|
On May 03 2012 15:58 Cyro wrote:
I wonder if blizzard considered the consequences of queen spawn energy increase on back to back larvae injects. As it is now, larvae inject takes 40 seconds, but the energy regeneration to inject again takes 44.444 seconds. If one were to go, lets say, 3 hatch before gas into a bunch of gasses with a roach warren, couldnt they use the extra ~9.9% inject uptime for a significantly early max out? I dont think money is an issue, as stephano usually throws down a macro hatch and a fourth base on his way to maxing. The 11 minute max could be pushed even earlier, and aside from the consequences of early queens and gasless ZvT styles becoming significantly more powerful, it worries me a lot.
Yeah, early max out is the issue I have.
I would want to know how the change affected max army size timings and if this changed things.
|
The reason why they aren't changing PvT yet is pretty obvious, they want to push these changes through next week and the GSL already has a+ Show Spoiler + PvT semifinals around the same time, possibly two.
|
On May 03 2012 15:53 Toastie wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2012 15:48 KiLLJoy216 wrote:On May 03 2012 15:42 Toastie wrote:
I think I speak for most of Terran is I say this:
Numbers and stats are deceiving because Terran goes for all-ins. We go for the all in because we know the lategame is unplayable and requires us to severely outplay our opponents. Because the opponents focus on the macro-game (in which they have the advantage) and cut as many corners as possible to get there as fast as possible (which is the current metagame), all- ins exploit this 'greedyness' and causes Terran to have higher winrates early game. I just want to know how many of those wins are all-in and how many are pressure.
Terrans complain about balance patches because only one side of the problem is tackled at any given time. Terrans versatility and early game are being nerfed consistently. This causes Terran to be even more reliant on all- ins, or die in the lategame.
People don't seem to understand how a beloved 'macro game' is a doomscenario for Terran, and with every balance patch, it just becomes more likely.
I would like to see buffs to thors, tanks, ravens, battlecruisers, lategame banshees, ghosts. Anything to make higher tech Terran armies more powerful. Instead, we keep of protecting P/Z against all- ins by making their scouting easier, give Zerg the best defense against tank pushes (creepspread) for free and in the process kill every single safe expand Terran has by making the primary use of Hellions, denying creepspread and taking map control, away because creep has already been spread.
This is why Terrans are angry. We keep on getting nerfed, and our lategame is terrible weak, so weak, if we get to the collosus/storm phase or the Infestor/Broodlord phase, we have a silly 20% chance (20%!!!!!!!!!!) to win if we are on even grounds with the opponent. I hope you realize why Terran all-ins work so well. It is because Terran is favored early/mid game.... Protoss have realized that Terran are doing mostly all-ins recently, know why they can't stop it regardless? Because Terran is favored early/mid game. If you try and deny this fact you are basically calling Protosses idiots that can't figure out how to hold off Terran all-ins. The reason Protoss can't is because early/mid game units of Terran beat Protoss units at that phase. Reading is hard. I said that a lot of the statistical imbalance is combined with the all- ins, which strike early-game, so there is no evidence to claim that terran early game is incredibly more powerful. Protoss plays greedy, Terran punishes with strong all-ins. If the punishing works, we win, if it doesn't, Protoss get's away with being greedy, wins lategame. honest protosses (maybe get a cannon? you go double forge double upgrades (500/200 cost) and seem to find it normal to get away with it) may make 1/2 cannons with those forges, defend vs drops with stalkers and forcefield the front. Instead of being greedy and claiming imbalance, you could try playing more defensive and see Terran falther.
Rofl. If you see Protoss playing defensively and still try to all-in you deserve to lose. End of story. You see Protoss playing defense take advantage of it. I.E. Double Expand, Upgrades, Tech, etc...
|
The buff to the queen seems interesting. Wonder how it will play out though.
|
On May 03 2012 15:55 Toastie wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2012 15:52 SmileZerg wrote:On May 03 2012 15:47 Toastie wrote:On May 03 2012 15:42 SmileZerg wrote:On May 03 2012 15:34 Toastie wrote:On May 03 2012 15:31 Nourek wrote:On May 03 2012 14:56 Toastie wrote:On May 03 2012 14:49 clever_us wrote:On May 03 2012 14:46 Toastie wrote:
I'm still waiting for my Tank buff. Tanks are pathetic in numbers < 25. That helps lategame.
