|
Please DISCUSS the changes and the impact they will have on gameplay.
Straight up whining and bitching will get you a ban, no exceptions. |
On February 13 2012 02:07 RedMosquito wrote: If you look at win% vs elapsed game time, the longer the game goes terran's win rate plummets against zerg.
This was explained many, many times in the last 150 pages.
It's hard for a Z to break a T. A Z may have won the game at 10 mins, but takes another 10 mins to clean up. T on the other hand tend to be able to clean up a T very quickly after they take a massive lead. This leads to skewed stats.
That said, the Snipe change is too big imo.
|
On February 13 2012 01:57 mlspmatt wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 01:55 Torra wrote:On February 13 2012 01:43 stormchaser wrote: This is such a good patch, terrans have the strongest lategame armies in the current metagame (pros have been quoted saying this recently as well) so a big change like the snipe nerf was much needed. The phoenix stuff should be interesting. If u actually had been following the current metagame, you would know that the strongest race in general is protoss (both terran and zerg players are saying this in GSL). And the race with the worst late game is terran. Pros have been saying this for quite a while now, so get ur facts straight. I think he's just trolling. U never know with these people...^^
|
4713 Posts
On February 13 2012 01:29 Moochlol wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 00:34 TheDwf wrote:High Master Terran on Europe here, sometimes playing GMs. Since I'm usually only a spectator for the PvZ match-up, I will not talk about the Phoenix change. MULEs now harvest the same amount of minerals on both high yield minerals and normal minerals.This change is somewhat ok, though gold and MULE-haters should remember that Terran players gain little “more” by taking their fourth and fifth bases, unlike Zergs and Protosses who have then access to their precious 8/10 gases to build gas-heavy powerful units en masse. Since Terran do not benefit as much as the other races from 8/10 gases compared to 6 gases, is it that imbalanced that they're rewarded with a temporary income boost in the ressource that matters the most for them, i.e. minerals? People should remember that faster mining also means the base will be mined out earlier than normal, which means Terrans will have to (over)extend again to maintain the same income, something which is not easy to do on some maps. Now, talking about maps—I think this is the main issue with gold bases. Take Antiga for instance; gold bases were removed in recent tournament versions: did it change anything to the fact that, in ZvT, once the Terran player controls the center, the Zerg player is in deep trouble anyway? Snipe damage changed from 45 to 25 +25 PsionicThis is a terrible and very poorly thought change. As long as neither flying Banelings (read: Ravens) nor BattleCruisers are really viable, Terrans will still need some kind of “universal unit” against Zerg tier3. Reasons are known—thanks to the way their race works, Zergs are able to remax on Ultralisks after they've traded their Broodlords, and vice versa. Since Vikings don't do well against Ultralisks, nor Marauders are particularly hot against Broodlords, and with Terran having the slowest production in the game, the Zerg possibility to tech switch in a little more than a minut (55 sec for Ultralisks, 74 for Broodlords) without the Terran being able to know which unit the Zerg chose until he sees eggs spawning (this is of the utmost importance, because it means Terran is forced to wait at least 40 sec before starting his “counter units”) means that Terrans have to be able to rely on units that are good against one option, and at least “ok” against the other option—not to mention that at this point, Zergs should have banked enough larvae to be able to quickly build a Zergling swarm. Thors are somewhat ok against both Broodlords and Ultralisks, but their anti-air low rate of fire simply prevents them from killing Broodlords efficiently, especially with Queens being able to negate many shots in a single Transfuse. Besides, Thors are slow to replenish, and they cost 6 supply whereas Broodlords cost only 4. Macro OCs allow the Terran player to have a bigger army, but since Broodlords are air units while Thors are clumsy and bulky ground units, the more Thors you have the worst they will perform against high Broodlords count (and, once again, let us not forget the Broodlings swarm that comes with Broodlords, which at some point may simply prevent some Thors to reach Broodlords). So, we have the tech switch issue, but we also have the “mass Broodlords with Infests” issue. Unlike Ultralisks, which are melee ground units and cost 6 supply anyway, Broodlords do not become weaker the more you have of them; actually, thanks to the Broodlings mechanic, it's quite the contrary. Terrans need a realistic answer to mass Broodlords/Infestors (of course with Corruptor support if needed) armies that inevitably come with late late game. So Terran bro, wut u got? Marines?By lategame, though Marines are still useful, they cannot be played en masse the same way they are played by midgame since Infestors' Fungal Growths literally stop them dead. Marines would do fine against Broodlords on their own, but unfortunately Infestor support prevents them from ever reaching Broodlords, not to mention the Broodlings swarm that immediately spawns to surround them should they attempt to close the distance with Broodlords. Thors?Talked about them above. Vikings?Possible tech switch problem aside, in the end Vikings are simply not enough against Corruptors/Infestors. Even with the best splitting in the world (humanly speaking, I mean), Vikings inevitably tend to clump up when attacking, which means Fungal Growths will catch at least some of them, and then they will be food for Corruptors / Infested Terrans / more Fungals. Basically, Fungal Growth prevents Vikings to use their strength which is their long range; because speaking of values, it is not hard to see that the Corruptor does better in the toughness department (200 hps vs 125, 2 native armor vs 0). Flying Banelings—I mean, Ravens?So, the Raven—this “amazing unit of the future” which, strangely enough, is seldom seen outside of mirrors. For those who read those forums, you will always see that Raven guy who comes and teaches Terrans that “they bank 3k gas by lategame anyway,” so why not use that amazing HSM thing which will blow up your opponent's army (read: provided he's stupid enough not to micro his units[/strike)? Though you sometimes see Ravens in lategame TvZ play (don't know if Beastyqt still plays them sometimes, but this was one of the few players I saw using them; TLO was using them too), there are obvious and blatant issues which make it very hard to use them on a consistent basis. TimeRemember the part above about Terrans having the slowest production? Typically, when playing Marine/Tanks/Medivacs in midgame, Terrans will enter lategame with one Reactor Starport—maybe with 2 Starports if you have spared resources and scout the Broodlords transition. It means that to build your Raven fleet, you will have to build several Starports with Lab attached, all while holding your line (because the Zerg player will try to break your line with his Broodlords), then research HSM and Corvid Reactor, then build Ravens, then wait 90 sec for them to have enough energy to launch a single HSM. Now compare to Ghosts: they only require a Ghost Academy (40 sec) and Tech Labs on Barracks you already have, and depending on whether or not you have Moebius Reactor they come with 2 or 3 Snipes ready ( i. e. they can be useful as soon as they spawn, not at T+90s). What this means is that you can't really transition right away into Ravens off a standard Marines/Tank/Medivac midgame (even a mech midgame will seldom have more than 2 Starports, but they may have a Lab, so it could be a little bit easier for mech players); as costly and time-consuming as they are, in a standard game they're only viable in split map