|
Of course food plays a role too. The food you eat partially determines the state of health you are in. This is why sportmen have food plans and that stuff.
I dont judge about food because I dont know what the guys ate before playing. I judge about what I can observe from the game. E.g. I could observe that Taeja was tired before game against bomber because he yawned in the prematch mapvotes or interview (dont remember exactly) so he obviously was quita tired and therefore I knew at this point that bomber probably would win the match beforehand.
Also I give you guys another example: many players use to close their eyes before the match when they are in the booth waiting for the start. In 80% of cases the player that closes his eyes for a 5-10 seconds period before a match is gonna lose it. It happens basically every second or 3rd match, its almost always a factor to easily make a good pre guess who will be on top.
|
On August 26 2013 17:05 RJ231 wrote:
I'm not a pro player but I've been playing blizzard RTS for around 16-17 years and have always been pretty consistently in the top of the ladder rankings. I dunno about formatting my post correctly but there's a couple things I've observed playing HoTS for a couple months now as a zerg player.
ZvT - this match up feels very difficult as a zerg player, the new widow mine unit feels like it offers far too much power for the amount of effort it takes to handle the unit. Often times it's quite easy to lose the game to a single mine shot that will devastate an entire pack of lings or banes. The part I feel is unfair is that this happens automatically from a unit that's hidden unless you bring detection out and scan the area, even then the mines have pretty decent range and the rest of the zerg army moves too quickly compared to the speed of an overseer so you often come out behind when engaging widow mines as a rule. The fact they cost 75/25 is also quite difficult to accept considering their investment is negligible compared to the profit a single shot can give. As a zerg player it feels like terran has a unit that gets to burrow and shoot out banelings - repeatedly, without any micro needed beyond simply burrowing it in the first place. The mine isn't really the core of the problem though, it comes down to mid-late game when terran is able to keep presenting wave after wave of highly efficient units with very little investment in terms of macro, simply hotkeying all your barracks to a single hotkey and pressing a single key will train 15-20 units at once, on top of this terran can queue up additional waves of units past the first so there's little punishing them for "missing" a production cycle past the first. This problem is also seen with the mule mechanic, terran can expand with impunity often late game because of their ability to simply drop multiple mules at once and recoup any loses they might experience by having the expansion killed even if it is killed almost immediately after. The issue is that there's really nothing to punish terran players for not using command center energy in the mid-late game. On top of all of this is the issue that terran doesn't need gas to be effective vs zerg, often times you'll see top pros in the mid-late game floating 1000+ gas simply because they don't need it which compounds the issue of muling since all you really need to do late game as terran is land a fourth base and use all your orbital command energy on mules and you've put yourself right back into the game even if you're behind and even if the zerg immediately reacts you've already recouped your loses due to how quickly 8-12 mules can mine at once. All of these things together make it extremely difficult to keep up with a terran late game as a zerg player since all of their actions are much more efficient than yours, couple that with their units being more efficient in general and you've got a recipe for a matchup that feels like an uphill climb.
Suggestions:
-Widow mine price increase - this unit is incredibly powerful vs zerg and only costs 75/25 which feels far too cheap for it's power level and required adjustments in game play.
-Increase the gas cost of 3/3 for bio units, this upgrade often just ends games and terran really have no reason to not get it as the rest of their army is relatively gas cheap. This would also help slightly with the whole gas stockpiling you see later on from terrans.
-Mule cooldown timer, this would still allow terrans to drop many mules at a location but it would force them to spend more effort to do so.
- Overseer speed increase, often these lag behind your forces and you take mine shots - if the zerg is prepared to try and handle a strategy by getting detection it would be reasonable to make the detection efficient.
- Infestation pit no longer required to upgrade to Hive - zerg need to have upgrades to stay relevant vs terran late game but there's often no window of opportunity to upgrade to Hive in an even match. You see many pro zergs die once terran hits 3/3 simply because they're still on 2/2 and with the constant pressure there's really no opportunity to expend the resources to get to hive and get all these upgrades.
I'm a high masters Terran mech player and previously gm Protoss in WOL. I don't completely disagree with you about the WM problem, that's why i play mech: I think it takes more positional skill, map awareness and strategy than mindlessly running a marine WM stream into a opponents base. But mech is far less forgiving than bio. How do you think mech players feel about Vipers and Swarm hosts when it comes to your comments about micro? That being said, there are no top pro Terran mech player. When I say top Pro, people like Strelok and GoOdy are know for mech. Yes, they are very good but you don't see them winning any Dreamhack, WCS or GSL etc. The problem is Terran is limited in what they can go depending on the race. I think they should take your approach and nerf the WM, but in turn, buff mech. You can't just nerf a race without countering the loss of power in another way. Terran needs to see more diversity.
