|
On June 13 2012 02:08 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2012 01:45 Thrombozyt wrote:On June 13 2012 01:23 SeaSwift wrote:On June 13 2012 01:11 Snowbear wrote:On June 13 2012 00:59 manloveman wrote:On June 13 2012 00:47 Snowbear wrote:On June 13 2012 00:34 SeaSwift wrote:
and PvT will continue being a bit Terran favoured because of basic maths. Terran is stronger before the 15 minute mark, Protoss after, and the time before that mark comes before the time after so it's easier to force an engagement and win.
Calling TvP a bit T favoured is really a slap in the fact of every terran. TvP is definitely not terran favoured... It's not heavy P favoured either, but still a bit. And you build that statement on the numbers in OP i suppose... I build that statement on opinions from terrans. I build it also on the last gsl, where immvp had to cheese hard to win He didn't. It is a complete myth that MVP played very cheesily, perpetuated in part by Naniwa fans. He played a macro game with drops in most games, and just destroyed his opponents. He was willing to go all-in when he saw weakness, like in game 1 vs Parting, but that is not cheese. Also, fuck opinions. People are biased, people are morons. Opinions don't say the whole story any more than statistics do. Winrate in standard games: 50% Is this a problem?
When it's Mvp you're talking about? Yes, yes it is.
|
On June 13 2012 04:13 Tibbroar wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2012 02:08 Shiori wrote:On June 13 2012 01:45 Thrombozyt wrote:On June 13 2012 01:23 SeaSwift wrote:On June 13 2012 01:11 Snowbear wrote:On June 13 2012 00:59 manloveman wrote:On June 13 2012 00:47 Snowbear wrote:On June 13 2012 00:34 SeaSwift wrote:
and PvT will continue being a bit Terran favoured because of basic maths. Terran is stronger before the 15 minute mark, Protoss after, and the time before that mark comes before the time after so it's easier to force an engagement and win.
Calling TvP a bit T favoured is really a slap in the fact of every terran. TvP is definitely not terran favoured... It's not heavy P favoured either, but still a bit. And you build that statement on the numbers in OP i suppose... I build that statement on opinions from terrans. I build it also on the last gsl, where immvp had to cheese hard to win He didn't. It is a complete myth that MVP played very cheesily, perpetuated in part by Naniwa fans. He played a macro game with drops in most games, and just destroyed his opponents. He was willing to go all-in when he saw weakness, like in game 1 vs Parting, but that is not cheese. Also, fuck opinions. People are biased, people are morons. Opinions don't say the whole story any more than statistics do. Winrate in standard games: 50% Is this a problem? When it's Mvp you're talking about? Yes, yes it is.
Why is it a problem? Squirtle is an extremely capable PvTer. So is Parting. Stop acting like MVP is someone that's untouchable and should always have a 99% winrate or something.
|
On June 13 2012 04:22 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2012 04:13 Tibbroar wrote:On June 13 2012 02:08 Shiori wrote:On June 13 2012 01:45 Thrombozyt wrote:On June 13 2012 01:23 SeaSwift wrote:On June 13 2012 01:11 Snowbear wrote:On June 13 2012 00:59 manloveman wrote:On June 13 2012 00:47 Snowbear wrote:On June 13 2012 00:34 SeaSwift wrote:
and PvT will continue being a bit Terran favoured because of basic maths. Terran is stronger before the 15 minute mark, Protoss after, and the time before that mark comes before the time after so it's easier to force an engagement and win.
Calling TvP a bit T favoured is really a slap in the fact of every terran. TvP is definitely not terran favoured... It's not heavy P favoured either, but still a bit. And you build that statement on the numbers in OP i suppose... I build that statement on opinions from terrans. I build it also on the last gsl, where immvp had to cheese hard to win He didn't. It is a complete myth that MVP played very cheesily, perpetuated in part by Naniwa fans. He played a macro game with drops in most games, and just destroyed his opponents. He was willing to go all-in when he saw weakness, like in game 1 vs Parting, but that is not cheese. Also, fuck opinions. People are biased, people are morons. Opinions don't say the whole story any more than statistics do. Winrate in standard games: 50% Is this a problem? When it's Mvp you're talking about? Yes, yes it is. Why is it a problem? Squirtle is an extremely capable PvTer. So is Parting. Stop acting like MVP is someone that's untouchable and should always have a 99% winrate or something.