scenarii (or maybe past 4 bases for mech players who planned for a Raven transition). But then you run into the next issue: HSM rangeHSM range = 6 Fungal Growth range = 9 This simple fact makes it very difficult to use Ravens more than once, and this is why you see some people call them “flying Banelings”. Each time one of your Ravens moves forward to launch a HSM, he is at risk, because he enters the Zerg anti-air zone which is 9 range around the Infestors position. And 200 gas for possibly a single Missile which is not even guaranteed to hit a clump of units (remember: against HSM, Zerg players can still micro/spread their units) is simply too much. So, aside from the infrastructure/time problem, the main, critical issue with Ravens is that they simply lose the caster war. Both Infestors and High Templars are able to outrange Ravens with deadly spells which kills them in some way. And this is a very serious problem, because on every map resources are limited: at some point, you must trade cost-efficiently or you will simply end up losing the split map scenario. BattleCruisers?Corruptors + Fungal Growth (and even Neural Parasite). Enough said. Yes, I did see this very nice Polt vs [don't remember the Zerg, maybe an IM player] ladder game @ Shattered Temple, but he could probably have won with mass SCVs, and anyway Ghosts would have netted him the kill earlier and more efficiently. So… Ghosts.First, we need to dismiss the idea that Ghosts are an auto-win button against lategame Zerg. This is simply false. As proven in the Fin/fOrGG vs Leenock game @ Daybreak in GSL Code S Ro32, you have to carefully manage your Ghost squad, else one bad Fungal Growth goes through and you're in deep trouble. Ghosts have 100 hit points, so they're frail units for their high cost—which is fine given their potential, but I'm merely reminding you that Ghosts are neither immortal nor invincible. They take a lot of micro to use, and the more Broodlords there is, the harder it becomes to manage your Ghost squad. I'm also tired to hear that “Ghosts hard-counter tier3 Zerg”. This is not true. Immortals hard-counter Siege Tanks. The truth is Ghosts are a soft-counter: “Enough Ghosts with enough energy and careful micro are able to deal efficiently with Zerg tier3.” Which is very different from the usual “trololol Ghost auto-win button eznb” that you sometimes read on Live Report threads. As a Terran player, I say to Zerg players who are not convinced by this to play Terran against their own race (offracing against your own race really is a good experience anyway). You will quickly notice how fast your Ghosts fall each time you mismicro them. You will see that it takes a lot of resources and time to bank enough energy to be able to snipe a lot of Broodlords (or Ultralisks) and EMP Infestors. I mean, each time I enter lategame against Zerg, my purpose is to get this Ghost squad, but I can tell you it simply looks much easier when Mvp does it. Watching GSL, you may say “lol Ghost ez,” but then you can try it, even in a Unit test map, and you will see how hard it is to pull off, and how hard you will actually fail in a real game, desperately trying to micro your Ghost in a Broodlings sea while Broodlords relentlessly rain down death on your position. Are Ghosts too efficient against Ultralisks? The thing is, a lot of Zerg players (including progamers) simply have a terrible Ultralisks use, making either too much of them ( i. e. not enough support) or sending them to death in heavily fortified positions and then complaining about them being “horrible” or something. Like Broodlords, Ultralisks need support (Banelings and/or Infestors, and most importantly Zerglings) to do their job—but anyway, in the end, you likely won't win a split map scenario (and I'm talking about real split map, not 4/5 bases vs 3/4) against Terran with only Ultralisks, simply because, well, all melee units can be defended quite easily using chokes and mass ranged units behind defences; whether death comes from Snipes or something else is irrelevant at this point, I think you simply have to transition to Broodlords in a split map scenario, just as Protosses simply cannot afford to keep running on pure Blink Stalkers + Colossi against a mass Broodlords/Infestors/Spines split map scenario. I know, Ultralisks are tier3 while Blink Stalkers are not; still, regardless of tiers, there simply is some point beyond which some compositions are no more playable in some scenarii. For Ultralisks, the reason is quite self-explanatory: ranged units (especially air ones) get exponentially better while ground melee units do not (partly due to collision size issues). So basically, when looking at Ghosts vs Ultralisks skirmishes, you have to wonder if using Ultralisks was the right thing to do given the state of the game, i. e. if the Terran had enough time to bank full energy on 20+ Ghosts, it was probably not a good choice anyway to head this way. Ultralisks' effectiveness simply starts decreasing beyond some point. While they're viable at the beginning of the late game, I'm not convinced about their uses in split map scenarii in which both players are allowed to bank mass resources. Killing Infestors with 2 Snipes, down to 3, is basically irrelevant since Infestors will safely stand behind Broodlords if you can no longer kill them as fast and efficiently as now. I mean, even with the current Snipe, facing 15+ Broodlords with Infestor (and Overseers!) support is still a challenge even for the best players in the world—so how are Terrans supposed to deal with this if this silly change goes through? As stated above, even tech switch problems aside, Vikings, Thors and Ravens all have obvious problems. Sniping is a bit like a race against the clock anyway, since the longer your Ghosts take to kill Broodlords, the more Broodlords, Broodlings and your own Siege Tanks hurt them, so going up to 10 hits from 6 is simply stupid. Once again, even with the current Snipe, a lot of Terrans have difficulties in late game, because as stated above managing your Ghost squad is not easy at all—even pros fail it sometimes, so how are people with only two arms supposed to deal with this? And for people who will answer “don't let this happen,” do you realize how stupid it would be if one race had close to no chance by late game against some armies? All races should have fair chances to win by lategame, even against “the ultimate army”. This Snipe change simply means that Zergs will now be able to turtle into 20+ Broodlords with Corruptors/Infestors support, and then laugh at you because you won't have any efficient tool to deal with this. Well now that I almost threw up in my mouth, the after taste of those tears is delicious. Can't tell you how many games I have seen Terran just demolish ZT3, this change is for the highest levels of play, so the pros can play in a more balanced environment, who gives a shit about master league and the ramifications, if you find it to hard to use ghosts that's your problem. Nothing is stopping you from making vikings and upgrading them, nothing is stopping you from still making ghosts, blizzard wants you to save some energy on your ghosts instead of just shitting out snipes like you don't even give a fuck. I also would not be surprised if this isn't a sub reaction to the mouse scroll bind. All in all I think these are great changes. Here is a tip, scout, plan ahead, make more ghosts and buy more time, the only thing that owns Ghosts is the Infestor, so research cloak, snipe the Overseers, proceed to snipe x2/EMP the Infestors while your vikings and Thors demolish the Corrupters, and lets not forget about 3/3 marines who do a damn good job on hold position vs Corrupters flying in to deep. Just because Ghost isn't auto win (If you can use them) don't act like TVZ end game is totally broken. This is a standard case of one strategy being way easier to execute for X race, yet insanely difficult for Y race ala 1/1/1 in TVP. WOL is what it is, damage in this game was way to high and still is. Anything that allows for battles to last longer is great for everyone involved.