As for your suggestions, maybe the price increase can work, but remember, the Terran player already needs to invest gas to produce the unit (and gas for a reactor and drilling claws). As for your other suggest (i.e. mule coodown, or 3/3 armor increase) I think its a pipe dream and would far imbalance the race. You neglect to consider the other matches; specifically, TvP where Protoss can get 3/3 upgrades far before Terran and Chrono out probes non-stop b/c of the MSC. Many Pros find this matchup very difficult with the current STO and your suggestions would make it even more broken.
|
On August 26 2013 17:33 hearters wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2013 17:04 Sissors wrote:On August 26 2013 16:56 hearters wrote:
There is only one thing that is imbalanced in ZvT / TvZ.
Marines.
So I think blizzard should buff something zerg that is "good" against marines and make it better. Ultras. Maybe +1 armor with the +50hp will be helpful. Marauders and immortals would still rape ultras. Ultras would actually be cost-effective against marines, considering their place in the tech tree and their 50s build time. I always consider it hearthwarming to see the zerg support for giving thor ground attack splash damage. At least I think that is what you mean considering the place in the tech tree of thors and zerglings? Thors are meant to be good vs ultras. Ultras are meant to be good vs marines. Hard to see a difference?
Thats probably why ultras slaughter marines. But what exactly is your source that thors are meant to be good vs ultras while ultras are meant to be good vs marines? Because I was just following your logic where the place in the tech tree would mean thors should easily beat zerglings. And currently I am really confused.
@SirPinky, respect you make it work. Currently I consider mech vs toss more doable than vs zerg. Granted mostly probably because zergs aren't as clueless on how to defeat mech, but still, I can't make it work vs zerg.
|
On August 26 2013 17:36 hummingbird23 wrote:
This thread has descended to incredible depths of stupidity. I mean, coming up with pseudoscientific bullshit about sex and gender in a thread where great ZvT was played? Post hoc rationalisation of results galore!
LSN, I suggest you stop claiming expertise in psychology and genetic causes of behavior. It's obvious that your understanding of either field is skin-deep, if even that.
thats just talking bs. I dont claim expertise in psychology. I claim basic knowledge. Basic knowledge in psychology/sociology is the gender thing that applies on everything. It has especially effects on sports when a male faces a female what I explained.
Uneducated people implied that e.g. MMA on purpose played worse than he could against Scarlett what is of course wrong. What is right is that playing against a teammate and playing against a girl has a subtile effect on a players mindset that he cannot or hardly can control.
But I guess thats to high to be understood in an immature TL discussion like this. So idc honestly if you want to stay stupid or are willing to learn elements of elemental psychology.
|
On August 26 2013 17:42 Sissors wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2013 17:33 hearters wrote:On August 26 2013 17:04 Sissors wrote:On August 26 2013 16:56 hearters wrote:
There is only one thing that is imbalanced in ZvT / TvZ.
Marines.
So I think blizzard should buff something zerg that is "good" against marines and make it better. Ultras. Maybe +1 armor with the +50hp will be helpful. Marauders and immortals would still rape ultras. Ultras would actually be cost-effective against marines, considering their place in the tech tree and their 50s build time. I always consider it hearthwarming to see the zerg support for giving thor ground attack splash damage. At least I think that is what you mean considering the place in the tech tree of thors and zerglings? Thors are meant to be good vs ultras. Ultras are meant to be good vs marines. Hard to see a difference? Thats probably why ultras slaughter marines. But what exactly is your source that thors are meant to be good vs ultras while ultras are meant to be good vs marines? Because I was just following your logic where the place in the tech tree would mean thors should easily beat zerglings. And currently I am really confused. @SirPinky, respect you make it work. Currently I consider mech vs toss more doable than vs zerg. Granted mostly probably because zergs aren't as clueless on how to defeat mech, but still, I can't make it work vs zerg.
Ultras actually don't slaughter marines if marines micro and have a few marauders mixed in. That's the issue.
|
Stop feeding the troll. If that's not enough, consider the wise words:
"Don't argue with a fool, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience".
