard nowadays, in PvZ, feels like I'm playing as a Zerg at the end of WoL, though not quite as bad. I think this discussion is becoming really hard because the balance of the game is becoming really good, maybe we need to change the topic to: Is the game fun to play/watch?. A game might be balanced, not necessarily fun to play or watch and, I think, that the objective of balance must be accompanied by such questions: What if we have a perfectly balanced game? Can we make changes so that the game remains balanced, but more fun? I think the turbo-vacs are adding a lot to the game. It allows for much less risky harass, which means more is going on around the map. I wish the other races had something that would allow them harass as risk free. I feel like zerg does have zerglings, but the oracle (which I think is what protoss's harass form is suppose to be) isn't that strong at harassment. I think with PvZ, only recently have people started to really pressure with the idea of recall in mind. I'd like to see more of that, and I think it definitely is a viable form of safe harassment from protoss against zerg (see Naniwa's PvZs from dreamhack). It definitely is more enjoyable to watch than WoL was at any point in my opinion (miles ahead of the end of WoL). I personally enjoy watching tempest (see Parting v Flash, game 1). They do allow protoss to "punish" the army stalemate that can make PvT boring at times. TvZ feels like the mid 2011's in WoL where there was constant pushes by terran, except with tanks replaced by mines. I personally like tanks more in those pushes because it gave mutas something to pick off and force marines to guard the tanks. But I do like that terran can pressure zerg again. What do other people think about watching mines over tanks?
I do like mines over tanks, though I also like tanks. But I just like those games were big masses of cheap units fight each other with lots of splash in the picture. Makes for very skillbased, exciting combat outcomes, unlike when you see MMM or roach/hydra, were you can just look at the army count and know which side has more and will win.
The biggest problem I have right now with the widow mine as a zerg is overseer speed. I have said it in the beta and I'm saying it now, speed overseers should move as fast as mutalisks. It's really annoying how you have to wait for your overseer anytime you go over the map with mutas (and it's not like you do that often to begin with, as you are heavily pinned back by drops). And I had those annoying situations were you have the overseer around, but slightly out of range of the mine, yet you see the mine regardlessly, because it is activating so you go for it with your 15mutas... and take a hit, because you actually didn't see it, though you saw it...
what I don't like right now about TvZ is how bad everything is in dealing with pure marine with slight support. Like, I know that 50marines and 5mines/hellbats/tanks are coming, but I just can't force him into a different unit until I reach ultras... which I often just don't reach. Like, the whole strength of zerg is how you can switch around and try to counter what your opponent is doing and force adjustments. But whatever I do for the first 15-20mins, the counter to it is more marinebased play.
And while I'm at it... I also don't like how other ladder Terrans are playing these days when they dont open reaper. They always have exactly two marines in a bunker and you just know anytime you don't punish them you play the whole game from behind because he went 3CC, fast reactored factory and double upgrades. Yeah, it's a bit like end 2011 TvZ when the standard build was roach/bling bust.
|
Overseers with faster speed would be a stronger counter to mines as well. It's a good idea maybe.
|
On May 06 2013 17:30 Big J wrote:
what I don't like right now about TvZ is how bad everything is in dealing with pure marine with slight support. Like, I know that 50marines and 5mines/hellbats/tanks are coming, but I just can't force him into a different unit until I reach ultras...
Forcing a Terran into a different unit composition should NOT be possible as a Zerg because the Terran does not have the Zerg (and Protoss) flexibility for tech switches. They need the largest amount of production buildings and consequently they should be the ones dictating the type of battle.
The only question is: Can you kill the mass Marine army or not? If you can then nothing needs to be changed, but if you cant then they need to look at the matchup.
|
On May 06 2013 19:35 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2013 17:30 Big J wrote:
what I don't like right now about TvZ is how bad everything is in dealing with pure marine with slight support. Like, I know that 50marines and 5mines/hellbats/tanks are coming, but I just can't force him into a different unit until I reach ultras... Forcing a Terran into a different unit composition should NOT be possible as a Zerg because the Terran does not have the Zerg (and Protoss) flexibility for tech switches. They need the largest amount of production buildings and consequently they should be the ones dictating the type of battle. The only question is: Can you kill the mass Marine army or not? If you can then nothing needs to be changed, but if you cant then they need to look at the matchup.
You have 5+ barracks and 1-2 factories with 9units on it in the midgame. I don't see an issue if a Zerg would be capable of forcing a Terran to build marauders (what zerg can, but only in the lategame with ultras) or mix in a few ghosts (what they can't, because fungal and blinding clouds are inefficient against proper micro and ghosts just not worth skipping 4marines - not even factoring in the 100gas and the techlab) a few siege tanks or force a decision between hellbats, hellions or mines.
But they are not. The decision to build tanks, mines, hellbats is completly up to the terran and marauders only needed in the lategame against ultras. Even against roach/hydra marauders and tanks are optional (though definatly worth it) and marines do the job as well.
All of the said units are on your techpath and you can switch into them. I'm not saying a Terran should be forced to suddenly come out with BCs when I build roaches or have 10siege tanks in case I build 10hydralisks. But it would be nice to have a little bit of control over what a Terran does.
|
Imo you are really selling infestors short. Even with perfect micro it is impossible for bio to really dodge fungals. Sure you can lessen their effect, but also that is hard. And you only need one good fungal to make the next one easy.
|
On May 06 2013 20:42 Sissors wrote:
Imo you are really selling infestors short. Even with perfect micro it is impossible for bio to really dodge fungals. Sure you can lessen their effect, but also that is hard. And you only need one good fungal to make the next one easy.
I must say I keep on trying to use them, because I actually believe in them to a certain degree. But I'm not managing it, neither do I see anyone else using them successfully in the midgame.
Also I don't think that the Infestors was ever too powerful in the midgame in WoL TvZ, as they only come with one fungal and well, Terrans said it themselves that you could/needed to kill a zerg in the midgame. And now take those stronger pushes and stronger drops and put the weaker infestor against them. I just feel like they are very costinefficient marinekillers against an active Terran who doesn't just push out once and then gets killed in the focused power of 10fungals.