He's the favorite against every single player you match him up against, and his mechanics, and in particular his macro, are, if not the best, certainly beyond both Squirtle and Parting. Yet he's only managing 50% in macro games. I don't expect him to win every single game, but his mechanics alone, in a perfectly balanced game, should get him above a 50% winrate against anyone other than perhaps MKP and DRG.
|
On June 13 2012 03:39 Snowbear wrote:
Dragon vs lalush tsl qualifier today: perfect example of 2 base attacks being so damn bad vs zerg. Lalush went for 4 queen build --> roach lings (0 banelings), dragon went for hellion marauder, and dragon lost his army.
I thought the more ridiculous result of that series was that the counter to mass BC/Raven is apparently mass Infestor. That's just fucking stupid no matter how you look at it. Terrans complain about feedback ruining their lategame units, but at least you can't simply mass HTs and expect to roll over everything.
|
A four queen opening is a significant economic investment that limits zerg's aggressive options in the early game. Hellion openings and other early game aggressive builds aren't nearly as effective against zerg, and this definitely represents a significant metagame shift, but defensive queen openings also open up new opportunities for terrans.
Four queen openings allow terrans to take a fast third and tech quickly without as much of a threat of aggression from zerg. Although zerg can spread creep early game without being inhibited by terran, terran can still kill creep tumors with midgame aggression. Mech builds incorporating ravens have the potential to effectively deal with late game zerg compositions.
I think we should wait a few months before deciding whether zerg is imbalanced in zvt or the metagame has simply shifted. Metagame shifts like the queen buff will usually be accompanied by shifts in win rates because people are still adjusting to new changes.
|
On June 13 2012 05:10 Rainling wrote:
A four queen opening is a significant economic investment that limits zerg's aggressive options in the early game. Hellion openings and other early game aggressive builds aren't nearly as effective against zerg, and this definitely represents a significant metagame shift, but defensive queen openings also open up new opportunities for terrans.
Four queen openings allow terrans to take a fast third and tech quickly without as much of a threat of aggression from zerg. Although zerg can spread creep early game without being inhibited by terran, terran can still kill creep tumors with midgame aggression. Mech builds incorporating ravens have the potential to effectively deal with late game zerg compositions.
I think we should wait a few months before deciding whether zerg is imbalanced in zvt or the metagame has simply shifted. Metagame shifts like the queen buff will usually be accompanied by shifts in win rates because people are still adjusting to new changes.
Exactly. Luckily your race is designed to sit back on your ass and drone all day and then roll over the terran with mass BL/infestor/Queen.
What are you gonna be aggresive with early on? Lings? Wall. Bunker. HELLIONS. Not gonna happen man so don't even say that your ''aggression'' (Which is non-existant) is limited, please.
|
On June 13 2012 05:16 Thylacine wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2012 05:10 Rainling wrote:
A four queen opening is a significant economic investment that limits zerg's aggressive options in the early game. Hellion openings and other early game aggressive builds aren't nearly as effective against zerg, and this definitely represents a significant metagame shift, but defensive queen openings also open up new opportunities for terrans.
Four queen openings allow terrans to take a fast third and tech quickly without as much of a threat of aggression from zerg. Although zerg can spread creep early game without being inhibited by terran, terran can still kill creep tumors with midgame aggression. Mech builds incorporating ravens have the potential to effectively deal with late game zerg compositions.
I think we should wait a few months before deciding whether zerg is imbalanced in zvt or the metagame has simply shifted. Metagame shifts like the queen buff will usually be accompanied by shifts in win rates because people are still adjusting to new changes. Exactly. Luckily your race is designed to sit back on your ass and drone all day and then roll over the terran with mass BL/infestor/Queen. What are you gonna be aggresive with early on? Lings? Wall. Bunker. HELLIONS. Not gonna happen man so don't even say that your ''aggression'' (Which is non-existant) is limited, please.
Roach ling allins? Those are pretty common in zvt.
|
On June 13 2012 05:16 Thylacine wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2012 05:10 Rainling wrote:
A four queen opening is a significant economic investment that limits zerg's aggressive options in the early game. Hellion openings and other early game aggressive builds aren't nearly as effective against zerg, and this definitely represents a significant metagame shift, but defensive queen openings also open up new opportunities for terrans.