+ Show Spoiler +I do not entirely agree with the sentiment but I do think you do not get the time and engagement on an internet forum for a proper discussion which overcomes that statement.
|
I think the current problem is in gas. No matter which way you slice it, whether the splits are good or bad, the Zerg is trading gas to hold the Terran at bay. The Widow Mine increases the gas for minerals trade ratio by too much, leading to a gas starved zerg deciding whether or not to die to this current push by investing gas into Infestation Pit/Hive, or die later from a lack of tech/upgrades.
Widow mines need to cost more gas. I think 75/50 is a good place to start. This forces the Terran to manage gas like a Zerg does and reduces the gas bank for late game switches.
|
Lately I have seen a bunch of TvZs where the zerg was massively floating gas, nerf zerg?
When will people get the idea that being mineral starved is NOT a good situation. A balanced minerals-gas requirement is by far the best. If you then have to choose between mineral starved or gas starved, sure I would choose mineral starved. But balanced is still better.
Edit: Wait I missed that one at first, reducing the gas bank for lategame switches? Zerg is the one who can make lategame switches, not terran. Sure once every 200 games an air switch can be made, but even with the current situation where terran normally isn't gas limitted it is highly unlikely it is a good option. I don't think that requires a nerf...
|
Why exactly do we need different upgrades for zerg melee and range?
If there was just one upgrade, we would see far more interesting unit compositions, composition changes and more micro intensive fights. I think this would be far more interesting then earlier T3 upgrades. Too bad this is not likely to happen because of too many conservative thinkers in this community.
Wow LSN went full retard. Please don't feed the troll. Nothing to see here. Move on please.
|
On August 26 2013 17:38 SirPinky wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2013 17:05 RJ231 wrote:
I'm not a pro player but I've been playing blizzard RTS for around 16-17 years and have always been pretty consistently in the top of the ladder rankings. I dunno about formatting my post correctly but there's a couple things I've observed playing HoTS for a couple months now as a zerg player.
ZvT - this match up feels very difficult as a zerg player, the new widow mine unit feels like it offers far too much power for the amount of effort it takes to handle the unit. Often times it's quite easy to lose the game to a single mine shot that will devastate an entire pack of lings or banes. The part I feel is unfair is that this happens automatically from a unit that's hidden unless you bring detection out and scan the area, even then the mines have pretty decent range and the rest of the zerg army moves too quickly compared to the speed of an overseer so you often come out behind when engaging widow mines as a rule. The fact they cost 75/25 is also quite difficult to accept considering their investment is negligible compared to the profit a single shot can give. As a zerg player it feels like terran has a unit that gets to burrow and shoot out banelings - repeatedly, without any micro needed beyond simply burrowing it in the first place. The mine isn't really the core of the problem though, it comes down to mid-late game when terran is able to keep presenting wave after wave of highly efficient units with very little investment in terms of macro, simply hotkeying all your barracks to a single hotkey and pressing a single key will train 15-20 units at once, on top of this terran can queue up additional waves of units past the first so there's little punishing them for "missing" a production cycle past the first. This problem is also seen with the mule mechanic, terran can expand with impunity often late game because of their ability to simply drop multiple mules at once and recoup any loses they might experience by having the expansion killed even if it is killed almost immediately after. The issue is that there's really nothing to punish terran players for not using command center energy in the mid-late game. On top of all of this is the issue that terran doesn't need gas to be effective vs zerg, often times you'll see top pros in the mid-late game floating 1000+ gas simply because they don't need it which compounds the issue of muling since all you really need to do late game as terran is land a fourth base and use all your orbital command energy on mules and you've put yourself right back into the game even if you're behind and even if the zerg immediately reacts you've already recouped your loses due to how quickly 8-12 mules can mine at once. All of these things together make it extremely difficult to keep up with a terran late game as a zerg player since all of their actions are much more efficient than yours, couple that with their units being more efficient in general and you've got a recipe for a matchup that feels like an uphill climb.
Suggestions:
-Widow mine price increase - this unit is incredibly powerful vs zerg and only costs 75/25 which feels far too cheap for it's power level and required adjustments in game play.
-Increase the gas cost of 3/3 for bio units, this upgrade often just ends games and terran really have no reason to not get it as the rest of their army is relatively gas cheap. This would also help slightly with the whole gas stockpiling you see later on from terrans.
-Mule cooldown timer, this would still allow terrans to drop many mules at a location but it would force them to spend more effort to do so.
- Overseer speed increase, often these lag behind your forces and you take mine shots - if the zerg is prepared to try and handle a strategy by getting detection it would be reasonable to make the detection efficient.