But maybe something gets figured out with those. Again, this is not a balance complaint or something like that. TvZ is in a good state balancewise. The matchup is just dropping a lot of its freshness it gained from HotS, as it just gets kind of stuck in that bio vs ling/bling phase and you hardly ever get that "I hope he builds X or Y soon" feelings of excitement.
|
On May 06 2013 17:30 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2013 09:35 convention wrote:On May 06 2013 09:23 BeyondCtrL wrote:On May 06 2013 03:05 tomatriedes wrote:On May 06 2013 02:18 Emzeeshady wrote:On May 06 2013 01:33 Big J wrote:On May 06 2013 00:33 FakeDeath wrote:On May 06 2013 00:13 Big J wrote:On May 05 2013 23:14 FakeDeath wrote:On May 05 2013 23:02 diverzee wrote:
How can someone waste so much time, writing posts so long and yet so lacking in conveying anything close to a message? Thus shamelessly and single-handedly derailing a thread. If I was butchering my first language like that I would be so embarrased.
I think some issues with Zerg balance, and the mirror matchup in particular would be solved if Hydralisks were given higher damage to aerial targets. They would make a harder counter to mutalisks, and they would fare better against a skytoss army. Their strength vs ground based targets is good in all matchups (perhaps too strong in ZvP?) but as anti-air units they are weak (even phoenices are good at picking them off.)
Why are the mutalisks regenerating so fast? What lack in balance is that supposed to address? They are likely too strong vs Protoss, and too strong vs Zerg. I believe that by weakening the mutalisk and making the hydralisk stronger that the balance of ZvP and the diversity of units displayed in ZvZ both improve. Mutalisk was buffed due to WM. Spore not requiring evo was also due to WM. Phoenix got their +1 range. Toss player all go Stargate these day in fear of Mutalisk play. Buffing Hydra as a better AA is good idea but it must be a very slight buff. But it won't change ZvZ. In order for Muta to be not dominant in ZvZ, you must nerf Muta. Muta gives insane map control. So i got no idea why Blizz buff spores. Didn't they say that they wanted to buff zergs midgame options when they nerfed the infestor and the mutalisk regeneration and the hydralisk speed at lair the burrow and overlord speed at hatchery tech were the results? Whatever it is, I think the main problem is simply that in the midgame when you don't have a lot of money to spend, the mutalisk counts get very high and they never die. It's similar in PvZ if you don't use phoenixes and don't allin, the mutacount just gets so high and the defense needed is just so much more expensive than in TvZ (mines, marines, repairable turrets) when you defend with hydralisk/infestor stalker/archon/HT. So you have to dedicate much more to defense and can't expand/pressure as much as a Terran while the mutas just heal up and harass and heal up... I think it would be easiest to just remove the tissue regeneration or remove. However, though the superspores may not work alone, I think it is the right idea. Make defending mutalisks somewhat cheap, so that the mutalisk player can't control your army movement as hard as right now. One thing I want to point out still is that even in WoL we had that ling/bling/infestor/ultralisk style popping up for some time in ZvZ. It never really became standard, but I believe a huge part of this was how much infestors countered zerglings/banelings. With the weaker infestor, I think zergling based play alone is already stronger than it used to be, and the mutalisk might not even be as much of an issue. It's rather that the zergling alone may dominate the matchup and the mutalisk may just be a result of this, as it is one of the only units that can really combat zergling/baneling in terms of mapcontrol AND combatabilities in ZvZ. (the roach obviously can do so to a certain extend, but skipping hydras in favor of a strong roach army isn't really viable with the mutas in the picture, and so we come back to zerglings/banelings being really costefficient) Yeah it is the right idea. But they won't remove tissue regeneration. If they did,they would need to reduce WM damage output and Phoenix +1 range Mutalisk buff and Hydra speed upgrade was given in relative to Infestor overall nerf. I don't think PvZ Mass Muta is a issue. It just that P standard play is to go stargate all the time. And that's why PvZ has kinda become one-dimensional. Oh, I don't think mass muta is an issue in PvZ. I also don't think it's stale that Protoss kind of has to be ready in the midgame (and only in the midgame! a lategame mutaswitch won't do very much to a Protoss who sits on 50supply of AA capable units like Stalkers and Archons and Void Rays and has a templar archives and blink already) to switch into phoenixes. After all, the alternative PvZ playstyle seems to be to open very stale with robo and then turtle to either a ground- or an airdeathball. I think ZvP is actually in a better place then it has been for a long time. Mutas, Swarm host and Hydra focused compositions are all viable in the mid game making for much better variety then wings. For the first time in a long time we are seeing a plethora of new ZvP strategies. Not to mention that Ultras are way more fun to watch then BLs and void rays are more fun to watch than Colossi. +1 ZvP is a lot more dynamic now and is becoming a really fun match up to watch. So much better than BL + infestor walkover or immortal/sentry all-in every game. The MU is definitely more dynamic, but more on the Zerg side. Aside from some cool all-ins Protoss players do the same thing every standard game, yet Zerg can choose from several diverse strategies and compositions to meet that on equal footing (and certain maps lending advantages). Playing Protoss standard nowadays, in PvZ, feels like I'm playing as a Zerg at the end of WoL, though not quite as bad. I think this discussion is becoming really hard because the balance of the game is becoming really good, maybe we need to change the topic to: Is the game fun to play/watch?. A game might be balanced, not necessarily fun to play or watch and, I think, that the objective of balance must be accompanied by such questions: What if we have a perfectly balanced game? Can we make changes so that the game remains balanced, but more fun? I think the turbo-vacs are adding a lot to the game. It allows for much less risky harass, which means more is going on around the map. I wish the other races had something that would allow them harass as risk free. I feel like zerg does have zerglings, but the oracle (which I think is what protoss's harass form is suppose to be) isn't that strong at harassment. I think with PvZ, only recently have people started to really pressure with the idea of recall in mind. I'd like to see more of that, and I think it definitely is a viable form of safe harassment from protoss against zerg (see Naniwa's PvZs from dreamhack). It definitely is more enjoyable to watch than WoL was at any point in my opinion (miles ahead of the end of WoL). I personally enjoy watching tempest (see Parting v Flash, game 1). They do allow protoss to "punish" the army stalemate that can make PvT boring at times. TvZ feels like the mid 2011's in WoL where there was constant pushes by terran, except with tanks replaced by mines. I personally like tanks more in those pushes because it gave mutas something to pick off and force marines to guard the tanks. But I do like that terran can pressure zerg again. What do other people think about watching mines over tanks? The biggest problem I have right now with the widow mine as a zerg is overseer speed. I have said it in the beta and I'm saying it now, speed overseers should move as fast as mutalisks. It's really annoying how you have to wait for your overseer anytime you go over the map with mutas (and it's not like you do that often to begin with, as you are heavily pinned back by drops).
I agree that as the zerg, the fact that your detecting unit is the slower piece of your army is just painfull.