Four queen openings allow terrans to take a fast third and tech quickly without as much of a threat of aggression from zerg. Although zerg can spread creep early game without being inhibited by terran, terran can still kill creep tumors with midgame aggression. Mech builds incorporating ravens have the potential to effectively deal with late game zerg compositions.
I think we should wait a few months before deciding whether zerg is imbalanced in zvt or the metagame has simply shifted. Metagame shifts like the queen buff will usually be accompanied by shifts in win rates because people are still adjusting to new changes. Exactly. Luckily your race is designed to sit back on your ass and drone all day and then roll over the terran with mass BL/infestor/Queen. What are you gonna be aggresive with early on? Lings? Wall. Bunker. HELLIONS. Not gonna happen man so don't even say that your ''aggression'' (Which is non-existant) is limited, please.
Zerg have a number of aggressive options/playstyes, both allin and non-allin...
And @Rainling, you can perform a very potent roach/bane bust off of a 4 queen opening.
|
The infestor's fungal growth is such a sick spell. It's basically a maelstrom (from dark archons) plus a psionic storm (not plague, because FG'ed units can die).
I would experiment with nerfing the infestor so it's more of a maelstrom + plague (FG'ed units will be left at 1 HP, and you would need other units to kill off 1HP units)
OR, a psionic storm + ensnare type of thing where FG'ed units are still mobile, just slow (I think this has been suggested before?)
The ravens need some serious buff. Compared to the zerg infestors or the protoss HTs, it costs a lot more gas, but does a lot less damage (for more energy too). This means that massing up ravens (say 4~8) is a huge risk compared to making infestors or HTs. Sure, you could have massive amount of damage to incoming units, but Retention of the ravens is very difficult too. Ravens' spells cost too much energy. The seeker missile range seems fine though... it just costs too much energy. There really needs to be a better way to deal with broodlord/infestor/ultra/queen combo...
|
On June 13 2012 05:28 KhAmun wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2012 05:16 Thylacine wrote:On June 13 2012 05:10 Rainling wrote:
A four queen opening is a significant economic investment that limits zerg's aggressive options in the early game. Hellion openings and other early game aggressive builds aren't nearly as effective against zerg, and this definitely represents a significant metagame shift, but defensive queen openings also open up new opportunities for terrans.
Four queen openings allow terrans to take a fast third and tech quickly without as much of a threat of aggression from zerg. Although zerg can spread creep early game without being inhibited by terran, terran can still kill creep tumors with midgame aggression. Mech builds incorporating ravens have the potential to effectively deal with late game zerg compositions.
I think we should wait a few months before deciding whether zerg is imbalanced in zvt or the metagame has simply shifted. Metagame shifts like the queen buff will usually be accompanied by shifts in win rates because people are still adjusting to new changes. Exactly. Luckily your race is designed to sit back on your ass and drone all day and then roll over the terran with mass BL/infestor/Queen. What are you gonna be aggresive with early on? Lings? Wall. Bunker. HELLIONS. Not gonna happen man so don't even say that your ''aggression'' (Which is non-existant) is limited, please. Zerg have a number of aggressive options/playstyes, both allin and non-allin... And @Rainling, you can perform a very potent roach/bane bust off of a 4 queen opening.
I'm guessing that roach baneling build would be stronger with a two queen opening, though. I'm just saying that four queen openings limit your ability to be aggressive. On the other hand, a four queen opening allows you to make less spines/lings than you otherwise would need to to defend against potential aggression, so it's possible that roach baneling builds are just as potent with four queen openings as with two to three queen openings.
|
On June 13 2012 05:33 stalife wrote:
The infestor's fungal growth is such a sick spell. It's basically a maelstrom (from dark archons) plus a psionic storm (not plague, because FG'ed units can die).
I would experiment with nerfing the infestor so it's more of a maelstrom + plague (FG'ed units will be left at 1 HP, and you would need other units to kill off 1HP units)
OR, a psionic storm + ensnare type of thing where FG'ed units are still mobile, just slow (I think this has been suggested before?)
The ravens need some serious buff. Compared to the zerg infestors or the protoss HTs, it costs a lot more gas, but does a lot less damage (for more energy too). This means that massing up ravens (say 4~8) is a huge risk compared to making infestors or HTs. Sure, you could have massive amount of damage to incoming units, but Retention of the ravens is very difficult too. Ravens' spells cost too much energy. The seeker missile range seems fine though... it just costs too much energy. There really needs to be a better way to deal with broodlord/infestor/ultra/queen combo...