It would also be nice if our 'air superiority unit' didnt lose 2v1 with Corruptors, whom are easier to produce and have an ability that actually is usefull. LOL how I wish vikings lost to corruptors when there were twice as many vikings. Holy shit late game ZvT would be a breeze... Edit: also wtf, tank buff? troll. It's not 2v1, but corruptors beat Vikings hardcore and the higher the upgrades, the worse the fight. Vikings ate harder to mass so, imo, should at least trade kind of equal. 1v1 with equal upgrades and starting to shoot at the same time, the corruptor survives with 12 hp left (4 of that from regen). And upgrades don't make a difference as long as they're equal. pretty sure they do. Terran gets +1*2 (which is nulified with 1 armor) and Zerg gets +2*1 (thus increasing over armor). Also, Corruptors are faster to mass, usually start with an upgrade advantage, are actually useful when Vikings are gone, don't take damage from Terran AoE (What it it, 20 damage/thor volley?) while Vikings lose 40hp/fungal. Corruptor>Viking Corruptors also cost more gas than Vikings, have 3 less range, and can't attack ground whatsoever. They sure as hell better beat them in a head to head. As the only air combat unit in the game without a way to damage ground, they need to be the best air superiority available. Corruption deals 100 damage to Thors?! For the race with the best production, best econ and fastest unit-location, having the most cost efficient is not fair. Corruption doesn't deal damage you idiot. And if Corruptors weren't cost efficient they would be even more a massive waste of supply than they are now. Stop fucking every word in my post in the back so you can reply on 1 word and not the statement, it's dumb and highly annoying. If I corrupt a 500 hp unit and kill it, 100 of the damage is caused by Corruption. Is this wording better? Do you understand it this way? Maybe put it in 5 word sentences?
That doesn't change the fact that Corruptors can't deal any damage to ground units on their own, which is untrue of every other air unit barring dropships/observers. A unit with more versatility should be less effective at its various roles than an even more expensive unit with only one defined role, that's just basic internal balance. How do you possibly expect to justify increasing Viking performance versus Corruptors while maintaining that?
|
On May 03 2012 16:02 KiLLJoy216 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2012 15:53 Toastie wrote:On May 03 2012 15:48 KiLLJoy216 wrote:On May 03 2012 15:42 Toastie wrote:
I think I speak for most of Terran is I say this:
Numbers and stats are deceiving because Terran goes for all-ins. We go for the all in because we know the lategame is unplayable and requires us to severely outplay our opponents. Because the opponents focus on the macro-game (in which they have the advantage) and cut as many corners as possible to get there as fast as possible (which is the current metagame), all- ins exploit this 'greedyness' and causes Terran to have higher winrates early game. I just want to know how many of those wins are all-in and how many are pressure.
Terrans complain about balance patches because only one side of the problem is tackled at any given time. Terrans versatility and early game are being nerfed consistently. This causes Terran to be even more reliant on all- ins, or die in the lategame.
People don't seem to understand how a beloved 'macro game' is a doomscenario for Terran, and with every balance patch, it just becomes more likely.
I would like to see buffs to thors, tanks, ravens, battlecruisers, lategame banshees, ghosts. Anything to make higher tech Terran armies more powerful. Instead, we keep of protecting P/Z against all- ins by making their scouting easier, give Zerg the best defense against tank pushes (creepspread) for free and in the process kill every single safe expand Terran has by making the primary use of Hellions, denying creepspread and taking map control, away because creep has already been spread.
This is why Terrans are angry. We keep on getting nerfed, and our lategame is terrible weak, so weak, if we get to the collosus/storm phase or the Infestor/Broodlord phase, we have a silly 20% chance (20%!!!!!!!!!!) to win if we are on even grounds with the opponent. I hope you realize why Terran all-ins work so well. It is because Terran is favored early/mid game.... Protoss have realized that Terran are doing mostly all-ins recently, know why they can't stop it regardless? Because Terran is favored early/mid game. If you try and deny this fact you are basically calling Protosses idiots that can't figure out how to hold off Terran all-ins. The reason Protoss can't is because early/mid game units of Terran beat Protoss units at that phase. Reading is hard. I said that a lot of the statistical imbalance is combined with the all- ins, which strike early-game, so there is no evidence to claim that terran early game is incredibly more powerful. Protoss plays greedy, Terran punishes with strong all-ins. If the punishing works, we win, if it doesn't, Protoss get's away with being greedy, wins lategame. honest protosses (maybe get a cannon? you go double forge double upgrades (500/200 cost) and seem to find it normal to get away with it) may make 1/2 cannons with those forges, defend vs drops with stalkers and forcefield the front. Instead of being greedy and claiming imbalance, you could try playing more defensive and see Terran falther. Rofl. If you see Protoss playing defensively and still try to all-in you deserve to lose. End of story. You see Protoss playing defense take advantage of it. I.E. Double Expand, Upgrades, Tech, etc...