Really? I've only seen 3-4 games where terran destroyed zerg T3, and the majority of those games where by MVP. Just because one person can consistently do it and make it look easy doesn't mean it is completely easy. You seem to be jumping on the bandwagon if thinking mass Ghost is auto-win, check out Leenock vs Fin GSL RO 32 of this season. You make a grave assumption in thinking mass Ghost is easier to execute.
I also love how you completely disregard the entirety of his other arguments with crappy arguments. You automatically assume all zergs are idiots and leave Overseers and Infestors out in front of the army, in the open, so they can easily be sniped and EMPed. Its also cute how you assume Thors and Vikings are the answer to mass corrupter and brood lord.
Firstly as the guy you just quoted pointed out, despite your best efforts, you can't continue to split vikings, a slow unit, when you have the rest of the battle to manage, and despite your best efforts vikings are going to be fungaled and than probably picked off quickly, remember not all zergs are idiots who can't spread and hide infestors.
Secondly, its cute how you mention thors, who do shit damage vs corrupters thanks to the armor. Thors fire 4 volleys of 6 damage each, -2 damage because of the armor and you get a measly 16 damage volley. Assuming equal upgrades it literally takes 13 shots to kill, not to mention the 3 second reload time on the Thor weapons. Practically it takes a long time for Thors to kill corrupters, but enough brood lords and broodlings can easily kill corrupted thors.
I also like how you disregard and completely avoid the rest of his arguments, like how crappy terran T3 is, slow, expensive, susceptible to both feedbacks and neural. How crappy ravens are. How slow terran re-maxing and production is. Or how murderous zerg tech switches are.
Unless you play both Zerg and Terran at a high level, you have no place on commenting how mass ghost is auto-win. When even the terran pros are saying this nerf is too much, and Morrow (who plays both races), even says he doesn't see how he can lose late game vs T.
|
On February 13 2012 01:55 Torra wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 01:43 stormchaser wrote: This is such a good patch, terrans have the strongest lategame armies in the current metagame (pros have been quoted saying this recently as well) so a big change like the snipe nerf was much needed. The phoenix stuff should be interesting. If u actually had been following the current metagame, you would know that the strongest race in general is protoss (both terran and zerg players are saying this in GSL). And the race with the worst late game is terran. Pros have been saying this for quite a while now, so get ur facts straight.
No, they haven't. In fact many BW pros have mentioned they will not consider changing to SC2 until it stops being "Terrancraft."
|
On February 13 2012 02:11 Seam wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 02:07 RedMosquito wrote: If you look at win% vs elapsed game time, the longer the game goes terran's win rate plummets against zerg. This was explained many, many times in the last 150 pages. It's hard for a Z to break a T. A Z may have won the game at 10 mins, but takes another 10 mins to clean up. T on the other hand tend to be able to clean up a T very quickly after they take a massive lead. This leads to skewed stats. That said, the Snipe change is too big imo. The stats are one thing. But if u follow the current pro scene, you would know that terran is pretty clearly the weakest race in lategame, mainly due to their lack of good T3 units for the lategame.
|
On February 13 2012 02:17 lowercase wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 01:55 Torra wrote:On February 13 2012 01:43 stormchaser wrote: This is such a good patch, terrans have the strongest lategame armies in the current metagame (pros have been quoted saying this recently as well) so a big change like the snipe nerf was much needed. The phoenix stuff should be interesting. If u actually had been following the current metagame, you would know that the strongest race in general is protoss (both terran and zerg players are saying this in GSL). And the race with the worst late game is terran. Pros have been saying this for quite a while now, so get ur facts straight. No, they haven't. In fact many BW pros have mentioned they will not consider changing to SC2 until it stops being "Terrancraft." Get over it dude, we're talking about the CURRENT state of the game. Not several months ago.
|
On February 13 2012 01:29 Garmer wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 01:25 tztztz wrote:does this mean we wont need the tempest anymore and can keep the carrier? data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c81e3/c81e334f952fa6a3b77a0f55297a8c05972c04b5" alt="" no this mean thaat HOST will be released in 2013, so to make the wait less suffering they have gifted this upgrade to us
Yes but now Tempest is overkill, such a usless unit.
|
On February 13 2012 00:44 mlspmatt wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2012 23:53 PureBalls wrote:On February 12 2012 17:40 mlspmatt wrote:On February 12 2012 16:56 Sandermatt wrote:On February 12 2012 15:36 mlspmatt wrote: I occasionally play Toss and Zerg, and I find their macro much more forgiving. If you miss a macro round as Terran, it's gone, you missed it. With Zerg you just spend more larva, with Toss you warp stuff in then chrono and do it again. I wouldn't say terran macro is harder, just less forgiving.
And I'm gonna miss the ghost. I don't think terrans are going to make them much in TvZ if this nurf happens. They're so expensive, and need the two upgrades, and with their output cut in half, investing those resources in Vikings/air upgrades or more Rax might be a better investment.
It's terrible for the game and as a fan. I wanna see more ghosts, not less ghosts.