Maybe give them the medivacs boosters ? :D
|
On May 06 2013 20:25 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2013 19:35 Rabiator wrote:On May 06 2013 17:30 Big J wrote:
what I don't like right now about TvZ is how bad everything is in dealing with pure marine with slight support. Like, I know that 50marines and 5mines/hellbats/tanks are coming, but I just can't force him into a different unit until I reach ultras... Forcing a Terran into a different unit composition should NOT be possible as a Zerg because the Terran does not have the Zerg (and Protoss) flexibility for tech switches. They need the largest amount of production buildings and consequently they should be the ones dictating the type of battle. The only question is: Can you kill the mass Marine army or not? If you can then nothing needs to be changed, but if you cant then they need to look at the matchup. You have 5+ barracks and 1-2 factories with 9units on it in the midgame. I don't see an issue if a Zerg would be capable of forcing a Terran to build marauders (what zerg can, but only in the lategame with ultras) or mix in a few ghosts (what they can't, because fungal and blinding clouds are inefficient against proper micro and ghosts just not worth skipping 4marines - not even factoring in the 100gas and the techlab) a few siege tanks or force a decision between hellbats, hellions or mines. But they are not. The decision to build tanks, mines, hellbats is completly up to the terran and marauders only needed in the lategame against ultras. Even against roach/hydra marauders and tanks are optional (though definatly worth it) and marines do the job as well. All of the said units are on your techpath and you can switch into them. I'm not saying a Terran should be forced to suddenly come out with BCs when I build roaches or have 10siege tanks in case I build 10hydralisks. But it would be nice to have a little bit of control over what a Terran does.
Dont you think this is a bit ignorant? Most of the 5+ Barracks will have a Reactor on them and you cant build Marauders with that. In case you havent noticed ... it takes SPACE to build such a huge amount of production buildings and that is a limitation on some maps. So your whole argument is really not valid. Just play Terran and build those buildings AND have an alternative addon ready for the Reactored ones (you forgot the 2 Starports). It is nigh on impossible except on the larger main bases.
Forcing a certain unit is more than "forcing Marauders instead of Marines" but rather about "forcing mech instead of bio" as well and that can never happen for the reasons I have given.
|
On May 06 2013 21:44 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2013 20:25 Big J wrote:On May 06 2013 19:35 Rabiator wrote:On May 06 2013 17:30 Big J wrote:
what I don't like right now about TvZ is how bad everything is in dealing with pure marine with slight support. Like, I know that 50marines and 5mines/hellbats/tanks are coming, but I just can't force him into a different unit until I reach ultras... Forcing a Terran into a different unit composition should NOT be possible as a Zerg because the Terran does not have the Zerg (and Protoss) flexibility for tech switches. They need the largest amount of production buildings and consequently they should be the ones dictating the type of battle. The only question is: Can you kill the mass Marine army or not? If you can then nothing needs to be changed, but if you cant then they need to look at the matchup. You have 5+ barracks and 1-2 factories with 9units on it in the midgame. I don't see an issue if a Zerg would be capable of forcing a Terran to build marauders (what zerg can, but only in the lategame with ultras) or mix in a few ghosts (what they can't, because fungal and blinding clouds are inefficient against proper micro and ghosts just not worth skipping 4marines - not even factoring in the 100gas and the techlab) a few siege tanks or force a decision between hellbats, hellions or mines. But they are not. The decision to build tanks, mines, hellbats is completly up to the terran and marauders only needed in the lategame against ultras. Even against roach/hydra marauders and tanks are optional (though definatly worth it) and marines do the job as well. All of the said units are on your techpath and you can switch into them. I'm not saying a Terran should be forced to suddenly come out with BCs when I build roaches or have 10siege tanks in case I build 10hydralisks. But it would be nice to have a little bit of control over what a Terran does. Dont you think this is a bit ignorant? Most of the 5+ Barracks will have a Reactor on them and you cant build Marauders with that. In case you havent noticed ... it takes SPACE to build such a huge amount of production buildings and that is a limitation on some maps. So your whole argument is really not valid. Just play Terran and build those buildings AND have an alternative addon ready for the Reactored ones (you forgot the 2 Starports). It is nigh on impossible except on the larger main bases. Forcing a certain unit is more than "forcing Marauders instead of Marines" but rather about "forcing mech instead of bio" as well and that can never happen for the reasons I have given.
I play a fare share of Terran on the ladder (~dia-master level). I do build techlabs towards the lategame because you need them for ultras. But before that, I actually don't care and even my 1-2 techlabed barracks rather produce marines than marauders. And it really doesn't kill you to have 1-2 extra barracks with a techlab ready in case you need to produce 6marauders/minute in the midgame. The game isn't that tight that it is impossible to have 3reactor/3techlab barracks instead of 4/1.
I did not forget the 1-2 starports, but I actually can't see any of those (nonmedivac) units really fullfill a role in midgame ZvT, apart from that lone viking or a single raven for detection.
Forcing a certain unit is "forcing Marauders instead of Marines" or "hellbats instead of mines". If you haven't noticed, a marauder is a unit and a marine is a unit. So forcing one instead of the other is forcing a unit.
But that's not the case, as marines have the same dps against armored as marauders have and the only limits for marineplay are base armor and AoE.
But I don't want to discuss this further. I believe this would need a major rebalancing of the game on the level of basic units (like 2armor roaches, 5+1vs light marines, 12+6vs armored marauders, stronger ghosts that can overtake some of the marine's roles in the lategame with all the implications for PvZ and PvT...). I just hope one year from now the TvZ midgame won't be marine/medivac/mine vs ling/bling/muta for the first 15-20mins in every game.