Do you see what you say?
Because Protoss plays defensive, we have to DoubleExpo/Upgrade/Tech, summarized, focus on the late game. Being defensive doesn't mean you are behind in the game. So, if Protoss plays defensive, Protoss/Terran enter the lategame on even footing > Protoss wins80% of those games.
You just prove what I said?! The rofl is on you sir.
|
On May 03 2012 15:56 ContrailNZ wrote:
Anyway back to my point. I think Zerg need better scouting vs Terran, but these changes boosts Z v P and will cause more problems in this matchup then it will fix vs Terran.
Maybe if they buff overlord speed but help Protoss early game somehow that would help.
I disagree, I feel like Zerg's already get the majority of the intel they're going to get with an overlord as is. A slight buff to speed against them seems negligible. I mean, out of the three MU I have to worry about my poor overlord getting shot down the latest from protoss.
No, I see this being most helpful against terran. Most unpredictable early game, coupled with earliest anti-air :/
|
About the 200 roach max isn´t there a high master or GM that can test this?
People are mentioning it a lot but I don´t see many proof.
|
On May 03 2012 16:04 SmileZerg wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2012 15:55 Toastie wrote:On May 03 2012 15:52 SmileZerg wrote:On May 03 2012 15:47 Toastie wrote:On May 03 2012 15:42 SmileZerg wrote:On May 03 2012 15:34 Toastie wrote:On May 03 2012 15:31 Nourek wrote:On May 03 2012 14:56 Toastie wrote:On May 03 2012 14:49 clever_us wrote:On May 03 2012 14:46 Toastie wrote:
I'm still waiting for my Tank buff. Tanks are pathetic in numbers < 25. That helps lategame.
It would also be nice if our 'air superiority unit' didnt lose 2v1 with Corruptors, whom are easier to produce and have an ability that actually is usefull. LOL how I wish vikings lost to corruptors when there were twice as many vikings. Holy shit late game ZvT would be a breeze... Edit: also wtf, tank buff? troll. It's not 2v1, but corruptors beat Vikings hardcore and the higher the upgrades, the worse the fight. Vikings ate harder to mass so, imo, should at least trade kind of equal. 1v1 with equal upgrades and starting to shoot at the same time, the corruptor survives with 12 hp left (4 of that from regen). And upgrades don't make a difference as long as they're equal. pretty sure they do. Terran gets +1*2 (which is nulified with 1 armor) and Zerg gets +2*1 (thus increasing over armor). Also, Corruptors are faster to mass, usually start with an upgrade advantage, are actually useful when Vikings are gone, don't take damage from Terran AoE (What it it, 20 damage/thor volley?) while Vikings lose 40hp/fungal. Corruptor>Viking Corruptors also cost more gas than Vikings, have 3 less range, and can't attack ground whatsoever. They sure as hell better beat them in a head to head. As the only air combat unit in the game without a way to damage ground, they need to be the best air superiority available. Corruption deals 100 damage to Thors?! For the race with the best production, best econ and fastest unit-location, having the most cost efficient is not fair. Corruption doesn't deal damage you idiot. And if Corruptors weren't cost efficient they would be even more a massive waste of supply than they are now. Stop fucking every word in my post in the back so you can reply on 1 word and not the statement, it's dumb and highly annoying. If I corrupt a 500 hp unit and kill it, 100 of the damage is caused by Corruption. Is this wording better? Do you understand it this way? Maybe put it in 5 word sentences? That doesn't change the fact that Corruptors can't deal any damage to ground units on their own, which is untrue of every other air unit barring dropships/observers. A unit with more versatility should be less effective at its various roles than an even more expensive unit with only one defined role, that's just basic internal balance. How do you possibly expect to justify increasing Viking performance versus Corruptors while maintaining that?