About your comment on forgiving macro: If you miss it with toss and chrono, you miss whatever else you would have chronoed if you didn't miss the cycle. If you miss an inject as zerg it's gone as well. Terrans can que up the second cycle before the first cycle finishes (you shouldn't que up too much, but still you do not have to wait until the last unit is produced). Neither injects nor warpgate cycles can be qued up. I agree that terrans need a lot of micro in many situations, but their macro surely isn't less forgiving than the one of zergs and protosses. About the changes: I like the mule change. The ghost change seems a little bit extreme. In TvZ they might remain somewhat useful for nukes and emps for infestors, but in uch smaller numbers. In TvT they most likely vanish completly (altough they were already rare). In TvP the change does little, You can no longer snipe zealots but otherwise. I think the range upgrade will actually help protoss, even on the fleet beacon, as protosses build motherships in PvZ anyway. Your argument is silly. If you que units, your essentially miss managing your macro, which would be similar to having to use chrono inefeciently or missing injects. It's just bad macro. You're assuming there's no cost to Terran queing units when there clearly is. Assuming i don't macro perfectly, which I do not, my biggest concern when I mess up is getting units on the field so I don't die. Having two rounds of units qued in my baracks isn't going to do me any good when my opponent shows up to kill me. I'm gonna die. If I mess up with Zerg, I have much more flexibility in how I spend my larva, or I can have a macro hatch, in any case I find I can get units on the field, quicker, again so i do not die. Protoss is in between the two. Not as flexable as Zerg but still gives me a way to get units on the field faster with chronoboost of my gates. If my opponent is coming to kill me i don't give a shit if i'm not using my chrono as effecientley as possible, I need units, and I need them NOW. Chrono allows me to do that. Terran has no way to get units on the field faster if I'm going to die. And again, I can have my units que'd 4 deep but that aint gonna do me any good when my oponent is on my doorstep. I'll take the chronoboost and queen injections to Terrans queing any day. But that's just my opinion. Then you are doing it wrong. What you should be doing as terran, is queing BEFORE the battle, so that you have APM to spare on your micro. Thats a luxury neither toss nor zerg have. As toss, if your gates are ready, you have to make units in midst of a battle, and therefore you lose APM for microing units. If you micro and dont make units, you lose those 5-15 sec on every warp gate, and you cant get it back. Same with zerg. Your right. Toss and Zerg can't que. Toss can just chronoboost their gates and warp them anywhere they want, I like that feature, and Zerg can just make a crap ton of whatever they want and remax instantley, thats a nice feature too. And your telling me that compared to those two abilities queing units is better? OK. No, the argument was "what macro mechanic is more unfogiving ad harder". And obviously queing is easier than larva inject or warpin, and more forgiving.
|
I am a zerg player and I can add one more thing about Brood Lords. Each time I go BL I just hope my Greater Spire is not gonna by sniped by a 4 marauders or 8 marines drop - before it becomes greater, while morfing, or even after (100 + 100 sec.).
|
On February 13 2012 02:19 Torra wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 02:17 lowercase wrote:On February 13 2012 01:55 Torra wrote:On February 13 2012 01:43 stormchaser wrote: This is such a good patch, terrans have the strongest lategame armies in the current metagame (pros have been quoted saying this recently as well) so a big change like the snipe nerf was much needed. The phoenix stuff should be interesting. If u actually had been following the current metagame, you would know that the strongest race in general is protoss (both terran and zerg players are saying this in GSL). And the race with the worst late game is terran. Pros have been saying this for quite a while now, so get ur facts straight. No, they haven't. In fact many BW pros have mentioned they will not consider changing to SC2 until it stops being "Terrancraft." Get over it dude, we're talking about the CURRENT state of the game. Not several months ago.
It's more balanced now for sure, thanks to the EMP radius nerf, Protoss upgrades buff, and a few other things. Terran still has the highest win percentages across almost all maps though, with the only exception being the new and wonderful map, ESV_Cloudkingdom. You can see the stats here.
I think we'll start to see T drop below 50% on some maps now, which, finally, implies balance.
|
On February 13 2012 02:17 lowercase wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 01:55 Torra wrote:On February 13 2012 01:43 stormchaser wrote: This is such a good patch, terrans have the strongest lategame armies in the current metagame (pros have been quoted saying this recently as well) so a big change like the snipe nerf was much needed. The phoenix stuff should be interesting. If u actually had been following the current metagame, you would know that the strongest race in general is protoss (both terran and zerg players are saying this in GSL). And the race with the worst late game is terran. Pros have been saying this for quite a while now, so get ur facts straight. No, they haven't. In fact many BW pros have mentioned they will not consider changing to SC2 until it stops being "Terrancraft." Who? Where are the quotes. How many have said this? When was it said?
I think it's likely this was said months and months ago, if it was said at all. Things that happened last summer aren't necessarily applicable to what's happening today.
And regarding terran win rates, In a perfectley balanced game terran will have better than 50% win rates at GSL. There are a crap ton of good terrans in Korea, more than play Zerg and Protoss. Koreans tend to lean toward playing Terran, whether it's the BW effect, or the micro style that Koreans like, or the fact Terran was the best race in the beta, all of that contributes to the terran leaning.
|
On February 13 2012 02:14 Destructicon wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 01:29 Moochlol wrote:On February 13 2012 00:34 TheDwf wrote:High Master Terran on Europe here, sometimes playing GMs. Since I'm usually only a spectator for the PvZ match-up, I will not talk about the Phoenix change. MULEs now harvest the same amount of minerals on both high yield minerals and normal minerals.This change is somewhat ok, though gold and MULE-haters should remember that Terran players gain little “more” by taking their fourth and fifth bases, unlike Zergs and Protosses who have then access to their precious 8/10 gases to build gas-heavy powerful units en masse. Since Terran do not benefit as much as the other races from 8/10 gases compared to 6 gases, is it that imbalanced that they're rewarded with a temporary income boost in the ressource that matters the most for them, i.e. minerals? People should remember that faster mining also means the base will be mined out earlier than normal, which means Terrans will have to (over)extend again to maintain the same income, something which is not easy to do on some maps. Now, talking about maps—I think this is the main issue with gold bases. Take Antiga for instance; gold bases were removed in recent tournament versions: did it change anything to the fact that, in ZvT, once the Terran player controls the center, the Zerg player is in deep trouble anyway? Snipe damage changed from 45 to 25 +25 PsionicThis is a terrible and very poorly thought change. As long as neither flying Banelings (read: Ravens) nor BattleCruisers are really viable, Terrans will still need some kind of “universal unit” against Zerg tier3. Reasons are known—thanks to the way their race works, Zergs are able to remax on Ultralisks after they've traded their Broodlords, and vice versa. Since Vikings don't do well against Ultralisks, nor Marauders are particularly hot against Broodlords, and with Terran having the slowest production in the game, the Zerg possibility to tech switch in a little more than a minut (55 sec for Ultralisks, 74 for Broodlords) without the Terran being