- Infestation pit no longer required to upgrade to Hive - zerg need to have upgrades to stay relevant vs terran late game but there's often no window of opportunity to upgrade to Hive in an even match. You see many pro zergs die once terran hits 3/3 simply because they're still on 2/2 and with the constant pressure there's really no opportunity to expend the resources to get to hive and get all these upgrades.
I'm a high masters Terran mech player and previously gm Protoss in WOL. I don't completely disagree with you about the WM problem, that's why i play mech: I think it takes more positional skill, map awareness and strategy than mindlessly running a marine WM stream into a opponents base. But mech is far less forgiving than bio. How do you think mech players feel about Vipers and Swarm hosts when it comes to your comments about micro? That being said, there are no top pro Terran mech player. When I say top Pro, people like Strelok and GoOdy are know for mech. Yes, they are very good but you don't see them winning any Dreamhack, WCS or GSL etc. The problem is Terran is limited in what they can go depending on the race. I think they should take your approach and nerf the WM, but in turn, buff mech. You can't just nerf a race without countering the loss of power in another way. Terran needs to see more diversity. As for your suggestions, maybe the price increase can work, but remember, the Terran player already needs to invest gas to produce the unit (and gas for a reactor and drilling claws). As for your other suggest (i.e. mule coodown, or 3/3 armor increase) I think its a pipe dream and would far imbalance the race. You neglect to consider the other matches; specifically, TvP where Protoss can get 3/3 upgrades far before Terran and Chrono out probes non-stop b/c of the MSC. Many Pros find this matchup very difficult with the current STO and your suggestions would make it even more broken.
It's really hard to talk about mech because the issue with mech is not only that it's too weak/strong, but that the way mech is designed in Starcraft 2 isn't rally interesting and tend to death ball play. If you buff mech to make it viable again, you will also buff turtle player who seat behind planetary and turrets which makes for very boring play, both to play against and to watch. In an ideal world, as I see it, mech should be a way more powerful army, but harder to get and that you build by transitionning from bio to mech in late game when you have enough economy to support it. However, this would require a redesign, not just tweaking some stats.
About Biomine, a while ago, Naruto said that it wasn't a problem, because only Innovation and Flash makes it looked imbalanced. I didn't agreed with him and I still don't, as more and more terrans are getting close Innovation TvZ's style, while zerg still haven't found solution to it, because in my opinion, there is none.
|
On August 26 2013 18:01 submarine wrote:
Why exactly do we need different upgrades for zerg melee and range?
If there was just one upgrade, we would see far more interesting unit compositions, composition changes and more micro intensive fights. I think this would be far more interesting then earlier T3 upgrades. Too bad this is not likely to happen because of too many conservative thinkers in this community.
Wow LSN went full retard. Please don't feed the troll. Nothing to see here. Move on please.
Agreed. Combining the upgrades is a good idea. Restricting Zerg to ling/bane or roach/hydra is limiting the playstyle. Plus it does sound ridiculous that Ranged Upgrades don't scale into the lategame because the lategame power units use the Melee upgrade. However, you do also have to consider the ridiculous power of tech switching on the fly and the ability of other races to get the counters in time.
|
While I agree it could be good for ZvT, it would probably be way too much broken for ZvP as huge tech switch can already be deadly.
|
On August 26 2013 17:38 SirPinky wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2013 17:05 RJ231 wrote:
I'm not a pro player but I've been playing blizzard RTS for around 16-17 years and have always been pretty consistently in the top of the ladder rankings. I dunno about formatting my post correctly but there's a couple things I've observed playing HoTS for a couple months now as a zerg player.