|
On May 06 2013 22:18 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2013 21:44 Rabiator wrote:On May 06 2013 20:25 Big J wrote:On May 06 2013 19:35 Rabiator wrote:On May 06 2013 17:30 Big J wrote:
what I don't like right now about TvZ is how bad everything is in dealing with pure marine with slight support. Like, I know that 50marines and 5mines/hellbats/tanks are coming, but I just can't force him into a different unit until I reach ultras... Forcing a Terran into a different unit composition should NOT be possible as a Zerg because the Terran does not have the Zerg (and Protoss) flexibility for tech switches. They need the largest amount of production buildings and consequently they should be the ones dictating the type of battle. The only question is: Can you kill the mass Marine army or not? If you can then nothing needs to be changed, but if you cant then they need to look at the matchup. You have 5+ barracks and 1-2 factories with 9units on it in the midgame. I don't see an issue if a Zerg would be capable of forcing a Terran to build marauders (what zerg can, but only in the lategame with ultras) or mix in a few ghosts (what they can't, because fungal and blinding clouds are inefficient against proper micro and ghosts just not worth skipping 4marines - not even factoring in the 100gas and the techlab) a few siege tanks or force a decision between hellbats, hellions or mines. But they are not. The decision to build tanks, mines, hellbats is completly up to the terran and marauders only needed in the lategame against ultras. Even against roach/hydra marauders and tanks are optional (though definatly worth it) and marines do the job as well. All of the said units are on your techpath and you can switch into them. I'm not saying a Terran should be forced to suddenly come out with BCs when I build roaches or have 10siege tanks in case I build 10hydralisks. But it would be nice to have a little bit of control over what a Terran does. Dont you think this is a bit ignorant? Most of the 5+ Barracks will have a Reactor on them and you cant build Marauders with that. In case you havent noticed ... it takes SPACE to build such a huge amount of production buildings and that is a limitation on some maps. So your whole argument is really not valid. Just play Terran and build those buildings AND have an alternative addon ready for the Reactored ones (you forgot the 2 Starports). It is nigh on impossible except on the larger main bases. Forcing a certain unit is more than "forcing Marauders instead of Marines" but rather about "forcing mech instead of bio" as well and that can never happen for the reasons I have given. I play a fare share of Terran on the ladder (~dia-master level). I do build techlabs towards the lategame because you need them for ultras. But before that, I actually don't care and even my 1-2 techlabed barracks rather produce marines than marauders. And it really doesn't kill you to have 1-2 extra barracks with a techlab ready in case you need to produce 6marauders/minute in the midgame. The game isn't that tight that it is impossible to have 3reactor/3techlab barracks instead of 4/1. I did not forget the 1-2 starports, but I actually can't see any of those (nonmedivac) units really fullfill a role in midgame ZvT, apart from that lone viking or a single raven for detection. Forcing a certain unit is "forcing Marauders instead of Marines" or "hellbats instead of mines". If you haven't noticed, a marauder is a unit and a marine is a unit. So forcing one instead of the other is forcing a unit. But that's not the case, as marines have the same dps against armored as marauders have and the only limits for marineplay are base armor and AoE. But I don't want to discuss this further. I believe this would need a major rebalancing of the game on the level of basic units (like 2armor roaches, 5+1vs light marines, 12+6vs armored marauders, stronger ghosts that can overtake some of the marine's roles in the lategame with all the implications for PvZ and PvT...). I just hope one year from now the TvZ midgame won't be marine/medivac/mine vs ling/bling/muta for the first 15-20mins in every game.
The whole "force unit X" does NOT start with the mid game when you have all your production buildings and your economy is good, but rather right at the start. Since Terrans are the most inflexible of races in their production it is only right that they are the ones who can force others to produce certain stuff while the same cant be done to them.
|
On May 06 2013 22:50 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2013 22:18 Big J wrote:On May 06 2013 21:44 Rabiator wrote:On May 06 2013 20:25 Big J wrote:On May 06 2013 19:35 Rabiator wrote:On May 06 2013 17:30 Big J wrote:
what I don't like right now about TvZ is how bad everything is in dealing with pure marine with slight support. Like, I know that 50marines and 5mines/hellbats/tanks are coming, but I just can't force him into a different unit until I reach ultras... Forcing a Terran into a different unit composition should NOT be possible as a Zerg because the Terran does not have the Zerg (and Protoss) flexibility for tech switches. They need the largest amount of production buildings and consequently they should be the ones dictating the type of battle. The only question is: Can you kill the mass Marine army or not? If you can then nothing needs to be changed, but if you cant then they need to look at the matchup. You have 5+ barracks and 1-2 factories with 9units on it in the midgame. I don't see an issue if a Zerg would be capable of forcing a Terran to build marauders (what zerg can, but only in the lategame with ultras) or mix in a few ghosts (what they can't, because fungal and blinding clouds are inefficient against proper micro and ghosts just not worth skipping 4marines - not even factoring in the 100gas and the techlab) a few siege tanks or force a decision between hellbats, hellions or mines. But they are not. The decision to build tanks, mines, hellbats is completly up to the terran and marauders only needed in the lategame against ultras. Even against roach/hydra marauders and tanks are optional (though definatly worth it) and marines do the job as well. All of the said units are on your techpath and you can switch into them. I'm not saying a Terran should be forced to suddenly come out with BCs when I build roaches or have 10siege tanks in case I build 10hydralisks. But it would be nice to have a little bit of control over what a Terran does. Dont you think this is a bit ignorant? Most of the 5+ Barracks will have a Reactor on them and you cant build Marauders with that. In case you havent noticed ... it takes SPACE to build such a huge amount of production buildings and that is a limitation on some maps. So your whole argument is really not valid. Just play Terran and build those buildings AND have an alternative addon ready for the Reactored ones (you forgot the 2 Starports). It is nigh on impossible except on the larger main bases. Forcing a certain unit is more than "forcing Marauders instead of Marines" but rather about "forcing mech instead of bio" as well and that can never happen for the reasons I have given. I play a fare share of Terran on the ladder (~dia-master level). I do build techlabs towards the lategame because you need them for ultras. But before that, I actually don't care and even my 1-2 techlabed barracks rather produce marines than marauders. And it really doesn't kill you to have 1-2 extra barracks with a techlab ready in case you need to produce 6marauders/minute in the midgame. The game isn't that tight that it is impossible to have 3reactor/3techlab barracks instead of 4/1. I did not forget the 1-2 starports, but I actually can't see any of those (nonmedivac) units really fullfill a role in midgame ZvT, apart from that lone viking or a single raven for detection. Forcing a certain unit is "forcing Marauders instead of Marines" or "hellbats instead of mines". If you haven't noticed, a marauder is a unit and a marine is a unit. So forcing one instead of the other is forcing a unit. But that's not the case, as marines have the same dps against armored as marauders have and the only limits for marineplay are base armor and AoE. But I don't want to discuss this further. I believe this would need a major rebalancing of the game on the level of basic units (like 2armor roaches, 5+1vs light marines, 12+6vs armored marauders, stronger ghosts that can overtake some of the marine's roles in the lategame with all the implications for PvZ and PvT...). I just hope one year from now the TvZ midgame won't be marine/medivac/mine vs ling/bling/muta for the first 15-20mins in every game. The whole "force unit X" does NOT start with the mid game when you have all your production buildings and your economy is good, but rather right at the start. Since Terrans are the most inflexible of races in their production it is only right that they are the ones who can force others to produce certain stuff while the same cant be done to them.