able to know which unit the Zerg chose until he sees eggs spawning (this is of the utmost importance, because it means Terran is forced to wait at least 40 sec before starting his “counter units”) means that Terrans have to be able to rely on units that are good against one option, and at least “ok” against the other option—not to mention that at this point, Zergs should have banked enough larvae to be able to quickly build a Zergling swarm. Thors are somewhat ok against both Broodlords and Ultralisks, but their anti-air low rate of fire simply prevents them from killing Broodlords efficiently, especially with Queens being able to negate many shots in a single Transfuse. Besides, Thors are slow to replenish, and they cost 6 supply whereas Broodlords cost only 4. Macro OCs allow the Terran player to have a bigger army, but since Broodlords are air units while Thors are clumsy and bulky ground units, the more Thors you have the worst they will perform against high Broodlords count (and, once again, let us not forget the Broodlings swarm that comes with Broodlords, which at some point may simply prevent some Thors to reach Broodlords). So, we have the tech switch issue, but we also have the “mass Broodlords with Infests” issue. Unlike Ultralisks, which are melee ground units and cost 6 supply anyway, Broodlords do not become weaker the more you have of them; actually, thanks to the Broodlings mechanic, it's quite the contrary. Terrans need a realistic answer to mass Broodlords/Infestors (of course with Corruptor support if needed) armies that inevitably come with late late game. So Terran bro, wut u got? Marines?By lategame, though Marines are still useful, they cannot be played en masse the same way they are played by midgame since Infestors' Fungal Growths literally stop them dead. Marines would do fine against Broodlords on their own, but unfortunately Infestor support prevents them from ever reaching Broodlords, not to mention the Broodlings swarm that immediately spawns to surround them should they attempt to close the distance with Broodlords. Thors?Talked about them above. Vikings?Possible tech switch problem aside, in the end Vikings are simply not enough against Corruptors/Infestors. Even with the best splitting in the world (humanly speaking, I mean), Vikings inevitably tend to clump up when attacking, which means Fungal Growths will catch at least some of them, and then they will be food for Corruptors / Infested Terrans / more Fungals. Basically, Fungal Growth prevents Vikings to use their strength which is their long range; because speaking of values, it is not hard to see that the Corruptor does better in the toughness department (200 hps vs 125, 2 native armor vs 0). Flying Banelings—I mean, Ravens?So, the Raven—this “amazing unit of the future” which, strangely enough, is seldom seen outside of mirrors. For those who read those forums, you will always see that Raven guy who comes and teaches Terrans that “they bank 3k gas by lategame anyway,” so why not use that amazing HSM thing which will blow up your opponent's army (read: provided he's stupid enough not to micro his units[/strike)? Though you sometimes see Ravens in lategame TvZ play (don't know if Beastyqt still plays them sometimes, but this was one of the few players I saw using them; TLO was using them too), there are obvious and blatant issues which make it very hard to use them on a consistent basis. TimeRemember the part above about Terrans having the slowest production? Typically, when playing Marine/Tanks/Medivacs in midgame, Terrans will enter lategame with one Reactor Starport—maybe with 2 Starports if you have spared resources and scout the Broodlords transition. It means that to build your Raven fleet, you will have to build several Starports with Lab attached, all while holding your line (because the Zerg player will try to break your line with his Broodlords), then research HSM and Corvid Reactor, then build Ravens, then wait 90 sec for them to have enough energy to launch a single HSM. Now compare to Ghosts: they only require a Ghost Academy (40 sec) and Tech Labs on Barracks you already have, and depending on whether or not you have Moebius Reactor they come with 2 or 3 Snipes ready ( i. e. they can be useful as soon as they spawn, not at T+90s). What this means is that you can't really transition right away into Ravens off a standard Marines/Tank/Medivac midgame (even a mech midgame will seldom have more than 2 Starports, but they may have a Lab, so it could be a little bit easier for mech players); as costly and time-consuming as they are, in a standard game they're only viable in split map scenarii (or maybe past 4 bases for mech players who planned for a Raven transition). But then you run into the next issue: HSM rangeHSM range = 6 Fungal Growth range = 9 This simple fact makes it very difficult to use Ravens more than once, and this is why you see some people call them “flying Banelings”. Each time one of your Ravens moves forward to launch a HSM, he is at risk, because he enters the Zerg anti-air zone which is 9 range around the Infestors position. And 200 gas for possibly a single Missile which is not even guaranteed to hit a clump of units (remember: against HSM, Zerg players can still micro/spread their units) is simply too much. So, aside from the infrastructure/time problem, the main, critical issue with Ravens is that they simply lose the caster war. Both Infestors and High Templars are able to outrange Ravens with deadly spells which kills them in some way. And this is a very serious problem, because on every map resources are limited: at some point, you must trade cost-efficiently or you will simply end up losing the split map scenario. BattleCruisers?Corruptors + Fungal Growth (and even Neural Parasite). Enough said. Yes, I did see this very nice Polt vs [don't remember the Zerg, maybe an IM player] ladder game @ Shattered Temple, but he could probably have won with mass SCVs, and anyway Ghosts would have netted him the kill earlier and more efficiently. So… Ghosts.First, we need to dismiss the idea that Ghosts are an auto-win button against lategame Zerg. This is simply false. As proven in the Fin/fOrGG vs Leenock game @ Daybreak in GSL Code S Ro32, you have to carefully manage your Ghost squad, else one bad Fungal Growth goes through and you're in deep trouble. Ghosts have 100 hit points, so they're frail units for their high cost—which is fine given their potential, but I'm merely reminding you that Ghosts are neither immortal nor invincible. They take a lot of micro to use, and the more Broodlords there is, the harder it becomes to manage your Ghost squad. I'm also tired to hear that “Ghosts hard-counter tier3 Zerg”. This is not true. Immortals hard-counter Siege Tanks. The truth is Ghosts are a soft-counter: “Enough Ghosts with enough energy and careful micro are able to deal efficiently with Zerg tier3.” Which is very different from the usual “trololol Ghost auto-win button eznb” that you sometimes read on Live Report threads. As a Terran player, I say to Zerg players who are not convinced by this to play Terran against their own race (offracing against your own race really is a good experience anyway). You will quickly notice how fast your Ghosts fall each time you mismicro them. You will see that it takes a lot of resources and time to bank enough energy to be able to snipe a lot of Broodlords (or Ultralisks) and EMP Infestors. I mean, each time I enter lategame against Zerg, my purpose is to get this Ghost squad, but I can tell you it simply looks much easier when Mvp does it. Watching GSL, you may say “lol Ghost ez,” but then you can try it, even in a Unit test map, and you will see how hard it is to pull off, and how hard you will actually fail in a real game, desperately trying to micro your Ghost in a Broodlings sea while Broodlords relentlessly rain down death on your position. Are Ghosts too efficient against Ultralisks? The thing is, a lot of Zerg players (including progamers) simply have a terrible Ultralisks use, making either too much of them ( i. e. not enough support) or sending them to death in heavily fortified positions and then complaining about them being “horrible” or something. Like Broodlords, Ultralisks need support (Banelings and/or Infestors, and most importantly Zerglings) to do their job—but anyway, in the end, you likely won't win a split map