ZvT - this match up feels very difficult as a zerg player, the new widow mine unit feels like it offers far too much power for the amount of effort it takes to handle the unit. Often times it's quite easy to lose the game to a single mine shot that will devastate an entire pack of lings or banes. The part I feel is unfair is that this happens automatically from a unit that's hidden unless you bring detection out and scan the area, even then the mines have pretty decent range and the rest of the zerg army moves too quickly compared to the speed of an overseer so you often come out behind when engaging widow mines as a rule. The fact they cost 75/25 is also quite difficult to accept considering their investment is negligible compared to the profit a single shot can give. As a zerg player it feels like terran has a unit that gets to burrow and shoot out banelings - repeatedly, without any micro needed beyond simply burrowing it in the first place. The mine isn't really the core of the problem though, it comes down to mid-late game when terran is able to keep presenting wave after wave of highly efficient units with very little investment in terms of macro, simply hotkeying all your barracks to a single hotkey and pressing a single key will train 15-20 units at once, on top of this terran can queue up additional waves of units past the first so there's little punishing them for "missing" a production cycle past the first. This problem is also seen with the mule mechanic, terran can expand with impunity often late game because of their ability to simply drop multiple mules at once and recoup any loses they might experience by having the expansion killed even if it is killed almost immediately after. The issue is that there's really nothing to punish terran players for not using command center energy in the mid-late game. On top of all of this is the issue that terran doesn't need gas to be effective vs zerg, often times you'll see top pros in the mid-late game floating 1000+ gas simply because they don't need it which compounds the issue of muling since all you really need to do late game as terran is land a fourth base and use all your orbital command energy on mules and you've put yourself right back into the game even if you're behind and even if the zerg immediately reacts you've already recouped your loses due to how quickly 8-12 mules can mine at once. All of these things together make it extremely difficult to keep up with a terran late game as a zerg player since all of their actions are much more efficient than yours, couple that with their units being more efficient in general and you've got a recipe for a matchup that feels like an uphill climb.
Suggestions:
-Widow mine price increase - this unit is incredibly powerful vs zerg and only costs 75/25 which feels far too cheap for it's power level and required adjustments in game play.
-Increase the gas cost of 3/3 for bio units, this upgrade often just ends games and terran really have no reason to not get it as the rest of their army is relatively gas cheap. This would also help slightly with the whole gas stockpiling you see later on from terrans.
-Mule cooldown timer, this would still allow terrans to drop many mules at a location but it would force them to spend more effort to do so.
- Overseer speed increase, often these lag behind your forces and you take mine shots - if the zerg is prepared to try and handle a strategy by getting detection it would be reasonable to make the detection efficient.
- Infestation pit no longer required to upgrade to Hive - zerg need to have upgrades to stay relevant vs terran late game but there's often no window of opportunity to upgrade to Hive in an even match. You see many pro zergs die once terran hits 3/3 simply because they're still on 2/2 and with the constant pressure there's really no opportunity to expend the resources to get to hive and get all these upgrades.
I'm a high masters Terran mech player and previously gm Protoss in WOL. I don't completely disagree with you about the WM problem, that's why i play mech: I think it takes more positional skill, map awareness and strategy than mindlessly running a marine WM stream into a opponents base. But mech is far less forgiving than bio. How do you think mech players feel about Vipers and Swarm hosts when it comes to your comments about micro? That being said, there are no top pro Terran mech player. When I say top Pro, people like Strelok and GoOdy are know for mech. Yes, they are very good but you don't see them winning any Dreamhack, WCS or GSL etc. The problem is Terran is limited in what they can go depending on the race. I think they should take your approach and nerf the WM, but in turn, buff mech. You can't just nerf a race without countering the loss of power in another way. Terran needs to see more diversity. As for your suggestions, maybe the price increase can work, but remember, the Terran player already needs to invest gas to produce the unit (and gas for a reactor and drilling claws). As for your other suggest (i.e. mule coodown, or 3/3 armor increase) I think its a pipe dream and would far imbalance the race. You neglect to consider the other matches; specifically, TvP where Protoss can get 3/3 upgrades far before Terran and Chrono out probes non-stop b/c of the MSC. Many Pros find this matchup very difficult with the current STO and your suggestions would make it even more broken.
I don't disagree that mech would need a buff at all, in fact it would be nice to see ZvT come down to tech switches and trying to "game" your opponent rather than just kick-the-door-down aggression with bio/mine/medivac play. I think the match up would be a lot more satisfying for both parties if the muta/ling/bane vs bio/mine/medivac strategies had a "timer" where if you don't switch out you lose to an opponent's tech switch. The problem right now is that mech isn't nearly as powerful and zerg can't afford to make anything but muta/ling/bane, trying to make that switch to infestor/ultra is so hard as a zerg and often you just end up losing to the bio army in the end as your ultras end up just trading with the bio force and you lose to reinforcements.
In the end I'd like to see small nerfs to widow mines along with a few small buffs to zerg to try and even out ZvT, I feel like ZvP is also a very hard match up but I don't really know what should be changed there. You know it's kind of unfair when the zerg that's ahead in economy often times is forced into a situation where they must throw away their "fighting" army and remax into mass mutas so they can base trade because trying to ever win against a protoss army head on is a recipe for losing a game you should of won.
|
On August 26 2013 17:16 LSN wrote:
Well, stupid is to say a matchup is balanced, because a non korean was able to beat koreans, what I replied to.