By, as said, the fact that corruptors are easilly producable en masse, and faster than Vikings, which should come at the cost of being weaker.
And don't tell me vikings are usable vs ground, that would make you look laughably silly.
|
On May 03 2012 15:40 sieksdekciw wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2012 15:28 Ballistixz wrote:On May 03 2012 15:19 Jaegeru wrote:
The overlord change is a good and needed buff for zerg scouting.
The energy increase from 25 to 50 is incredibly dumb, it makes stargate openings useless and even easier to hold without being able to take damage although that was already easy for any decent zerg. Also having the ability to instantly spread creep without sacrificing an inject is stupid - any "good" zerg can have creep half way across the map by 12 minutes and makes helion openers even worse as their main job is to deny any extra bases and creep. Calculated terran builds require you to drop specific number of mules to execute properly, but wont be able to do this now as more energy is going to have to be wasted on scans instead of dropping mules.
The observer change is incredibly stupid, a protoss can already get out an observer insanely fast with the use of chronoboost and an already existing robo in response to cloak banshee and decreasing the build time makes them even worse as it denies around 5-6 worker kills. If a protoss doesn't have a observer out fast enough to deal with a banshee they can only blame themselves for not having a observer out quickly enough. zerg lacks effective anti air in the early game, there only choice is queens and spores which is extremely ridiculous considering terrans have marines and toss has stalkers for early game anti air. hellions(if the terran is competent and denies creep tumors and denies zerg from taking a quick third) completely contain zerg for a good amount of time if creep is not spread fast enough. terrans dictate the flow of the early game way to easily as it is. the observer change im indifferent towards. most toss players get 1 or 2 observers for the entire game anyway and its usually never with there army so its w/e. i find it kinda sad since toss can deny creep spread pretty easily with observers, they should NEVER have to engage on creep, but they do anyway cuz they refuse to bring observers with there army for some reason... I know you are zerg but how is it possible you are so biased. 4 hellions are a pretty big investment and all you need to chase them away is a single roach. ThI am in ddisbelief of anything I hear and see, if something, tumors should cost more energy and build up slower. You get them for free, while as zerg you have far superior economy wh. How balanced is that. Anyway, I am so bewildered that I just cant express my sadness. World is really full of very ignorant people.
4 hellions are not that big of an investment considering what there purpose is in zvt, they only cost minerals... and mules are amazing.
4 hellions are there mainly to stop creep spread and deny zerg from ever taking a quick third. if u force even a single roach then that is a added bonus. u have to realize how useless roaches are in zvt. making 3-4 of them is wasted money and supply as there only purpose will be to defend against hellions. u should NEVER want to make roaches in zvt unless u know for a fact the terran is going mech or making an adnormal amount of hellions.
srsly, that really annoys me when ppl defend hellions by saying "make roaches, EZ". u do not realize how useless roaches are in that MU.
also, mules. in terms of race usefulness mules will ALWAYS be better then creep tumors any day of the week. so i dont even understand why terran players complain about creep spread so much, its really not that huge of a deal and wont dramatically effect the game. it certainly wont make it imba either.
|
Ruining ZvP even harder, wtf Blizzard? Air will become even more useless thanks to the insta-transfuse and 2 base all-ins will become weaker, because they are more easily scouted with an overlord. So even more ZvPs will go into lategame, which is not only zerg favored already, it's just terrible from a game design standpoint.
|
On May 03 2012 12:44 Liquid`Jinro wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2012 12:41 onPHYRE wrote:On May 03 2012 12:36 Liquid`Jinro wrote:......... I dont have words for how dumb this is. On May 03 2012 12:35 Empirimancer wrote:
Just tested the new overlords, they feel much, much faster. Zerg early game scouting will be even better than Terran early game scouting now.
Terran early game scouting fucking sucks so that's not much of an accomplishment. Do you disagree with both Z changes (I don't think the P one is that big anyway)? I think the overlord one is nice, not too fast, just slightly better. The Queen one might be a bit much, like people said maybe 35 energy instead of 50. Queen change is absolutely beyond disgusting. Overlord change is ok I guess, but I really dont think zergs have that hard of a time with dying to rushes....... Observer change is retarded wtf, they are already insanely quick to get with chronoboost wtf are you serious?