scenario (and I'm talking about real split map, not 4/5 bases vs 3/4) against Terran with only Ultralisks, simply because, well, all melee units can be defended quite easily using chokes and mass ranged units behind defences; whether death comes from Snipes or something else is irrelevant at this point, I think you simply have to transition to Broodlords in a split map scenario, just as Protosses simply cannot afford to keep running on pure Blink Stalkers + Colossi against a mass Broodlords/Infestors/Spines split map scenario. I know, Ultralisks are tier3 while Blink Stalkers are not; still, regardless of tiers, there simply is some point beyond which some compositions are no more playable in some scenarii. For Ultralisks, the reason is quite self-explanatory: ranged units (especially air ones) get exponentially better while ground melee units do not (partly due to collision size issues). So basically, when looking at Ghosts vs Ultralisks skirmishes, you have to wonder if using Ultralisks was the right thing to do given the state of the game, i. e. if the Terran had enough time to bank full energy on 20+ Ghosts, it was probably not a good choice anyway to head this way. Ultralisks' effectiveness simply starts decreasing beyond some point. While they're viable at the beginning of the late game, I'm not convinced about their uses in split map scenarii in which both players are allowed to bank mass resources. Killing Infestors with 2 Snipes, down to 3, is basically irrelevant since Infestors will safely stand behind Broodlords if you can no longer kill them as fast and efficiently as now. I mean, even with the current Snipe, facing 15+ Broodlords with Infestor (and Overseers!) support is still a challenge even for the best players in the world—so how are Terrans supposed to deal with this if this silly change goes through? As stated above, even tech switch problems aside, Vikings, Thors and Ravens all have obvious problems. Sniping is a bit like a race against the clock anyway, since the longer your Ghosts take to kill Broodlords, the more Broodlords, Broodlings and your own Siege Tanks hurt them, so going up to 10 hits from 6 is simply stupid. Once again, even with the current Snipe, a lot of Terrans have difficulties in late game, because as stated above managing your Ghost squad is not easy at all—even pros fail it sometimes, so how are people with only two arms supposed to deal with this? And for people who will answer “don't let this happen,” do you realize how stupid it would be if one race had close to no chance by late game against some armies? All races should have fair chances to win by lategame, even against “the ultimate army”. This Snipe change simply means that Zergs will now be able to turtle into 20+ Broodlords with Corruptors/Infestors support, and then laugh at you because you won't have any efficient tool to deal with this. Well now that I almost threw up in my mouth, the after taste of those tears is delicious. Can't tell you how many games I have seen Terran just demolish ZT3, this change is for the highest levels of play, so the pros can play in a more balanced environment, who gives a shit about master league and the ramifications, if you find it to hard to use ghosts that's your problem. Nothing is stopping you from making vikings and upgrading them, nothing is stopping you from still making ghosts, blizzard wants you to save some energy on your ghosts instead of just shitting out snipes like you don't even give a fuck. I also would not be surprised if this isn't a sub reaction to the mouse scroll bind. All in all I think these are great changes. Here is a tip, scout, plan ahead, make more ghosts and buy more time, the only thing that owns Ghosts is the Infestor, so research cloak, snipe the Overseers, proceed to snipe x2/EMP the Infestors while your vikings and Thors demolish the Corrupters, and lets not forget about 3/3 marines who do a damn good job on hold position vs Corrupters flying in to deep. Just because Ghost isn't auto win (If you can use them) don't act like TVZ end game is totally broken. This is a standard case of one strategy being way easier to execute for X race, yet insanely difficult for Y race ala 1/1/1 in TVP. WOL is what it is, damage in this game was way to high and still is. Anything that allows for battles to last longer is great for everyone involved. Really? I've only seen 3-4 games where terran destroyed zerg T3, and the majority of those games where by MVP. Just because one person can consistently do it and make it look easy doesn't mean it is completely easy. You seem to be jumping on the bandwagon if thinking mass Ghost is auto-win, check out Leenock vs Fin GSL RO 32 of this season.
Exactly. Most of the time MVP makes Terran look OP as shit anyway, ghost or not. I've seen Thorzain win some games with mass ghosts, but Thorzain is really slow to finish a game anyway so he could probably have closed it much earlier without ghosts. That was against foreigners too. Zergs keep coming and saying they keep seeing countless TvZ ghosts facerolls, but I just can't see it, sorry.
|
On February 13 2012 01:18 mlspmatt wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 01:08 PureBalls wrote:On February 12 2012 21:25 xongnox wrote:On February 12 2012 21:19 PureBalls wrote:On February 12 2012 09:22 Naphal wrote:
so "try carriers" or "try doublenydus" please. There are zerg and toss players, who are experimenting with both. Whitera and HongUn come to mind (carriers). There are no terrans experimenting with BCs and ravens. lol We experimented them since beta, dude. For a raven exemple you can see Brat_Ok vs Nestea on shakuras @ blizzcon. Beastyqt or even Kas incorporate them more and more in their late game vs Z/T. For BC.... TLO, Beastyqt, all T in TvT, used to incorporate them. They are just overall bad vs Z, and we simply need too much costly infrastructure (fusion core, 4 starport, some more armory and upgrades) to do this non-powerful switch. Btw zerglings/bling counter BC. Did you watch Whitera and HongUn play carriers? Why dont zegling/bling counter carriers? And no, I havent seen BCs in TvZ even once after beta. I'm aware of the TvT situation, but thats a MU, where balance is a non issue. Compared to the late game standard play PvZ (almost every game with BL/Inf you will see toss going for Mamaship), ravens are non existent. Try, fail, try some more! This is the same argument people used to make about Mech in TvP. "No it really is good, you terrans just don't want to try it" says the Zerg player who's never played terran. Ravens suck as do Battlecruisers. The reason Terrans don't use them is not because they havn't tried, but because when they did they lost so badly, they realized how stupid that idea was and abandoned it for common sense. No, you are wrong.
I can tell you this: when after the infestor DPS buff, first BL/Inf build popped up, most of us toss were bitching how imba it was. Sure, the fungal DPS was nerfed somewhat, but on its own, it wouldnt have done anything against the very strong BL/Inf composition. So, the people who were saying, that toss need to "figure it out" were actually right. And toss did figure it out. The solution was found in the least expected place. The mothership.
If someone at that time would have told me, that mothership + archon would one day be toss' standard late game play against zerg, I would have told him, that he's nuts.
And if I recall correctly, many toss have said the same things against air play, you are saying now. "The reason XXX don't use them is not because they havn't tried, but because when they did they lost so badly, they realized how stupid that idea was and abandoned it for common sense."
Think about this.
|
On February 11 2012 02:06 wichenks wrote: As always, we will continue to follow player discussions on our forums as well as fan sites and beyond, and we look forward to your constructive feedback regarding these changes. As with all balance-related changes, we've made these decisions with great care and consideration to ensure a great playing experience for players of all skill levels.
I'm really scared of this 'balancing for the community' approach that Blizzard is taking. Only the absolute top players should be considered when discussing balance IMO, amateurs/people in ladder lose games because other fundamental aspects of their play is lacking, not because of balance.