That's generally wrong, because it takes out the strategy from RTS, as only one race is able to prepare a strategy and the other one has to solely react to that. (and I'm glad we do not play this game of yours, were Broodlords/Colossi don't force vikings, Ultras don't force marauders, HTs/Archons don't force ghosts and rushes can be easily held without having the right units at the right time)
|
On May 06 2013 23:09 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2013 22:50 Rabiator wrote:On May 06 2013 22:18 Big J wrote:On May 06 2013 21:44 Rabiator wrote:On May 06 2013 20:25 Big J wrote:On May 06 2013 19:35 Rabiator wrote:On May 06 2013 17:30 Big J wrote:
what I don't like right now about TvZ is how bad everything is in dealing with pure marine with slight support. Like, I know that 50marines and 5mines/hellbats/tanks are coming, but I just can't force him into a different unit until I reach ultras... Forcing a Terran into a different unit composition should NOT be possible as a Zerg because the Terran does not have the Zerg (and Protoss) flexibility for tech switches. They need the largest amount of production buildings and consequently they should be the ones dictating the type of battle. The only question is: Can you kill the mass Marine army or not? If you can then nothing needs to be changed, but if you cant then they need to look at the matchup. You have 5+ barracks and 1-2 factories with 9units on it in the midgame. I don't see an issue if a Zerg would be capable of forcing a Terran to build marauders (what zerg can, but only in the lategame with ultras) or mix in a few ghosts (what they can't, because fungal and blinding clouds are inefficient against proper micro and ghosts just not worth skipping 4marines - not even factoring in the 100gas and the techlab) a few siege tanks or force a decision between hellbats, hellions or mines. But they are not. The decision to build tanks, mines, hellbats is completly up to the terran and marauders only needed in the lategame against ultras. Even against roach/hydra marauders and tanks are optional (though definatly worth it) and marines do the job as well. All of the said units are on your techpath and you can switch into them. I'm not saying a Terran should be forced to suddenly come out with BCs when I build roaches or have 10siege tanks in case I build 10hydralisks. But it would be nice to have a little bit of control over what a Terran does. Dont you think this is a bit ignorant? Most of the 5+ Barracks will have a Reactor on them and you cant build Marauders with that. In case you havent noticed ... it takes SPACE to build such a huge amount of production buildings and that is a limitation on some maps. So your whole argument is really not valid. Just play Terran and build those buildings AND have an alternative addon ready for the Reactored ones (you forgot the 2 Starports). It is nigh on impossible except on the larger main bases. Forcing a certain unit is more than "forcing Marauders instead of Marines" but rather about "forcing mech instead of bio" as well and that can never happen for the reasons I have given. I play a fare share of Terran on the ladder (~dia-master level). I do build techlabs towards the lategame because you need them for ultras. But before that, I actually don't care and even my 1-2 techlabed barracks rather produce marines than marauders. And it really doesn't kill you to have 1-2 extra barracks with a techlab ready in case you need to produce 6marauders/minute in the midgame. The game isn't that tight that it is impossible to have 3reactor/3techlab barracks instead of 4/1. I did not forget the 1-2 starports, but I actually can't see any of those (nonmedivac) units really fullfill a role in midgame ZvT, apart from that lone viking or a single raven for detection. Forcing a certain unit is "forcing Marauders instead of Marines" or "hellbats instead of mines". If you haven't noticed, a marauder is a unit and a marine is a unit. So forcing one instead of the other is forcing a unit. But that's not the case, as marines have the same dps against armored as marauders have and the only limits for marineplay are base armor and AoE. But I don't want to discuss this further. I believe this would need a major rebalancing of the game on the level of basic units (like 2armor roaches, 5+1vs light marines, 12+6vs armored marauders, stronger ghosts that can overtake some of the marine's roles in the lategame with all the implications for PvZ and PvT...). I just hope one year from now the TvZ midgame won't be marine/medivac/mine vs ling/bling/muta for the first 15-20mins in every game. The whole "force unit X" does NOT start with the mid game when you have all your production buildings and your economy is good, but rather right at the start. Since Terrans are the most inflexible of races in their production it is only right that they are the ones who can force others to produce certain stuff while the same cant be done to them. That's generally wrong, because it takes out the strategy from RTS, as only one race is able to prepare a strategy and the other one has to solely react to that. (and I'm glad we do not play this game of yours, were Broodlords/Colossi don't force vikings, Ultras don't force marauders, HTs/Archons don't force ghosts and rushes can be easily held without having the right units at the right time)
Do you use ultras or broodlords on early game ? That's what he is speaking about.
I don't understand what you really want, muta ling bling deals ok with marines with support.