My thoughts exactly.
Zerg will be able to be even more greedy and you will have a hard time punishing them until snowball effect occurs.
And observer? The fuck is this change... It will absolutely kill any cloaked banshee play in TvP (which is already pretty much dead in non-allin strategies) and it will barely delay robo units production. Also, faster scouting will allow protoss to prepare for timings/pressure way better and thus encourage more greedy builds...
And nothing about factory or starport units, lol.
|
United States7166 Posts
On May 03 2012 16:00 ContrailNZ wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2012 15:58 Cyro wrote:
I wonder if blizzard considered the consequences of queen spawn energy increase on back to back larvae injects. As it is now, larvae inject takes 40 seconds, but the energy regeneration to inject again takes 44.444 seconds. If one were to go, lets say, 3 hatch before gas into a bunch of gasses with a roach warren, couldnt they use the extra ~9.9% inject uptime for a significantly early max out? I dont think money is an issue, as stephano usually throws down a macro hatch and a fourth base on his way to maxing. The 11 minute max could be pushed even earlier, and aside from the consequences of early queens and gasless ZvT styles becoming significantly more powerful, it worries me a lot. Yeah, early max out is the issue I have. I would want to know how the change affected max army size timings and if this changed things.
nice idea, but i dont think it will change the max time realistically, even by the current top players, zergs are not all injecting the second they get 25 energy every single time up until they max. there's too much to do in a real game to be that exact, so that extra couple seconds of not having to wait for 2 more energy is insignificant.
|
On May 03 2012 16:07 Ballistixz wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2012 15:40 sieksdekciw wrote:On May 03 2012 15:28 Ballistixz wrote:On May 03 2012 15:19 Jaegeru wrote:
The overlord change is a good and needed buff for zerg scouting.
The energy increase from 25 to 50 is incredibly dumb, it makes stargate openings useless and even easier to hold without being able to take damage although that was already easy for any decent zerg. Also having the ability to instantly spread creep without sacrificing an inject is stupid - any "good" zerg can have creep half way across the map by 12 minutes and makes helion openers even worse as their main job is to deny any extra bases and creep. Calculated terran builds require you to drop specific number of mules to execute properly, but wont be able to do this now as more energy is going to have to be wasted on scans instead of dropping mules.
The observer change is incredibly stupid, a protoss can already get out an observer insanely fast with the use of chronoboost and an already existing robo in response to cloak banshee and decreasing the build time makes them even worse as it denies around 5-6 worker kills. If a protoss doesn't have a observer out fast enough to deal with a banshee they can only blame themselves for not having a observer out quickly enough. zerg lacks effective anti air in the early game, there only choice is queens and spores which is extremely ridiculous considering terrans have marines and toss has stalkers for early game anti air. hellions(if the terran is competent and denies creep tumors and denies zerg from taking a quick third) completely contain zerg for a good amount of time if creep is not spread fast enough. terrans dictate the flow of the early game way to easily as it is. the observer change im indifferent towards. most toss players get 1 or 2 observers for the entire game anyway and its usually never with there army so its w/e. i find it kinda sad since toss can deny creep spread pretty easily with observers, they should NEVER have to engage on creep, but they do anyway cuz they refuse to bring observers with there army for some reason... I know you are zerg but how is it possible you are so biased. 4 hellions are a pretty big investment and all you need to chase them away is a single roach. ThI am in ddisbelief of anything I hear and see, if something, tumors should cost more energy and build up slower. You get them for free, while as zerg you have far superior economy wh. How balanced is that. Anyway, I am so bewildered that I just cant express my sadness. World is really full of very ignorant people. 4 hellions are not that big of an investment, they only cost minerals... and mules are amazing. 4 hellions are there mainly to stop creep spread and deny zerg from ever taking a quick third. if u force even a single roach then that is a added bonus. u have to realize how useless roaches are in zvt. making 3-4 of them is wasted money and supply as there only purpose will be to defend hellions against hellions. u should NEVER want to make roaches in zvt unless u know for a fact the terran is going mech or making an adnormal amount of hellions. srsly, that really annoys me when ppl defend hellions by saying "make roaches, EZ". u do not realize how useless roaches are in that MU. also, mules.
Hellions cost Terran 400 minerals. That is another base. meanwhile typing up the factory and delaying tech.