I agree, infestors might be too strong and ravens might be too weak. One thing I don't like about infestors is that they completely immobilize enemy armies, leaving little room for further micro. I think an ensare-type slow would make gameplay more interesting as one player would try to split up their units to avoid further fungals.
|
On June 13 2012 05:10 Rainling wrote:
A four queen opening is a significant economic investment that limits zerg's aggressive options in the early game. Hellion openings and other early game aggressive builds aren't nearly as effective against zerg, and this definitely represents a significant metagame shift, but defensive queen openings also open up new opportunities for terrans.
Four queen openings allow terrans to take a fast third and tech quickly without as much of a threat of aggression from zerg. Although zerg can spread creep early game without being inhibited by terran, terran can still kill creep tumors with midgame aggression. Mech builds incorporating ravens have the potential to effectively deal with late game zerg compositions.
I think we should wait a few months before deciding whether zerg is imbalanced in zvt or the metagame has simply shifted. Metagame shifts like the queen buff will usually be accompanied by shifts in win rates because people are still adjusting to new changes.
Ummm even if a Terran player goes 1 rax FE into 3 CC he will still be way behind if he just allows the Z player to drone up and not put pressure on. Sure he will have 3 orbitals fast, but you will have 80 drones compared to 50 scvs, the ability to remax your army instantly, insane creep spread (since nothing is clearing it), etc. Playing pure macro against zerg DOES NOT WORK. Mech is good but only if you have good timing with your push. You have to deny creep and pressure zerg, otherwise your march across the field is gonna be met by maxed out roach army after army until the mech army is gone and takes 5 minutes to reproduce, or broodlords come out and take dumps all over your army
|
On June 13 2012 05:16 Thylacine wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2012 05:10 Rainling wrote:
A four queen opening is a significant economic investment that limits zerg's aggressive options in the early game. Hellion openings and other early game aggressive builds aren't nearly as effective against zerg, and this definitely represents a significant metagame shift, but defensive queen openings also open up new opportunities for terrans.
Four queen openings allow terrans to take a fast third and tech quickly without as much of a threat of aggression from zerg. Although zerg can spread creep early game without being inhibited by terran, terran can still kill creep tumors with midgame aggression. Mech builds incorporating ravens have the potential to effectively deal with late game zerg compositions.
I think we should wait a few months before deciding whether zerg is imbalanced in zvt or the metagame has simply shifted. Metagame shifts like the queen buff will usually be accompanied by shifts in win rates because people are still adjusting to new changes. Exactly. Luckily your race is designed to sit back on your ass and drone all day and then roll over the terran with mass BL/infestor/Queen. What are you gonna be aggresive with early on? Lings? Wall. Bunker. HELLIONS. Not gonna happen man so don't even say that your ''aggression'' (Which is non-existant) is limited, please.
threat of roach bane allins is actually very important, the strength of stephano's early game zvt is that it can be greedy/aggressive/allin and the openings all look exactly the same.
if t sees 4 queens out on the map early he knows hes free to make almost no units till he has 3 bases and full infrastructure, that gives a ridiculously strong pre-hive timing push.
and the queen build the koreans have been using is really vulnerable to some hellion based 2 base attacks, since they dont get roaches.
|
On June 13 2012 05:50 teamhozac wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2012 05:10 Rainling wrote:
A four queen opening is a significant economic investment that limits zerg's aggressive options in the early game. Hellion openings and other early game aggressive builds aren't nearly as effective against zerg, and this definitely represents a significant metagame shift, but defensive queen openings also open up new opportunities for terrans.
Four queen openings allow terrans to take a fast third and tech quickly without as much of a threat of aggression from zerg. Although zerg can spread creep early game without being inhibited by terran, terran can still kill creep tumors with midgame aggression. Mech builds incorporating ravens have the potential to effectively deal with late game zerg compositions.