Stupid is also to say that Scarlett in fact is a guy instead of a girl.
There is nothing stupid in what I said. All these things that I wrote play a role in mental 1on1.
The inner team match MMA vs Scarlett is one of the most obvious.
MMA never would have proxy marine rushed her. If he cannot face her in a fair macrogame then he would rather lose than cheesing his teammate (that is a girl) out.
MMA probably would have acted differently if he had faced a superior other zerg player and MAYBE would have tried to cheese.
Also:
When it comes to boys vs girls in sports, there are always mental differences. In a man vs man or woman vs woman fight there is always more competition involved than in intergender fights. It is basic psychology. Woman fight against woman to impress men, and the other way round. You can not impress a girl in fighting it to death. This of course is subtile and not matter of the decision of the individual. But I guess none of you guys have ever listened to a semester 1 psychology lecture.
And yes this is science.
Alright, so you were replying to me, and to be clear, I never even said the matchup was balanced. I did say I don't think it is in as much trouble as the person I quoted claimed, but he was using phrases like" the inevitability of MMM winning." Even if the matchup is imbalanced, winning is far from inevitable.
I brought up Scarlett crushing through Terrans as an example. In particular I pointed out that as a foreigner playing against Koreans she would already be expected to lose handily; that if the matchup was so imbalanced that MMM winning was "inevitable," that would stack the odds even more against her; and to add to that, she wasn't just going toe-to-toe with Koreans. She went 2-3 against Bomber, who went on to win the tournament. That isn't enough evidence to show the matchup is balanced, certainly, but it's enough to say there's nothing inevitable about the matchup. Winning is plenty contingent on skill still, apparently.
You responded by saying that Scarlett is a foreigner, but she's also a ZvT specialist and she got to prepare only ZvT because of brackets; that's fair. Then you brought up a lot of weird evolutionary sociology about how women are more adaptive and Zerg-like or something, and tried to show that she won in spite of the matchup's imbalance because she's a woman. Here's where you lost me (and anyone else reading it). First of all, the premise that being female makes you better at playing Zerg in the current metagame is just as stupid as the premise that being male makes you better at Starcraft. There's just not evidence to show someone's sex plays such a causal role in their traits (and these theories are generally concerned with sex, not gender). Second, even if the evolutionary psychology angle were at all persuasive, it's unclear how lgbt individuals fit into evolutionary psychological theories regarding sex, anyway. The relationship is doubtless varied and complex.
And third, even if the "being a girl gave her the skills to win" angle did make sense, that is still irrelevant to what I was claiming. I just argued that Scarlett's results indicate that winning in ZvT is still quite possible at high-level play. If you want to argue that not only is it possible, but it's even easier if you're a girl, go for it, but that's irrelevant to what I was saying. If you're right, maybe we should leave the matchup the way it is; this is just what we need to help encourage more female participation in SC2! Of course, it's almost certainly absurd to think that gender is playing a significant causal role, but even if it did, the original point remains unaffected.
|
On August 26 2013 18:06 hummingbird23 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2013 18:01 submarine wrote:
Why exactly do we need different upgrades for zerg melee and range?
If there was just one upgrade, we would see far more interesting unit compositions, composition changes and more micro intensive fights. I think this would be far more interesting then earlier T3 upgrades. Too bad this is not likely to happen because of too many conservative thinkers in this community.
Wow LSN went full retard. Please don't feed the troll. Nothing to see here. Move on please. Agreed. Combining the upgrades is a good idea. Restricting Zerg to ling/bane or roach/hydra is limiting the playstyle. Plus it does sound ridiculous that Ranged Upgrades don't scale into the lategame because the lategame power units use the Melee upgrade. However, you do also have to consider the ridiculous power of tech switching on the fly and the ability of other races to get the counters in time.
I think combining the upgrades to be a really bad idea. The protoss equivalent would be to combine robo and stargate units into the same building. Think how 'interesting' the compositions will be then! Stop thinking so conservatively! 
The point is that in the early / mid game zerg has to choose a tech based on scouting, just like everyone else. The difference between a good zerg and a great one is how to make that decision. Remove that choice and you get the return of the 'patch zerg' where no matter what, you make infestor BL.
I think it is worth asking is hive too large a requirement for T3 zerg upgrades. I wouldn't mind seeing 'infestation pit' requirement for hive being replaced with 'pit, hydra den or spire' as requirement. That way no matter what path zerg have chosen they can move on to hive relatively quickly instead of being forced to build a building they may not want just to advance to hive tech.
|
On August 26 2013 18:06 hummingbird23 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2013 18:01 submarine wrote:
Why exactly do we need different upgrades for zerg melee and range?