WIth the creepbuff, hellions don't have a function anymore. Denying a third on creep vs speedling? gl.
Also, Mules are an integral part of Terran economy. You can produce 20 drones at a time, I get my 3 mules. YOu cannot say Mules are free, additional income, it is the income needed to keep terran EVEN on income.
Also, 2/3/4 Roaches are good vs the first tankpush, if you take the time to position your army. A roach takes 3 tank shots, and in the first push, using roaches, you can take the first 2 volleys of the tanks and 1a ezpz
|
I think the queen-thingy may be a bit too much. It will make zerg players able to abuse creep and transfuses later on.
|
Uhm I just played...here are my thoughts.
Overlord Speed
Great idea, I think the overlord speed needed a boost. I don't think anyone will argue that, however, the overlord is a little too fast now. The way they should calculate the speed is by taking a marine and an overlord in a typical sized base, put them in the center and if the overlord can get away, ITS TOO FAST. I am a zerg player, so don't say I am just whining, I think thats part of the meta game that needs to stay.
Final: Boost overlord speed, but not as drastically.
Poll: Agree With Me?Yes (15) 56% No (12) 44% 27 total votes Your vote: Agree With Me? (Vote): Yes
(Vote): No
Starting Energy Of Queen
I never understood why if you inject larva asap, as soon as the first larva spawns you cannot inject right away again. So I love this starting energy of the queen increase. But by DOUBLING the starting energy it allows for the zerg to get a tumor AND inject? This is a little much for the meta game.
Final: Love the idea, but once again they went a little far on this one.
Few suggestions -
- Increase starting energy to 35, this would allow for 1st queen to not miss the instant inject
in the begining, also the second queen would be able to put down a tumor, and by the time it
gets to your expo if you fast expo it will have enough energy to inject into your expo.
- Increase energy regeneration by TINY TINY miniscule amount but keep starting energy at 25.
Increase tumor cost? ....nvm thats a bad one.
Poll: Agree With Me?No (14) 61% Yes (9) 39% 23 total votes Your vote: Agree With Me? (Vote): Yes
(Vote): No
Observer Build Time
I think this will help against 1-1-1, but a 25% decrease? Blizzard...once again...sooooo drastic. I suppose this would also counter the faster than usual creep spread? So I don't see Zerg's being affected that badly.
Final: I am not really complaining about this as a zerg. And I dont have any suggestions, I would like to see the
pro scene comment on this change regarding PvP and PvT though.
Poll: Agree With Me?No (8) 62% Yes (5) 38% 13 total votes Your vote: Agree With Me? (Vote): Yes
(Vote): No
I am diamond league 1v1, and play CASUALLY. If you yell at me and tell me I am crazy, I don't care. I understand I don't have TONS of knowledge of SC2. I will play the game if all these changes go through the way they are, or if none go through. This is just my personal opinion, I don't know what is best or how it will affect the competitive level of play. That's why I am not on the balance team at Blizzard :-D Thanks for listening though!
|
Everytime a thread like this crops up, I feel sorry for this community.
So many retarded, ignorant people with an IQ of apparently the same as their apm- 20.
|
On May 03 2012 16:05 Toastie wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2012 16:02 KiLLJoy216 wrote:On May 03 2012 15:53 Toastie wrote:On May 03 2012 15:48 KiLLJoy216 wrote:On May 03 2012 15:42 Toastie wrote:
I think I speak for most of Terran is I say this:
Numbers and stats are deceiving because Terran goes for all-ins. We go for the all in because we know the lategame is unplayable and requires us to severely outplay our opponents. Because the opponents focus on the macro-game (in which they have the advantage) and cut as many corners as possible to get there as fast as possible (which is the current metagame), all- ins exploit this 'greedyness' and causes Terran to have higher winrates early game. I just want to know how many of those wins are all-in and how many are pressure.
Terrans complain about balance patches because only one side of the problem is tackled at any given time. Terrans versatility and early game are being nerfed consistently. This causes Terran to be even more reliant on all- ins, or die in the lategame.
People don't seem to understand how a beloved 'macro game' is a doomscenario for Terran, and with every balance patch, it just becomes more likely.