|
On May 06 2013 23:37 Godwrath wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2013 23:09 Big J wrote:On May 06 2013 22:50 Rabiator wrote:On May 06 2013 22:18 Big J wrote:On May 06 2013 21:44 Rabiator wrote:On May 06 2013 20:25 Big J wrote:On May 06 2013 19:35 Rabiator wrote:On May 06 2013 17:30 Big J wrote:
what I don't like right now about TvZ is how bad everything is in dealing with pure marine with slight support. Like, I know that 50marines and 5mines/hellbats/tanks are coming, but I just can't force him into a different unit until I reach ultras... Forcing a Terran into a different unit composition should NOT be possible as a Zerg because the Terran does not have the Zerg (and Protoss) flexibility for tech switches. They need the largest amount of production buildings and consequently they should be the ones dictating the type of battle. The only question is: Can you kill the mass Marine army or not? If you can then nothing needs to be changed, but if you cant then they need to look at the matchup. You have 5+ barracks and 1-2 factories with 9units on it in the midgame. I don't see an issue if a Zerg would be capable of forcing a Terran to build marauders (what zerg can, but only in the lategame with ultras) or mix in a few ghosts (what they can't, because fungal and blinding clouds are inefficient against proper micro and ghosts just not worth skipping 4marines - not even factoring in the 100gas and the techlab) a few siege tanks or force a decision between hellbats, hellions or mines. But they are not. The decision to build tanks, mines, hellbats is completly up to the terran and marauders only needed in the lategame against ultras. Even against roach/hydra marauders and tanks are optional (though definatly worth it) and marines do the job as well. All of the said units are on your techpath and you can switch into them. I'm not saying a Terran should be forced to suddenly come out with BCs when I build roaches or have 10siege tanks in case I build 10hydralisks. But it would be nice to have a little bit of control over what a Terran does. Dont you think this is a bit ignorant? Most of the 5+ Barracks will have a Reactor on them and you cant build Marauders with that. In case you havent noticed ... it takes SPACE to build such a huge amount of production buildings and that is a limitation on some maps. So your whole argument is really not valid. Just play Terran and build those buildings AND have an alternative addon ready for the Reactored ones (you forgot the 2 Starports). It is nigh on impossible except on the larger main bases. Forcing a certain unit is more than "forcing Marauders instead of Marines" but rather about "forcing mech instead of bio" as well and that can never happen for the reasons I have given. I play a fare share of Terran on the ladder (~dia-master level). I do build techlabs towards the lategame because you need them for ultras. But before that, I actually don't care and even my 1-2 techlabed barracks rather produce marines than marauders. And it really doesn't kill you to have 1-2 extra barracks with a techlab ready in case you need to produce 6marauders/minute in the midgame. The game isn't that tight that it is impossible to have 3reactor/3techlab barracks instead of 4/1. I did not forget the 1-2 starports, but I actually can't see any of those (nonmedivac) units really fullfill a role in midgame ZvT, apart from that lone viking or a single raven for detection. Forcing a certain unit is "forcing Marauders instead of Marines" or "hellbats instead of mines". If you haven't noticed, a marauder is a unit and a marine is a unit. So forcing one instead of the other is forcing a unit. But that's not the case, as marines have the same dps against armored as marauders have and the only limits for marineplay are base armor and AoE. But I don't want to discuss this further. I believe this would need a major rebalancing of the game on the level of basic units (like 2armor roaches, 5+1vs light marines, 12+6vs armored marauders, stronger ghosts that can overtake some of the marine's roles in the lategame with all the implications for PvZ and PvT...). I just hope one year from now the TvZ midgame won't be marine/medivac/mine vs ling/bling/muta for the first 15-20mins in every game. The whole "force unit X" does NOT start with the mid game when you have all your production buildings and your economy is good, but rather right at the start. Since Terrans are the most inflexible of races in their production it is only right that they are the ones who can force others to produce certain stuff while the same cant be done to them. That's generally wrong, because it takes out the strategy from RTS, as only one race is able to prepare a strategy and the other one has to solely react to that. (and I'm glad we do not play this game of yours, were Broodlords/Colossi don't force vikings, Ultras don't force marauders, HTs/Archons don't force ghosts and rushes can be easily held without having the right units at the right time) Do you use ultras or broodlords on early game ? That's what he is speaking about. I don't understand what you really want, muta ling bling deals ok with marines with support.
That's what he said:
The whole "force unit X" does NOT start with the mid game when you have all your production buildings and your economy is good, but rather right at the start. Since Terrans are the most inflexible of races in their production it is only right that they are the ones who can force others to produce certain stuff while the same cant be done to them.
He said unit forcing starts right at the start and Terrans should not be forced into units. I don't know where you read about it being only early game. The way he formulated it is that he does not want Terran to be forced into anything from the start of the game. (or my English is lacking, in which case I'm sorry and would like to have it reformulated so I can understand  )
|
[B]I don't understand what you really want, muta ling bling deals ok with marines with support.
Muta, ling, bling vs. marine, medevac, mine is incredibly cost-efficient for Terran. Game 2 of Moonglade vs. Illusion in the WCS is a good example (http://sc2casts.com/cast12348-mOOnGLaDe-vs-Illusion-Best-of-3-2013-WCS-America-S1-Group-Stage).
From my experiences (I'm only a top-Dia player), it feels like at best you can break even, but pulling ahead feels far less likely than a mine shot putting you in the hole instead. The logic in getting Muta's is to deny drop-play, but marines and mines are also great counters to Muta's, so it's counter-intuative.
The alternative for Zerg is to go Roach-Hydra instead, but you're often limited in any agression due to drops, so you're forced to try and starve out Terran or gamble on dividing your forces in an attack -- of course the issue there is that by the time you cross the map, Terran has received two additional waves of 15+ marines each and is in a good defensive position.
In either case, Zerg is often waiting for an Ultra tech-switch, which can be tricky as it requires a base advantage (not easy against a multi-dropping Terran bio-mine opponent) and it leads to vulnerability while you're saving bank and building the Ultras.
All of that goes into the specifics though...if we step back, the bigger issue to me is that the Terran force has better synergy than any Zerg counter. In warcraft 2/3 logic, Zerg need something like "Bloodlust" from a support unit to counter the healing of medevacs. While Infestors and Vipers are both great units, I don't find that they synergize great with a Zerg army vs. a bio-mine Terran, whereas Medevacs are the ultimate synergy. (In fact, I find that Infestors work best when they're not used as a support unit at all, but more like a rogue, Ghost-type unit, that burrows into enemy mineral lines.)
The issue Zerg's are having is that in addition to the maddening drop play, more often than not, bio-mine can roll a Zerg army in a straight-up fight.