If there was just one upgrade, we would see far more interesting unit compositions, composition changes and more micro intensive fights. I think this would be far more interesting then earlier T3 upgrades. Too bad this is not likely to happen because of too many conservative thinkers in this community.
Wow LSN went full retard. Please don't feed the troll. Nothing to see here. Move on please. Agreed. Combining the upgrades is a good idea. Restricting Zerg to ling/bane or roach/hydra is limiting the playstyle. Plus it does sound ridiculous that Ranged Upgrades don't scale into the lategame because the lategame power units use the Melee upgrade. However, you do also have to consider the ridiculous power of tech switching on the fly and the ability of other races to get the counters in time.
Sure with combined zerg upgrades tech switches would be more powerful and it would be a general Zerg buff that might have to be offset by other buffs or nerfs. But I think over all it would make the game more interesting.
Lets take a short look at the different MUs:
ZvT:
Roach Hydra might play a bigger role in mid-game. Swarm host may also be used more often especially to fight mines. Terrans response is to get a few tanks out. There would be a T3 transition for a roach hydra mid-game against M^4. That buff might just be enough to make ZvT great.
ZvP:
I am not too sure about the impact on this MU. It would help quite a lot while defending various 2 base pushes, especially immo-sentry. In the later stages of the game the T3 units would be more powerful directly when they enter the field. Ling runbys might also be more dangerous.
Over all i think combined upgrades would make sc2 a lot more interesting.
|
On August 26 2013 18:19 ChristianS wrote:
...Then you brought up a lot of weird evolutionary sociology about how women are more adaptive and Zerg-like or something, and tried to show that she won in spite of the matchup's imbalance because she's a woman. Here's where you lost me (and anyone else reading it). First of all, the premise that being female makes you better at playing Zerg in the current metagame is just as stupid as the premise that being male makes you better at Starcraft.
It was of course rather theoretical. It could be an explanation why Scarlett is so good especially in ZvT and not any other matchup. Of course it doesnt have to be the reason. Sure to say is that "women are more adaptable than men", when you just google this you find alot of stuff about it. I didnt say she won in spite of heavy imbalance because she is a woman. I said that being a woman can support right decisionmaking when having excellenct ZvT skills, cause women are known for being more adaptable and patient than males and this is what is required in current ZvT and also it is what I observed in her play as well, espacially when comparing it to alot of korean zergs that have equal, maybe even better overall skills (mechanics/macro/micro). This way round.
I wanted to point out why Scarlett games are a bad indicator for balance for several minor reasons, besides the major ones. And it was expectable that alot of people use Scarletts great perfromance to indicate that balance is alright overall, which it is not in my opinion. That doesnt mean its all bad or Z cant win of course. The exact issues have been named a hundred times, so no need to repeat it over and over again.
Edit: I didnt even know that she is a born male so what I wrote about this part is at least questionable.
|
On August 26 2013 18:23 Kharnage wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2013 18:06 hummingbird23 wrote:On August 26 2013 18:01 submarine wrote:
Why exactly do we need different upgrades for zerg melee and range?
If there was just one upgrade, we would see far more interesting unit compositions, composition changes and more micro intensive fights. I think this would be far more interesting then earlier T3 upgrades. Too bad this is not likely to happen because of too many conservative thinkers in this community.
Wow LSN went full retard. Please don't feed the troll. Nothing to see here. Move on please. Agreed. Combining the upgrades is a good idea. Restricting Zerg to ling/bane or roach/hydra is limiting the playstyle. Plus it does sound ridiculous that Ranged Upgrades don't scale into the lategame because the lategame power units use the Melee upgrade. However, you do also have to consider the ridiculous power of tech switching on the fly and the ability of other races to get the counters in time. I think combining the upgrades to be a really bad idea. The protoss equivalent would be to combine robo and stargate units into the same building. Think how 'interesting' the compositions will be then! Stop thinking so conservatively! The point is that in the early / mid game zerg has to choose a tech based on scouting, just like everyone else. The difference between a good zerg and a great one is how to make that decision. Remove that choice and you get the return of the 'patch zerg' where no matter what, you make infestor BL. I think it is worth asking is hive too large a requirement for T3 zerg upgrades. I wouldn't mind seeing 'infestation pit' requirement for hive being replaced with 'pit, hydra den or spire' as requirement. That way no matter what path zerg have chosen they can move on to hive relatively quickly instead of being forced to build a building they may not want just to advance to hive tech.
