Another Neural Parasite Change. - Page 11

On September 16 2011 04:39 Heavenly wrote:


Against double stargate play coupled with infestors and as a two hatch nydus hydra bust on Tal'darim after a protoss goes FFE into stargate, or in certain low econ ZvP where resources are tight and colossi tech is too risky to tech to, since hydras cost less than stalkers. What are you smoking?

On September 16 2011 04:32 tkRage wrote:

Because they have the most cost efficient units. Because they don't have to react to game situations aside from defending attacks. Because their mechanics don't require thoughts. They go through the motions of their mechanics and that typically wins their games. Show me a Terran player making a conscious, spur of the moment making a decision.

Protoss is the same way. there's no choices made. You choose a build, you execute it, and you play standard shit from there and you have a solid win rate. The only way to lose is to make drastic mistakes.

Zerg makes conscious, game breaking decisions from minute 1 of every single game. Every drone you make is a risk. Show me protoss or terran risks? Every expo you take is a possible loss to a mechanical, robotic timing.

Zerg has zero cost or supply effective units; lings are the closest, but with the massive amounts of splash damage (tanks hellions colossus ht) available at every stage of the game, lings become cost inefficient in any sort of straight up engagement. Roaches are supply inefficient and maxed roach-based army compositions are 100% inefficient. Hydras are a joke. Ultras are a joke. Broodlords are not time/cost efficient. Infestors are the closest thing we have to late game cost efficiency and that's being cut into oblivion here.

On September 16 2011 04:38 Arisen wrote:


Come on, now. You're on the same team as KewiKaki, and I see him roll superb infestor usage a lot with good late game management. You know they're perfectly deal-able. Sure, it makes mid game a bit hard, but no harder than a zerg dealing with protoss midgame, right? I mean, you have to admit there comes a point in the game where zerg can no longer win when you have your HT colossus blink stalker and maybe mothership army up (and god help the zerg if you made like 8 phoenix to lift his infestors), right (or at least hard as shit to the point where pretty much no one can figure it out)? So shouldn't it in turn be REALLY hard to get to that "I can no longer lose state?"

I know it's horrible design, game wise, and by itself infestor would be way too powerful, but zerg units are pretty bad compared to protoss units late game, so you need the infestor to be that strong. I really don't like the logic that you need to kill a protoss before he gets this super army state the game is in, but it is. And now it's just easier to get there. Do you think that's a good thing for the balance of the game?

On September 16 2011 04:40 tkRage wrote:

So when protoss does an all in
Hydras can be used
If the protoss doesn't scout their base
or tech switch appropriately
and then zerg can all in
and it might work

On September 16 2011 04:41 dani` wrote:

Zerg bias at its finest. You should switch races for quite a while to learn more about the game. Clearly your idea of the current state of balance is completely off and for some reason you think Zerg is 10x harder/weaker than other races which is hilarious. I think you were claiming to be 'high masters Zerg', which means you should be top 10 GM with either Protoss or Terran within a month if what you said about Zerg is true. Please prove it ^_^

On September 16 2011 04:42 Heavenly wrote:


What are you even talking about?

On September 16 2011 04:40 bwally wrote:
A more reasonable thing for tkRage to say is that when playing as Zerg you are more susceptible to losing to players of lower skill, at least non-pro and possibly pro.

On September 16 2011 04:42 tkRage wrote:

I've played all three races. Thanks

On September 16 2011 04:42 immortlone wrote:


did you actually call lings cost-efficient?

On September 16 2011 04:32 tkRage wrote:

Because they have the most cost efficient units. Because they don't have to react to game situations aside from defending attacks. Because their mechanics don't require thoughts. They go through the motions of their mechanics and that typically wins their games. Show me a Terran player making a conscious, spur of the moment making a decision.

Protoss is the same way. there's no choices made. You choose a build, you execute it, and you play standard shit from there and you have a solid win rate. The only way to lose is to make drastic mistakes.

Zerg makes conscious, game breaking decisions from minute 1 of every single game. Every drone you make is a risk. Show me protoss or terran risks? Every expo you take is a possible loss to a mechanical, robotic timing.

Zerg has zero cost or supply effective units; lings are the closest, but with the massive amounts of splash damage (tanks hellions colossus ht) available at every stage of the game, lings become cost inefficient in any sort of straight up engagement. Roaches are supply inefficient and maxed roach-based army compositions are 100% inefficient. Hydras are a joke. Ultras are a joke. Broodlords are not time/cost efficient. Infestors are the closest thing we have to late game cost efficiency and that's being cut into oblivion here.

On September 16 2011 04:43 dani` wrote:

That's not enough of an answer. Did you make it significantly higher up the ladder with Terran or Protoss? Again, a high master Zerg should make it top-10 GM if we assume your thoughts about balance are true. Did you?

On September 16 2011 04:44 tkRage wrote:

You can assume all you want but it only makes you look like an idiot

On September 16 2011 04:43 tkRage wrote:

protoss does double stargate all in
zerg can counter with a hydra nydus all in
if the protoss doesn't remove nyduses fast enough
and hasn't switched to colossus.

I really don't see how this proves hydras are a cost effective, solid unit

On September 16 2011 04:44 xbankx wrote:


I just assume you are trolling here.

Infestors are the best unit in the game by far. Roaches are very cost effective but supply inefficent. Zerg are not suppposed to be cost effective thats why they can take more bases easier. Thier units are generally more mobile and creep is pretty good I heard.

you really don't play toss at a high level. Every single FF you cast is like a challenge. Miss 1 ff and sometimes you lose. Go the wrong tech path and its gg? Every moment you wonder if its safe to move out. One msitake and your opponent catches you in middle of map? Your army dies and there is no coming back. Toss is litterally an ALL-in race everytime it moves its army out in the center because core units are so expensive and we are so resource limtied.

Terran? How should I siege my tanks. When Should I siege my tanks? If I siege them too early and leapfrog, zerg can mass enough and take out push and win game from there. If I siege too slow, baneling gets to marine and gg. Every micro decesion is important. How should I move out with my army? If i move out am I rdy for the muta counterattack? What if he jsut circumvents my army and sacs into my base? Is there baneling land mines? WHere are his infestors because guess what? 1 fungal=20 death marines(due to chain fungal).