|
On May 06 2013 23:09 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2013 22:50 Rabiator wrote:On May 06 2013 22:18 Big J wrote:On May 06 2013 21:44 Rabiator wrote:On May 06 2013 20:25 Big J wrote:On May 06 2013 19:35 Rabiator wrote:On May 06 2013 17:30 Big J wrote:
what I don't like right now about TvZ is how bad everything is in dealing with pure marine with slight support. Like, I know that 50marines and 5mines/hellbats/tanks are coming, but I just can't force him into a different unit until I reach ultras... Forcing a Terran into a different unit composition should NOT be possible as a Zerg because the Terran does not have the Zerg (and Protoss) flexibility for tech switches. They need the largest amount of production buildings and consequently they should be the ones dictating the type of battle. The only question is: Can you kill the mass Marine army or not? If you can then nothing needs to be changed, but if you cant then they need to look at the matchup. You have 5+ barracks and 1-2 factories with 9units on it in the midgame. I don't see an issue if a Zerg would be capable of forcing a Terran to build marauders (what zerg can, but only in the lategame with ultras) or mix in a few ghosts (what they can't, because fungal and blinding clouds are inefficient against proper micro and ghosts just not worth skipping 4marines - not even factoring in the 100gas and the techlab) a few siege tanks or force a decision between hellbats, hellions or mines. But they are not. The decision to build tanks, mines, hellbats is completly up to the terran and marauders only needed in the lategame against ultras. Even against roach/hydra marauders and tanks are optional (though definatly worth it) and marines do the job as well. All of the said units are on your techpath and you can switch into them. I'm not saying a Terran should be forced to suddenly come out with BCs when I build roaches or have 10siege tanks in case I build 10hydralisks. But it would be nice to have a little bit of control over what a Terran does. Dont you think this is a bit ignorant? Most of the 5+ Barracks will have a Reactor on them and you cant build Marauders with that. In case you havent noticed ... it takes SPACE to build such a huge amount of production buildings and that is a limitation on some maps. So your whole argument is really not valid. Just play Terran and build those buildings AND have an alternative addon ready for the Reactored ones (you forgot the 2 Starports). It is nigh on impossible except on the larger main bases. Forcing a certain unit is more than "forcing Marauders instead of Marines" but rather about "forcing mech instead of bio" as well and that can never happen for the reasons I have given. I play a fare share of Terran on the ladder (~dia-master level). I do build techlabs towards the lategame because you need them for ultras. But before that, I actually don't care and even my 1-2 techlabed barracks rather produce marines than marauders. And it really doesn't kill you to have 1-2 extra barracks with a techlab ready in case you need to produce 6marauders/minute in the midgame. The game isn't that tight that it is impossible to have 3reactor/3techlab barracks instead of 4/1. I did not forget the 1-2 starports, but I actually can't see any of those (nonmedivac) units really fullfill a role in midgame ZvT, apart from that lone viking or a single raven for detection. Forcing a certain unit is "forcing Marauders instead of Marines" or "hellbats instead of mines". If you haven't noticed, a marauder is a unit and a marine is a unit. So forcing one instead of the other is forcing a unit. But that's not the case, as marines have the same dps against armored as marauders have and the only limits for marineplay are base armor and AoE. But I don't want to discuss this further. I believe this would need a major rebalancing of the game on the level of basic units (like 2armor roaches, 5+1vs light marines, 12+6vs armored marauders, stronger ghosts that can overtake some of the marine's roles in the lategame with all the implications for PvZ and PvT...). I just hope one year from now the TvZ midgame won't be marine/medivac/mine vs ling/bling/muta for the first 15-20mins in every game. The whole "force unit X" does NOT start with the mid game when you have all your production buildings and your economy is good, but rather right at the start. Since Terrans are the most inflexible of races in their production it is only right that they are the ones who can force others to produce certain stuff while the same cant be done to them. That's generally wrong, because it takes out the strategy from RTS, as only one race is able to prepare a strategy and the other one has to solely react to that. (and I'm glad we do not play this game of yours, were Broodlords/Colossi don't force vikings, Ultras don't force marauders, HTs/Archons don't force ghosts and rushes can be easily held without having the right units at the right time)
Like a spoiled child you "want it all" without acknowledging that there needs to be a BALANCE between raw production power (Zerg) and unit power (Terran). Zerg have the best production and tech switch ability of all the races, generally superior scouting and mobility compared to Terrans and yet you want to force them into producing stuff you can kill easier? That is plainly ridiculous.
At the beginning of this "discussion" you were rambling on about the mid-game, but you dont even see that Terrans (and Protoss) are FORCED to harrass the Zerg to "keep their economy and produiction in check". Are Zergs forced to do the same to Terrans? Nope, not really. You just "want it all" and for no cost in return.
Zerg have enough advantages as it is ...
|
On May 07 2013 13:55 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2013 23:09 Big J wrote:On May 06 2013 22:50 Rabiator wrote:On May 06 2013 22:18 Big J wrote:On May 06 2013 21:44 Rabiator wrote:On May 06 2013 20:25 Big J wrote:On May 06 2013 19:35 Rabiator wrote:On May 06 2013 17:30 Big J wrote:
what I don't like right now about TvZ is how bad everything is in dealing with pure marine with slight support. Like, I know that 50marines and 5mines/hellbats/tanks are coming, but I just can't force him into a different unit until I reach ultras... Forcing a Terran into a different unit composition should NOT be possible as a Zerg because the Terran does not have the Zerg (and Protoss) flexibility for tech switches. They need the largest amount of production buildings and consequently they should be the ones dictating the type of battle. The only question is: Can you kill the mass Marine army or not? If you can then nothing needs to be changed, but if you cant then they need to look at the matchup. You have 5+ barracks and 1-2 factories with 9units on it in the midgame. I don't see an issue if a Zerg would be capable of forcing a Terran to build marauders (what zerg can, but only in the lategame with ultras) or mix in a few ghosts (what they can't, because fungal and blinding clouds are inefficient against proper micro and ghosts just not worth skipping 4marines - not even factoring in the 100gas and the techlab) a few siege tanks or force a decision between hellbats, hellions or mines. But they are not. The decision to build tanks, mines, hellbats is completly up to the terran and marauders only needed in the lategame against ultras. Even against roach/hydra marauders and tanks are optional (though definatly worth it) and marines do the job as well. All of the said units are on your techpath and you can switch into them. I'm not saying a Terran should be forced to suddenly come out with BCs when I build roaches or have 10siege tanks in case I build 10hydralisks. But it would be nice to have a little bit of control over what a Terran does. Dont you think this is a bit ignorant? Most of the 5+ Barracks will have a Reactor on them and you cant build Marauders with that. In case you havent noticed ... it takes SPACE to build such a huge amount of production buildings and that is a limitation on some maps. So your whole argument is really not valid. Just play Terran and build those buildings AND have an alternative addon ready for the Reactored ones (you forgot the 2 Starports). It is nigh on impossible except on the larger main bases. Forcing a certain unit is more than "forcing Marauders instead of Marines" but rather about "forcing mech instead of bio" as well and that can never happen for the reasons I have given. I play a fare share of Terran on the ladder (~dia-master level). I do build techlabs towards the lategame because you need them for ultras. But before that, I actually don't care and even my 1-2 techlabed barracks rather produce marines than marauders. And it really doesn't kill you to have 1-2 extra barracks with a techlab ready in case you need to produce 6marauders/minute in the midgame. The game isn't that tight that it is impossible to have 3reactor/3techlab barracks instead of 4/1. I did not forget the 1-2 starports, but I actually can't see any of those (nonmedivac) units really fullfill a role in midgame ZvT, apart from that lone viking or a single raven for detection. Forcing a certain unit is "forcing Marauders instead of Marines" or "hellbats instead of mines". If you haven't noticed, a marauder is a unit and a marine is a unit. So forcing one instead of the other is forcing a unit. But that's not the case, as marines have the same dps against armored as marauders have and the only limits for marineplay are base armor and AoE. But I don't want to discuss this further. I believe this would need a major rebalancing of the game on the level of basic units (like 2armor roaches, 5+1vs light marines, 12+6vs armored marauders, stronger ghosts that can overtake some of the marine's roles in the lategame with all the implications for PvZ and PvT...). I just hope one year from now the TvZ midgame won't be marine/medivac/mine vs ling/bling/muta for the first 15-20mins in every game. The whole "force unit X" does NOT start with the mid game when you have all your production buildings and your economy is good, but rather right at the start. Since Terrans are the most inflexible of races in their production it is only right that they are the ones who can force others to produce certain stuff while the same cant be done to them. That's generally wrong, because it takes out the strategy from RTS, as only one race is able to prepare a strategy and the other one has to solely react to that. (and I'm glad we do not play this game of yours, were Broodlords/Colossi don't force vikings, Ultras don't force marauders, HTs/Archons don't force ghosts and rushes can be easily held without having the right units at the right time) Like a spoiled child you "want it all" without acknowledging that there needs to be a BALANCE between raw production power (Zerg) and unit power (Terran). Zerg have the best production and tech switch ability of all the races, generally superior scouting and mobility compared to Terrans and yet you want to force them into producing stuff you can kill easier? That is plainly ridiculous. At the beginning of this "discussion" you were rambling on about the mid-game, but you dont even see that Terrans (and Protoss) are FORCED to harrass the Zerg to "keep their economy and produiction in check". Are Zergs forced to do the same to Terrans? Nope, not really. You just "want it all" and for no cost in return. Zerg have enough advantages as it is ...