I think we should wait a few months before deciding whether zerg is imbalanced in zvt or the metagame has simply shifted. Metagame shifts like the queen buff will usually be accompanied by shifts in win rates because people are still adjusting to new changes. Ummm even if a Terran player goes 1 rax FE into 3 CC he will still be way behind if he just allows the Z player to drone up and not put pressure on. Sure he will have 3 orbitals fast, but you will have 80 drones compared to 50 scvs, the ability to remax your army instantly, insane creep spread (since nothing is clearing it), etc. Playing pure macro against zerg DOES NOT WORK. Mech is good but only if you have good timing with your push. You have to deny creep and pressure zerg, otherwise your march across the field is gonna be met by maxed out roach army after army until the mech army is gone and takes 5 minutes to reproduce, or broodlords come out and take dumps all over your army
It seems like even with the queen change, midgame aggression is still viable. Midgame drops and pushes off of three bases can still be effective even if the zerg has a strong economy to defend them. I could be wrong about this, though.
|
On June 13 2012 04:53 Toadvine wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2012 03:39 Snowbear wrote:
Dragon vs lalush tsl qualifier today: perfect example of 2 base attacks being so damn bad vs zerg. Lalush went for 4 queen build --> roach lings (0 banelings), dragon went for hellion marauder, and dragon lost his army. I thought the more ridiculous result of that series was that the counter to mass BC/Raven is apparently mass Infestor. That's just fucking stupid no matter how you look at it. Terrans complain about feedback ruining their lategame units, but at least you can't simply mass HTs and expect to roll over everything.
FG is the best anti air in the game IMO, and this is just a bonus to it's already great uses. Powerfull spels are great IMO, but good against everything spells are boring, regardless of balance.
|
On June 13 2012 05:58 Rainling wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2012 05:50 teamhozac wrote:On June 13 2012 05:10 Rainling wrote:
A four queen opening is a significant economic investment that limits zerg's aggressive options in the early game. Hellion openings and other early game aggressive builds aren't nearly as effective against zerg, and this definitely represents a significant metagame shift, but defensive queen openings also open up new opportunities for terrans.
Four queen openings allow terrans to take a fast third and tech quickly without as much of a threat of aggression from zerg. Although zerg can spread creep early game without being inhibited by terran, terran can still kill creep tumors with midgame aggression. Mech builds incorporating ravens have the potential to effectively deal with late game zerg compositions.
I think we should wait a few months before deciding whether zerg is imbalanced in zvt or the metagame has simply shifted. Metagame shifts like the queen buff will usually be accompanied by shifts in win rates because people are still adjusting to new changes. Ummm even if a Terran player goes 1 rax FE into 3 CC he will still be way behind if he just allows the Z player to drone up and not put pressure on. Sure he will have 3 orbitals fast, but you will have 80 drones compared to 50 scvs, the ability to remax your army instantly, insane creep spread (since nothing is clearing it), etc. Playing pure macro against zerg DOES NOT WORK. Mech is good but only if you have good timing with your push. You have to deny creep and pressure zerg, otherwise your march across the field is gonna be met by maxed out roach army after army until the mech army is gone and takes 5 minutes to reproduce, or broodlords come out and take dumps all over your army It seems like even with the queen change, midgame aggression is still viable. Midgame drops and pushes off of three bases can still be effective even if the zerg has a strong economy to defend them. I could be wrong about this, though.
Point is: it's the ONLY thing terran can still do.
And to reiterate a point made by someone else: zerg doesn't have to play aggressive. Just don't show all your queens, unless you have to and drone like the greedy bastard you are. Wow, terran is already playing catchup for the rest of the game.
|
On June 13 2012 06:19 Zoesan wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2012 05:58 Rainling wrote:On June 13 2012 05:50 teamhozac wrote:On June 13 2012 05:10 Rainling wrote:
A four queen opening is a significant economic investment that limits zerg's aggressive options in the early game. Hellion openings and other early game aggressive builds aren't nearly as effective against zerg, and this definitely represents a significant metagame shift, but defensive queen openings also open up new opportunities for terrans.
Four queen openings allow terrans to take a fast third and tech quickly without as much of a threat of aggression from zerg. Although zerg can spread creep early game without being inhibited by terran, terran can still kill creep tumors with midgame aggression. Mech builds incorporating ravens have the potential to effectively deal with late game zerg compositions.