I fail to see why you think it is not just a "bad" idea but a "really bad" one. It seems to me like you did not even think about it. Your comparison to robo and air units is "really bad". The idea i wrote down is in no way more radical or crazy then all these "faster T3" proposals.
I think a better comparison would be to break up the ground weapon upgrades from toss into robo and non-robo or psy(chargelot, archon) and the rest. I think it is quite clear that such a differentiation would make toss a lot less flexible and the game over all rather dull.
For zerg such a differentiation is in the game right now. The reason is, IMHO, traditionalism (That's how it was in BW!). For me this is just not enough and i see great potential if this differentiation was removed.
I also think this is far more interesting then an earlier Hive or earlier T3 upgrades, which both would be zerg buffs of a similar magnitude.
|
On August 26 2013 18:45 LSN wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2013 18:19 ChristianS wrote:
...Then you brought up a lot of weird evolutionary sociology about how women are more adaptive and Zerg-like or something, and tried to show that she won in spite of the matchup's imbalance because she's a woman. Here's where you lost me (and anyone else reading it). First of all, the premise that being female makes you better at playing Zerg in the current metagame is just as stupid as the premise that being male makes you better at Starcraft. It was of course rather theoretical. It could be an explanation why Scarlett is so good especially in ZvT and not any other matchup. Of course it doesnt have to be the reason. Sure to say is that "women are more adaptable than men", when you just google this you find alot of stuff about it. I didnt say she won in spite of heavy imbalance because she is a woman. I said that being a woman can support right decisionmaking when having excellenct ZvT skills, cause women are known for being more adaptable and patient than males and this is what is required in current ZvT and also it is what I observed in her play as well, espacially when comparing it to alot of korean zergs that have equal, maybe even better overall skills (mechanics/macro/micro). This way round. I wanted to point out why Scarlett games are a bad indicator for balance for several minor reasons, besides the major ones. And it was expectable that alot of people use Scarletts great perfromance to indicate that balance is alright overall, which it is not in my opinion. That doesnt mean its all bad or Z cant win of course. The exact issues have been named a hundred times, so no need to repeat it over and over again.
I assume the major reasons are largely based around "she's just one player, and one player isn't a good indicator of the overall metagame." If the minor reasons are your arguments about how she has an unnatural advantage in the matchup because she's a woman, then that's a pretty absurd argument. If the minor reasons are things like "she got to prepare for only ZvT going into the tournament, so it's expected she'd be particularly good at it," then sure, that's fair, although still not so incredibly compelling. If the argument is that Scarlett can't be used as an example of ZvT because she's really good at ZvT, though, I don't think that works. The argument on the side of imbalance has always been that a) even top level Zergs like Soulkey can't keep up, and b) this imbalance only effects the highest level of play, between top Korean Terrans and top Korean Zergs.
So, here we have a foreign Zerg competing against top Korean Terrans and holding her own. Sure she's ahead of the curve in ZvT, but if Scarlett can handle top Terrans' TvZ, surely so can the likes of Symbol and Soulkey. We can't say it's not the highest level of play, because even if you could argue that about Scarlett, you can't argue that about her opponents. So if she's competing with them, she must be top level, too.
In other words, people have been trying for a while now to take series like Innovation vs. Soulkey and say "this domination is representative of current TvZ." Then it seems like a perfectly reasonable response to point out Scarlett vs. Bomber and respond "No it's not, not at all."
|
In general, it is good to look at wider statistics. E.g. Jaedong prepared probably only ZvP, the first terran he met knocked him out 4:0. It isnt a quite good indicator for balance as well because jaedong didnt play well in the finals. But at the same time it means if jaedong had a strong terran in ro8 he probably wouldnt have made it any further. If JD had met tired taeja in ro8 (which made a whole lot of mistakes against bomber) he could also have advanced more.
For balance all this is not important, because it is focus of players and the shape of the day (taeja vs bomber was in very bad shape). Important is the number players of a race that reach a certain round in a larger number of tournaments I'd say. It can tell something about balance. That was 2/16 in this tournament. 2/8 probably happened because both zergs had to prepare only for one matchup in their groups that they were able to do convincingly.
Of course scarlett is rather new on the field still which gives a natural advantage of opponents underestimating her a bit at least. I dare to say that e.g. maru prepared way more for the two strong korean terrans in his group instead of a potential game against the foreigner zerg and MMA didnt seem to be quite focused enaugh for whatever reason.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