I would like to see buffs to thors, tanks, ravens, battlecruisers, lategame banshees, ghosts. Anything to make higher tech Terran armies more powerful. Instead, we keep of protecting P/Z against all- ins by making their scouting easier, give Zerg the best defense against tank pushes (creepspread) for free and in the process kill every single safe expand Terran has by making the primary use of Hellions, denying creepspread and taking map control, away because creep has already been spread.
This is why Terrans are angry. We keep on getting nerfed, and our lategame is terrible weak, so weak, if we get to the collosus/storm phase or the Infestor/Broodlord phase, we have a silly 20% chance (20%!!!!!!!!!!) to win if we are on even grounds with the opponent. I hope you realize why Terran all-ins work so well. It is because Terran is favored early/mid game.... Protoss have realized that Terran are doing mostly all-ins recently, know why they can't stop it regardless? Because Terran is favored early/mid game. If you try and deny this fact you are basically calling Protosses idiots that can't figure out how to hold off Terran all-ins. The reason Protoss can't is because early/mid game units of Terran beat Protoss units at that phase. Reading is hard. I said that a lot of the statistical imbalance is combined with the all- ins, which strike early-game, so there is no evidence to claim that terran early game is incredibly more powerful. Protoss plays greedy, Terran punishes with strong all-ins. If the punishing works, we win, if it doesn't, Protoss get's away with being greedy, wins lategame. honest protosses (maybe get a cannon? you go double forge double upgrades (500/200 cost) and seem to find it normal to get away with it) may make 1/2 cannons with those forges, defend vs drops with stalkers and forcefield the front. Instead of being greedy and claiming imbalance, you could try playing more defensive and see Terran falther. Rofl. If you see Protoss playing defensively and still try to all-in you deserve to lose. End of story. You see Protoss playing defense take advantage of it. I.E. Double Expand, Upgrades, Tech, etc... Do you see what you say? Because Protoss plays defensive, we have to DoubleExpo/Upgrade/Tech, summarized, focus on the late game. Being defensive doesn't mean you are behind in the game. So, if Protoss plays defensive, Protoss/Terran enter the lategame on even footing > Protoss wins80% of those games. You just prove what I said?! The rofl is on you sir.
Not quite. Protoss is stuck in the base with basically 0 vision. If you can't find a way to exploit that thats all on you. Also, if you double expanded and teched you should be ahead in every aspect. So even if he somehow kills your army, you should have more production and planetary fortresses for instance to buy you time and mop up the rest of the Protoss army. Not my fault you are bad at coming up with strategies. You probably have what most people have. They copy Pro players styles and expect them to come up with all the answers. Most don't even understand why the build is good and why it functions how it does.
|
On May 03 2012 16:05 FrostedMiniWheats wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2012 15:56 ContrailNZ wrote:
Anyway back to my point. I think Zerg need better scouting vs Terran, but these changes boosts Z v P and will cause more problems in this matchup then it will fix vs Terran.
Maybe if they buff overlord speed but help Protoss early game somehow that would help.
I disagree, I feel like Zerg's already get the majority of the intel they're going to get with an overlord as is. A slight buff to speed against them seems negligible. I mean, out of the three MU I have to worry about my poor overlord getting shot down the latest from protoss. No, I see this being most helpful against terran. Most unpredictable early game, coupled with earliest anti-air :/
-Edited dumb mistake out-
There will also be more likelihood that an overlord will be able to get in and out of a protoss base alive (if the toss only has one sentry say) which can also be pretty big.
|
On May 03 2012 16:13 tomatriedes wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2012 16:05 FrostedMiniWheats wrote:On May 03 2012 15:56 ContrailNZ wrote:
Anyway back to my point. I think Zerg need better scouting vs Terran, but these changes boosts Z v P and will cause more problems in this matchup then it will fix vs Terran.
Maybe if they buff overlord speed but help Protoss early game somehow that would help.
I disagree, I feel like Zerg's already get the majority of the intel they're going to get with an overlord as is. A slight buff to speed against them seems negligible. I mean, out of the three MU I have to worry about my poor overlord getting shot down the latest from protoss. No, I see this being most helpful against terran. Most unpredictable early game, coupled with earliest anti-air :/ The overlord speed will also be an indirect buff to baneling rain in ZvP as stalkers will have less time to try and snipe overlords. Also there will also be more likelihood that an overlord will be able to get in and out of a protoss base alive (if the toss only has one sentry say) which can also be pretty big.
I'd love to see people do baneling drops with slow overlords.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