So you are out of arguements and you are not responding to the part where I said that P/Z can force Terran into certain techs, but I'd like Z to be capable to do so in the midgame (like Protoss who can go Colossus, or go into charge and templar). Instead you just start to call me a spoiled child and go back to what you are best at: selling your own design ideas and impressions of the game as general truths. + Show Spoiler +(I could respond to you, telling you that 30+marines+3medivacs+4.5mines per minute is the same amount of income spending as what zerg does, so once you decide upon your build you have the same production, just not of every unit. Or that Terran has scans, medivacs, reaper, hellions, mines... as great scouting tools that are not "generally worse" than zerg scouting - when do I have the freedom to just click once to keep track of an army and the opponent cannot deny it. Or that mobility results from gameplay and not numbers written on units, and that Terran bio is especially due to medivacs has their own form of uncontested mobility. Well, I could, and I guess I just did...)
But the only general truth is that the game has to work out in the attributes fun and balance. And if it takes a purple bunny hero unit with AoE ensnare+dot spells that shits free units and outranges siege tanks by 10, is supermobile and can be built anywhere on the map, cliffjumps and has whatever attributes you declare as bad design provides that, it is a good addition. And same goes for production and unit strengths. Units don't have to be "powered down" so that production can be "superior" (in some way and mostly not another). The game just has to work out.
|
On May 07 2013 02:23 Graven wrote:Show nested quote +[B]I don't understand what you really want, muta ling bling deals ok with marines with support. Muta, ling, bling vs. marine, medevac, mine is incredibly cost-efficient for Terran. Game 2 of Moonglade vs. Illusion in the WCS is a good example (http://sc2casts.com/cast12348-mOOnGLaDe-vs-Illusion-Best-of-3-2013-WCS-America-S1-Group-Stage). From my experiences (I'm only a top-Dia player), it feels like at best you can break even, but pulling ahead feels far less likely than a mine shot putting you in the hole instead. The logic in getting Muta's is to deny drop-play, but marines and mines are also great counters to Muta's, so it's counter-intuative. The alternative for Zerg is to go Roach-Hydra instead, but you're often limited in any agression due to drops, so you're forced to try and starve out Terran or gamble on dividing your forces in an attack -- of course the issue there is that by the time you cross the map, Terran has received two additional waves of 15+ marines each and is in a good defensive position. In either case, Zerg is often waiting for an Ultra tech-switch, which can be tricky as it requires a base advantage (not easy against a multi-dropping Terran bio-mine opponent) and it leads to vulnerability while you're saving bank and building the Ultras. All of that goes into the specifics though...if we step back, the bigger issue to me is that the Terran force has better synergy than any Zerg counter. In warcraft 2/3 logic, Zerg need something like "Bloodlust" from a support unit to counter the healing of medevacs. While Infestors and Vipers are both great units, I don't find that they synergize great with a Zerg army vs. a bio-mine Terran, whereas Medevacs are the ultimate synergy. (In fact, I find that Infestors work best when they're not used as a support unit at all, but more like a rogue, Ghost-type unit, that burrows into enemy mineral lines.) The issue Zerg's are having is that in addition to the maddening drop play, more often than not, bio-mine can roll a Zerg army in a straight-up fight.
Zerg isn't supposed to be cost efficient.
|
On May 07 2013 17:39 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2013 02:23 Graven wrote:[B]I don't understand what you really want, muta ling bling deals ok with marines with support. Muta, ling, bling vs. marine, medevac, mine is incredibly cost-efficient for Terran. Game 2 of Moonglade vs. Illusion in the WCS is a good example (http://sc2casts.com/cast12348-mOOnGLaDe-vs-Illusion-Best-of-3-2013-WCS-America-S1-Group-Stage). From my experiences (I'm only a top-Dia player), it feels like at best you can break even, but pulling ahead feels far less likely than a mine shot putting you in the hole instead. The logic in getting Muta's is to deny drop-play, but marines and mines are also great counters to Muta's, so it's counter-intuative. The alternative for Zerg is to go Roach-Hydra instead, but you're often limited in any agression due to drops, so you're forced to try and starve out Terran or gamble on dividing your forces in an attack -- of course the issue there is that by the time you cross the map, Terran has received two additional waves of 15+ marines each and is in a good defensive position. In either case, Zerg is often waiting for an Ultra tech-switch, which can be tricky as it requires a base advantage (not easy against a multi-dropping Terran bio-mine opponent) and it leads to vulnerability while you're saving bank and building the Ultras. All of that goes into the specifics though...if we step back, the bigger issue to me is that the Terran force has better synergy than any Zerg counter. In warcraft 2/3 logic, Zerg need something like "Bloodlust" from a support unit to counter the healing of medevacs. While Infestors and Vipers are both great units, I don't find that they synergize great with a Zerg army vs. a bio-mine Terran, whereas Medevacs are the ultimate synergy. (In fact, I find that Infestors work best when they're not used as a support unit at all, but more like a rogue, Ghost-type unit, that burrows into enemy mineral lines.) The issue Zerg's are having is that in addition to the maddening drop play, more often than not, bio-mine can roll a Zerg army in a straight-up fight. Zerg isn't supposed to be cost efficient.
just like protoss should have the strongest lategame army?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