Don't know how this will affect the current pro scene, but I'm really worried for it if Blizzard keeps focusing their attention on making the game easier for the 'community', stopping innovation and just forcing their idea of how the game should be played.
|
On February 13 2012 02:28 mlspmatt wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 02:17 lowercase wrote:On February 13 2012 01:55 Torra wrote:On February 13 2012 01:43 stormchaser wrote: This is such a good patch, terrans have the strongest lategame armies in the current metagame (pros have been quoted saying this recently as well) so a big change like the snipe nerf was much needed. The phoenix stuff should be interesting. If u actually had been following the current metagame, you would know that the strongest race in general is protoss (both terran and zerg players are saying this in GSL). And the race with the worst late game is terran. Pros have been saying this for quite a while now, so get ur facts straight. No, they haven't. In fact many BW pros have mentioned they will not consider changing to SC2 until it stops being "Terrancraft." Who? Where are the quotes. How many have said this? When was it said? I think it's likely this was said months and months ago, if it was said at all. Things that happened last summer aren't necessarily applicable to what's happening today.
I Google'd it, and frankly, I don't care enough to dig around to find it for you just to make a point. It was a quote by Bisu during a time when Protoss was severely underpowered, so it wasn't very surprising!
|
United States13143 Posts
On February 13 2012 02:35 PureBalls wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 01:18 mlspmatt wrote:On February 13 2012 01:08 PureBalls wrote:On February 12 2012 21:25 xongnox wrote:On February 12 2012 21:19 PureBalls wrote:On February 12 2012 09:22 Naphal wrote:
so "try carriers" or "try doublenydus" please. There are zerg and toss players, who are experimenting with both. Whitera and HongUn come to mind (carriers). There are no terrans experimenting with BCs and ravens. lol We experimented them since beta, dude. For a raven exemple you can see Brat_Ok vs Nestea on shakuras @ blizzcon. Beastyqt or even Kas incorporate them more and more in their late game vs Z/T. For BC.... TLO, Beastyqt, all T in TvT, used to incorporate them. They are just overall bad vs Z, and we simply need too much costly infrastructure (fusion core, 4 starport, some more armory and upgrades) to do this non-powerful switch. Btw zerglings/bling counter BC. Did you watch Whitera and HongUn play carriers? Why dont zegling/bling counter carriers? And no, I havent seen BCs in TvZ even once after beta. I'm aware of the TvT situation, but thats a MU, where balance is a non issue. Compared to the late game standard play PvZ (almost every game with BL/Inf you will see toss going for Mamaship), ravens are non existent. Try, fail, try some more! This is the same argument people used to make about Mech in TvP. "No it really is good, you terrans just don't want to try it" says the Zerg player who's never played terran. Ravens suck as do Battlecruisers. The reason Terrans don't use them is not because they havn't tried, but because when they did they lost so badly, they realized how stupid that idea was and abandoned it for common sense. No, you are wrong. I can tell you this: when after the infestor DPS buff, first BL/Inf build popped up, most of us toss were bitching how imba it was. Sure, the fungal DPS was nerfed somewhat, but on its own, it wouldnt have done anything against the very strong BL/Inf composition. So, the people who were saying, that toss need to "figure it out" were actually right. And toss did figure it out. The solution was found in the least expected place. The mothership. If someone at that time would have told me, that mothership + archon would one day be toss' standard late game play against zerg, I would have told him, that he's nuts. And if I recall correctly, many toss have said the same things against air play, you are saying now. "The reason XXX don't use them is not because they havn't tried, but because when they did they lost so badly, they realized how stupid that idea was and abandoned it for common sense." Think about this. Luckily, when Terrans were whining about it, we did figure it out too. We got ghosts.
Now let's suppose units were invincible for 6 seconds after vortex; would you say, "oh, no big deal, we'll just find something else"?
(by the way, the problem with BC/Raven/Viking is it actually loses to simple pure corruptor, no infestors even needed. When they get added, it turns into a massacre).
|
On February 13 2012 02:35 PureBalls wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 01:18 mlspmatt wrote:On February 13 2012 01:08 PureBalls wrote:On February 12 2012 21:25 xongnox wrote:On February 12 2012 21:19 PureBalls wrote:On February 12 2012 09:22 Naphal wrote:
so "try carriers" or "try doublenydus" please. There are zerg and toss players, who are experimenting with both. Whitera and HongUn come to mind (carriers). There are no terrans experimenting with BCs and ravens. lol We experimented them since beta, dude. For a raven exemple you can see Brat_Ok vs Nestea on shakuras @ blizzcon. Beastyqt or even Kas incorporate them more and more in their late game vs Z/T. For BC.... TLO, Beastyqt, all T in TvT, used to incorporate them. They are just overall bad vs Z, and we simply need too much costly infrastructure (fusion core, 4 starport, some more armory and upgrades) to do this non-powerful switch. Btw zerglings/bling counter BC. Did you watch Whitera and HongUn play carriers? Why dont zegling/bling counter carriers? And no, I havent seen BCs in TvZ even once after beta. I'm aware of the TvT situation, but thats a MU, where balance is a non issue. Compared to the late game standard play PvZ (almost every game with BL/Inf you will see toss going for Mamaship), ravens are non existent. Try, fail, try some more! This is the same argument people used to make about Mech in TvP. "No it really is good, you terrans just don't want to try it" says the Zerg player who's never played terran. Ravens suck as do Battlecruisers. The reason Terrans don't use them is not because they havn't tried, but because when they did they lost so badly, they realized how stupid that idea was and abandoned it for common sense. No, you are wrong. I can tell you this: when after the infestor DPS buff, first BL/Inf build popped up, most of us toss were bitching how imba it was. Sure, the fungal DPS was nerfed somewhat, but on its own, it wouldnt have done anything against the very strong BL/Inf composition. So, the people who were saying, that toss need to "figure it out" were actually right. And toss did figure it out. The solution was found in the least expected place. The mothership. If someone at that time would have told me, that mothership + archon would one day be toss' standard late game play against zerg, I would have told him, that he's nuts. And if I recall correctly, many toss have said the same things against air play, you are saying now. "The reason XXX don't use them is not because they havn't tried, but because when they did they lost so badly, they realized how stupid that idea was and abandoned it for common sense." Think about this. But you're assuming that because that was true for Protoss, it's true for terran. They're not the same races.
And terrans have tried different things. Thorzain inovated the Thor build way back - Blizzard nurfed it. Morrow with mass early reaper vs Zerg - Blizzard nearly removed the unit Team slayers inovated the blue flame hellion play vs. Zerg - Blizzard nurfed it. Terrans finially started using ghosts vs Toss - Blizzrd nurfed it. Now terrans are innovating with snipe in TvZ late game - Blizzard is about to nurf it.
