Designated Balance Discussion Thread - Page 682

On August 09 2013 00:07 Big J wrote:


even if zerg was only able to win through allins, as long as they can do it consistently there is nothing wrong with it balancewise.

On August 09 2013 00:07 Big J wrote:


even if zerg was only able to win through allins, as long as they can do it consistently there is nothing wrong with it balancewise.

On August 09 2013 00:09 RaFox17 wrote:

Thats totally right. I should have mentioned that it makes the match-up bad design-wise but not balance-wise.

On August 09 2013 00:01 Big J wrote:


well, and as far as I remember CatZ did not think there was a problem. If there is any imbalance, it is probably tiny or even metagame dependend and could get figured out.

On August 09 2013 00:10 scypio wrote:


Well, that's the fun part. You need to poke around to keep the winrates intact and to get the games more varied / exciting.

Balancewise roach-ling-bane and mutal-ling-bling is in a perfect spot vs bio-mine, the armies are quite well matched and I don't think that nerfing / buffing something along these lines would be good.

On the other hand maybe the hive transition could be made faster / easier / requiring less resources so we could see more proper late game from the Zerg.

On August 09 2013 00:00 Foxxan wrote:


No!
you are doing it wrong, coming here and whine again

Its HOW you win the games

I repeat

HOW you as a player playing starcraft WINS the GAME

one more time

HOW you as a starcraft 2 player with blood in your body wins a GAME!!!
You get it? Stop your nonsence, you ARE THE WHINER

On August 09 2013 00:27 TheRabidDeer wrote:
This is how ZvT feels at the moment:
Either zerg punishes terran greed in the early game or the game goes on and zerg tries to hold on until terran makes a mistake. If T doesnt make that mistake that the Z manages to catch, then T ends up winning even if the Z doesnt make a mistake.

Whether or not this is true, this is how it feels.

On August 09 2013 00:29 Snowbear wrote:


If this is the case, then terrans would dominate ladder, then terrans would dominate tournaments. Both are not the case.

On August 09 2013 00:13 TeeTS wrote:


I think a lot of zergs are frustrated of how bad zergs where doing at the OSL against terran. And I can fully understand that. But I think maps played big time into that. In review, OSL had a terribly terribly terran favored mappool and results showed that. We'll see how next GSL goes, with terrible maps like Star Station, Anaconda, Newkirk and GG beach removed.

edit:
And I think zergs are misreading the current situation the same way like last year. Zergs are not really doing terribly against terran overall. They are getting massacred by Protoss right now. (which where getting massacred by Terran mostly in the OSL due to imbalanced maps, see the point above!) I think zerg players should switch their focus with their whine

On August 09 2013 00:31 TheRabidDeer wrote:

Unfortunately, no. For one thing, zergs do punish early game greed and second terrans do make mistakes. Also, tournaments are more complicated than that and ladder is a completely different story altogether.

Also
Whether or not this is true, this is how it feels.

On August 09 2013 00:34 Snowbear wrote:


You really think terrans haven't figured out how to hold zerg allins? And I can also say "terrans only win when the zergs make a mistake".

On August 09 2013 00:08 Snowbear wrote:





Yes! I show you a perfect proof that these zergs are whining without a reason. And then you come with "it's how you win the games"? Seriously??? What if those terran wins are because of allins? Your argument works in both ways mate .

You want your WOL zerg domination back and NO, you are NOT going to get it. Get over it ASAP because Blizzard will NEVER ever make the same mistake.

This is HOTS now. You need to micro now. Those easy no micro infestor times are gone and will never come back. You are required to put the same effort into the game as the terran.

On August 09 2013 00:35 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:
The reality is due to Terran's base booster and it's AoE/burst damage nature, Terran can come back from behind AT ANY TIME on a three base and up scenario.

Terran's base boost is limited to spell detection and unit summoning, unlike the super production of Spawn larvae and production and research boost of Chronoboost. Hence MULES have mining because assuming unlimited mana, usually at 3+ bases, Protoss can already have 50% more probes by the time a Terran rebuilds his SCVs in this magical scenario where both players wipe out each other's workers and army at the same time. A Zerg is even more insane, assuming tr player has been faithfully spawning larvae the entire battle, he could literally replace all 60 workers lost in a single cycle of production across his 3x hatcheries.

On August 09 2013 01:13 Tyrhanius wrote:
Zerg is designed to be the swarm : to swarm their opponent under a lot of units. So their units are less strong than the other race, but they have the mecanism to produce a lot of eco and units.

But in HOTS, T is become the swarm, T produce a lot of T1-T2 units and swarm their opponent. But unlike Zerg units, terran units are super cost effective, and nearly only cost mineral. T army are more mobile than Z army too, and so effective in small group.
Mines aslo make terran able to go super greedy start. Zerg doesn't outmacro their opponent anymore, and drop limit Zerg to take too many expansions.

So whereas Z units have been designed to be played on a game where Zerg has an economic lead, in hots where Z usually have the same economy than Terran, army trade on direct battle field or when T drop are nearly always in T favor. Moreover, Zerg are very depend on gaz for baneling, mutas, infestor, ultra, while Terran army only need gaz for medivac (that nearly nerver die), and upgrades.

So now in hots, Zerg is supposed to be super effective vs T army althought having most of units designed to uncosteffective.
So Zerg try to favour his most cost effective units : Ultra/queen, roach hydra in the idea to go infestor/SH. But each time you see Zerg playing like that the situation is always the same :
Zerg army is slower than Terran, so Terran drop to force Zerg to stay at his base. In the meantime, Terran take a lot of expansions, and go ahead on eco while he lower his worker supply to get more army supply thx to mules.
And Zerg can't deny expansions without taking his whole army thx to PF, mines, bunker repair.
So when Zerg decide to attack beacause he has no choice anymore if he doesn't want to lose. Terran just make 1 or 2 drop which kills every zerg ecos and buildings. Then he just defend with the rest of his army, and as he has strong defence, the avantage of the position, he crush zerg army.
Zerg army are often powerfull and kills a lot of the terran army, but Terran can easily reprod his nearly only costing mineral army, while Zerg can't reprod his high tier army while his eco has been hurt by the drop during the attack.

On August 09 2013 00:00 Foxxan wrote:


No!
you are doing it wrong, coming here and whine again

Its HOW you win the games

I repeat

HOW you as a player playing starcraft WINS the GAME

one more time

HOW you as a starcraft 2 player with blood in your body wins a GAME!!!
You get it? Stop your nonsence, you ARE THE WHINER

On August 09 2013 00:59 Big J wrote:
Don't take that as a balance comment, but your math is so wrong it just hurts anybody who has actually ever checked the numbers...


well, if we assume unlimited mana Terran has unlimited income with mules. Thankfully the assumption is wrong and Protoss chronoboosting probes as much as he can will only produce probes ~22% faster than a Terran (due to energy regeneration). Chrono Boost Math

To Zerg: an injection cyle takes 40seconds and will spawn 4+2.66666 larva. So in a single cycle, a 3hatch zerg can reproduce 20drones (assuming it is reproduction and he does not need to spend larva on overlords). 40less than he "could literally replace" as you say. But yes, 12.94more than a Terran with 3CCs in the same time. Luckily 12 is exactly the number of workers 3mules make up to begin with.