I think we should wait a few months before deciding whether zerg is imbalanced in zvt or the metagame has simply shifted. Metagame shifts like the queen buff will usually be accompanied by shifts in win rates because people are still adjusting to new changes. Ummm even if a Terran player goes 1 rax FE into 3 CC he will still be way behind if he just allows the Z player to drone up and not put pressure on. Sure he will have 3 orbitals fast, but you will have 80 drones compared to 50 scvs, the ability to remax your army instantly, insane creep spread (since nothing is clearing it), etc. Playing pure macro against zerg DOES NOT WORK. Mech is good but only if you have good timing with your push. You have to deny creep and pressure zerg, otherwise your march across the field is gonna be met by maxed out roach army after army until the mech army is gone and takes 5 minutes to reproduce, or broodlords come out and take dumps all over your army It seems like even with the queen change, midgame aggression is still viable. Midgame drops and pushes off of three bases can still be effective even if the zerg has a strong economy to defend them. I could be wrong about this, though. Point is: it's the ONLY thing terran can still do. And to reiterate a point made by someone else: zerg doesn't have to play aggressive. Just don't show all your queens, unless you have to and drone like the greedy bastard you are. Wow, terran is already playing catchup for the rest of the game.
you're oversimplifying this rediculously. Mid-game aggression is not the ONLY thing terran can do. We aren't in an "end it in in the mid-game or you lose" situation like you seem to be on about, and we aren't crippled in the early game either. We're also fully capable of being greedy ourselves and macroing WITH a zerg safely (not same rate, but fast enough to not die), just not as rediculously fast as if you leave them alone to get to 200/200 and hope that everything will be okay despite wanting to have stayed on two bases doing nothing like a bronze league player.
|
On June 13 2012 04:40 Tibbroar wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2012 04:22 Shiori wrote:On June 13 2012 04:13 Tibbroar wrote:On June 13 2012 02:08 Shiori wrote:On June 13 2012 01:45 Thrombozyt wrote:On June 13 2012 01:23 SeaSwift wrote:On June 13 2012 01:11 Snowbear wrote:On June 13 2012 00:59 manloveman wrote:On June 13 2012 00:47 Snowbear wrote:On June 13 2012 00:34 SeaSwift wrote:
and PvT will continue being a bit Terran favoured because of basic maths. Terran is stronger before the 15 minute mark, Protoss after, and the time before that mark comes before the time after so it's easier to force an engagement and win.
Calling TvP a bit T favoured is really a slap in the fact of every terran. TvP is definitely not terran favoured... It's not heavy P favoured either, but still a bit. And you build that statement on the numbers in OP i suppose... I build that statement on opinions from terrans. I build it also on the last gsl, where immvp had to cheese hard to win He didn't. It is a complete myth that MVP played very cheesily, perpetuated in part by Naniwa fans. He played a macro game with drops in most games, and just destroyed his opponents. He was willing to go all-in when he saw weakness, like in game 1 vs Parting, but that is not cheese. Also, fuck opinions. People are biased, people are morons. Opinions don't say the whole story any more than statistics do. Winrate in standard games: 50% Is this a problem? When it's Mvp you're talking about? Yes, yes it is. Why is it a problem? Squirtle is an extremely capable PvTer. So is Parting. Stop acting like MVP is someone that's untouchable and should always have a 99% winrate or something. He's the favorite against every single player you match him up against, and his mechanics, and in particular his macro, are, if not the best, certainly beyond both Squirtle and Parting. Yet he's only managing 50% in macro games. I don't expect him to win every single game, but his mechanics alone, in a perfectly balanced game, should get him above a 50% winrate against anyone other than perhaps MKP and DRG.
I don't think that's true at all. Maybe the MVP of 6 months ago was the favourite against everyone, but certainly not anymore.
|
If you both do nothing to disturb the other, you cannot win. End of story.
Early game attacks can work, but are now easily scouted. Yes, it's possible to go to 3+ bases while playing semi-aggressive, but that's the point isn't it?
Terran needs to do so three times more just to stay on a kind of even footing with the other two races. It's not possible to go into "fuck it, macromode" unless your opponent plays "like a bronze league player".
|
On June 13 2012 04:53 Toadvine wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2012 03:39 Snowbear wrote:
Dragon vs lalush tsl qualifier today: perfect example of 2 base attacks being so damn bad vs zerg. Lalush went for 4 queen build --> roach lings (0 banelings), dragon went for hellion marauder, and dragon lost his army. I thought the more ridiculous result of that series was that the counter to mass BC/Raven is apparently mass Infestor. That's just fucking stupid no matter how you look at it. Terrans complain about feedback ruining their lategame units, but at least you can't simply mass HTs and expect to roll over everything.
Mass infestor is the counter to everything that's terran. Ghosts were less effective against zergs than infestors have been against terran for ages, but Blizzard in their absolute brilliance decided that ghosts were the problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