At some point it's not terrans fault for sticking to their basic compositions, Blizzard is saying "STICK WITH YOUR BASIC COMPOSITIONS"
|
On February 13 2012 02:22 PureBalls wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 00:44 mlspmatt wrote:On February 12 2012 23:53 PureBalls wrote:On February 12 2012 17:40 mlspmatt wrote:On February 12 2012 16:56 Sandermatt wrote:On February 12 2012 15:36 mlspmatt wrote: I occasionally play Toss and Zerg, and I find their macro much more forgiving. If you miss a macro round as Terran, it's gone, you missed it. With Zerg you just spend more larva, with Toss you warp stuff in then chrono and do it again. I wouldn't say terran macro is harder, just less forgiving.
And I'm gonna miss the ghost. I don't think terrans are going to make them much in TvZ if this nurf happens. They're so expensive, and need the two upgrades, and with their output cut in half, investing those resources in Vikings/air upgrades or more Rax might be a better investment.
It's terrible for the game and as a fan. I wanna see more ghosts, not less ghosts.
About your comment on forgiving macro: If you miss it with toss and chrono, you miss whatever else you would have chronoed if you didn't miss the cycle. If you miss an inject as zerg it's gone as well. Terrans can que up the second cycle before the first cycle finishes (you shouldn't que up too much, but still you do not have to wait until the last unit is produced). Neither injects nor warpgate cycles can be qued up. I agree that terrans need a lot of micro in many situations, but their macro surely isn't less forgiving than the one of zergs and protosses. About the changes: I like the mule change. The ghost change seems a little bit extreme. In TvZ they might remain somewhat useful for nukes and emps for infestors, but in uch smaller numbers. In TvT they most likely vanish completly (altough they were already rare). In TvP the change does little, You can no longer snipe zealots but otherwise. I think the range upgrade will actually help protoss, even on the fleet beacon, as protosses build motherships in PvZ anyway. Your argument is silly. If you que units, your essentially miss managing your macro, which would be similar to having to use chrono inefeciently or missing injects. It's just bad macro. You're assuming there's no cost to Terran queing units when there clearly is. Assuming i don't macro perfectly, which I do not, my biggest concern when I mess up is getting units on the field so I don't die. Having two rounds of units qued in my baracks isn't going to do me any good when my opponent shows up to kill me. I'm gonna die. If I mess up with Zerg, I have much more flexibility in how I spend my larva, or I can have a macro hatch, in any case I find I can get units on the field, quicker, again so i do not die. Protoss is in between the two. Not as flexable as Zerg but still gives me a way to get units on the field faster with chronoboost of my gates. If my opponent is coming to kill me i don't give a shit if i'm not using my chrono as effecientley as possible, I need units, and I need them NOW. Chrono allows me to do that. Terran has no way to get units on the field faster if I'm going to die. And again, I can have my units que'd 4 deep but that aint gonna do me any good when my oponent is on my doorstep. I'll take the chronoboost and queen injections to Terrans queing any day. But that's just my opinion. Then you are doing it wrong. What you should be doing as terran, is queing BEFORE the battle, so that you have APM to spare on your micro. Thats a luxury neither toss nor zerg have. As toss, if your gates are ready, you have to make units in midst of a battle, and therefore you lose APM for microing units. If you micro and dont make units, you lose those 5-15 sec on every warp gate, and you cant get it back. Same with zerg. Your right. Toss and Zerg can't que. Toss can just chronoboost their gates and warp them anywhere they want, I like that feature, and Zerg can just make a crap ton of whatever they want and remax instantley, thats a nice feature too. And your telling me that compared to those two abilities queing units is better? OK. No, the argument was "what macro mechanic is more unfogiving ad harder". And obviously queing is easier than larva inject or warpin, and more forgiving. queueing is about as good as additional macro hatches. only difference being that macro hatches become a big advantage in the late game, while your 5 unit queue will look nothing but funny.
|
Really wanted to see a change to TvP late game...
|
On February 13 2012 02:35 PureBalls wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 01:18 mlspmatt wrote:On February 13 2012 01:08 PureBalls wrote:On February 12 2012 21:25 xongnox wrote:On February 12 2012 21:19 PureBalls wrote:On February 12 2012 09:22 Naphal wrote:
so "try carriers" or "try doublenydus" please. There are zerg and toss players, who are experimenting with both. Whitera and HongUn come to mind (carriers). There are no terrans experimenting with BCs and ravens. lol We experimented them since beta, dude. For a raven exemple you can see Brat_Ok vs Nestea on shakuras @ blizzcon. Beastyqt or even Kas incorporate them more and more in their late game vs Z/T. For BC.... TLO, Beastyqt, all T in TvT, used to incorporate them. They are just overall bad vs Z, and we simply need too much costly infrastructure (fusion core, 4 starport, some more armory and upgrades) to do this non-powerful switch. Btw zerglings/bling counter BC. Did you watch Whitera and HongUn play carriers? Why dont zegling/bling counter carriers? And no, I havent seen BCs in TvZ even once after beta. I'm aware of the TvT situation, but thats a MU, where balance is a non issue. Compared to the late game standard play PvZ (almost every game with BL/Inf you will see toss going for Mamaship), ravens are non existent. Try, fail, try some more! This is the same argument people used to make about Mech in TvP. "No it really is good, you terrans just don't want to try it" says the Zerg player who's never played terran. Ravens suck as do Battlecruisers. The reason Terrans don't use them is not because they havn't tried, but because when they did they lost so badly, they realized how stupid that idea was and abandoned it for common sense. No, you are wrong. I can tell you this: when after the infestor DPS buff, first BL/Inf build popped up, most of us toss were bitching how imba it was. Sure, the fungal DPS was nerfed somewhat, but on its own, it wouldnt have done anything against the very strong BL/Inf composition. So, the people who were saying, that toss need to "figure it out" were actually right. And toss did figure it out. The solution was found in the least expected place. The mothership. If someone at that time would have told me, that mothership + archon would one day be toss' standard late game play against zerg, I would have told him, that he's nuts. And if I recall correctly, many toss have said the same things against air play, you are saying now. "The reason XXX don't use them is not because they havn't tried, but because when they did they lost so badly, they realized how stupid that idea was and abandoned it for common sense." Think about this.
Nah, the actual solution P found is ending the game before Z can reach its 'ultimate' composition. Motherships almost never happen in high level PvZ.
Which is exactly what this will do to TvZ, why bother with the endgame when your chances of winning are better in the midgame. It's a shame for TvZ, seeing how it currently is by far the best matchup in the game.
|
|
|
|