This thread is going nowhere and I'm tired of dealing with it. Either drop the personal attacks and whining and replace it with actual discussion or it'll be closed.
On June 27 2012 06:19 Dalavita wrote: I don't think any of the terrans will switch to be honest. They'll keep grinding the game in the hopes of finding something new.
Regardless of what they'll find, if they'll discover some endgame composition that works against the endgame of the zerg or whatnot doesn't change the fact that Blizzard hamhandedly broke the earlygame of TvZ, a matchup that was considered balanced.
Edit: Statistics aside. The matchup is less fun than it was before. Who would want to turtle on their ass for 10+ minutes before anything happened? What is the point in those first ten minutes if nothing important happens...
If terrans discovered that turtling on 4 base until BC/Ravens was successful, the earlygame of TvZ would still be broken, regardless of statistical balance.
I see two ways out of this situation, actually.
1) a T build gets developed that takes advantage of the lack of threats from Z in the early game. Everybody starts doing that, the metagame shifts, and Z eventually start cutting corners by getting less queens (because they don't give them an auto-win since aggression isn't that common anymore). At this point, pressure builds, threats and feints become viable again. 2) no such build gets discovered and Blizzard patches this up.
Zerg will never have an incentive to produce less queens. Why would you get less of something that:
1) Doesn't use larva 2) Serves as a replacement for spine crawlers, thereby saving a drone 3) Facilitates the spread of creep 4) Counters any early game aggression with ease 5) Provides Anti Air 6) Has the transfuse ability that can be used on units/spines for any excess queens that accrue energy
On June 27 2012 06:19 Dalavita wrote: I don't think any of the terrans will switch to be honest. They'll keep grinding the game in the hopes of finding something new.
Regardless of what they'll find, if they'll discover some endgame composition that works against the endgame of the zerg or whatnot doesn't change the fact that Blizzard hamhandedly broke the earlygame of TvZ, a matchup that was considered balanced.
Edit: Statistics aside. The matchup is less fun than it was before. Who would want to turtle on their ass for 10+ minutes before anything happened? What is the point in those first ten minutes if nothing important happens...
If terrans discovered that turtling on 4 base until BC/Ravens was successful, the earlygame of TvZ would still be broken, regardless of statistical balance.
I see two ways out of this situation, actually.
1) a T build gets developed that takes advantage of the lack of threats from Z in the early game. Everybody starts doing that, the metagame shifts, and Z eventually start cutting corners by getting less queens (because they don't give them an auto-win since aggression isn't that common anymore). At this point, pressure builds, threats and feints become viable again. 2) no such build gets discovered and Blizzard patches this up.
Zerg will never have an incentive to produce less queens. Why would you get less of something that:
1) Doesn't use larva 2) Serves as a replacement for spine crawlers, thereby saving a drone 3) Facilitates the spread of creep 4) Counters any early game aggression with ease 5) Provides Anti Air 6) Has the transfuse ability that can be used on units/spines for any excess queens that accrue energy
because they can't attack off creep and they take up 2 supply? They are not the be-all-end-all of Zerg units. Yes, there is great incentive to build lots early game. But there are plenty of reasons to NOT spend 150 minerals on a 2 supply unit that you cannot (reasonably) bring to your opponent's base (early game).
The ghost nerf was rushed. There were only a handful of lategame TvZs that went the mass ghost route, and zergs won half of them. The other half was won by pretty much MVP alone in situations where he was advantaged before even getting the ghosts. We never got to see zergs response to the mass ghost play and what it would lead to,
No that wasnt a "handful" of lategame TvZ, that thing was everywhere on ladder, i played against that, and litteraly no matter how ahead I was, a million snipe was the solution to everything, the MVP game was just the highlight of it.
Also, it wasnt really something that could have waited for the metagame to catch-up or something because unlike many other claim of imbalance you cant really tell zerg to "Make x unit/army comp" against ghost, because zerg had absolutely no anti-caster unit in their tech tree, like there would have never ever been any counter to that.
I do aggree that snipe got "overnerfed" though, and that a snipe wont 1Shot a baneling anymore is pretty sad
In my opinion, the ghost nerf may have been needed as a way of keeping the game interesting. We can't have one unit that counters all units even if it requires exceptional micro.
However, if the ghost is to be nerfed, we must have other options, i.e. The Raven. However, for 100/200 the Raven is not at all worth its cost. All it takes is 1 fungal from infestors on your Ravens and it's GG in the late game. And Ravens by no means give you an advantage IF you are even able to tech to them. Ravens only allow you to compete in the late game a little bit by offering the threat of HSM at reckless BL/Corrupter/Infestor comps. The Raven needs a few things like a speed increase, perhaps a 50 gas reduction, and the ability to cast while it's being fungaled, which right now renders the unit basically useless.
On June 27 2012 06:19 Dalavita wrote: I don't think any of the terrans will switch to be honest. They'll keep grinding the game in the hopes of finding something new.
Regardless of what they'll find, if they'll discover some endgame composition that works against the endgame of the zerg or whatnot doesn't change the fact that Blizzard hamhandedly broke the earlygame of TvZ, a matchup that was considered balanced.
Edit: Statistics aside. The matchup is less fun than it was before. Who would want to turtle on their ass for 10+ minutes before anything happened? What is the point in those first ten minutes if nothing important happens...
If terrans discovered that turtling on 4 base until BC/Ravens was successful, the earlygame of TvZ would still be broken, regardless of statistical balance.
I see two ways out of this situation, actually.
1) a T build gets developed that takes advantage of the lack of threats from Z in the early game. Everybody starts doing that, the metagame shifts, and Z eventually start cutting corners by getting less queens (because they don't give them an auto-win since aggression isn't that common anymore). At this point, pressure builds, threats and feints become viable again. 2) no such build gets discovered and Blizzard patches this up.
Zerg will never have an incentive to produce less queens. Why would you get less of something that:
1) Doesn't use larva 2) Serves as a replacement for spine crawlers, thereby saving a drone 3) Facilitates the spread of creep 4) Counters any early game aggression with ease 5) Provides Anti Air 6) Has the transfuse ability that can be used on units/spines for any excess queens that accrue energy
because they can't attack off creep and they take up 2 supply? They are not the be-all-end-all of Zerg units. Yes, there is great incentive to build lots early game. But there are plenty of reasons to NOT spend 150 minerals on a 2 supply unit that you cannot (reasonably) bring to your opponent's base (early game).
Ok so if there are plenty of reasons NOT to spend 150 minerals on a 2 supply unit, what are they? You mention there are plenty of reasons and do not even offer one yourself.
Is 2 supply really supply prohibitive in the early game when each larva is important? Is there even a need to attack off-creep, or are queens defensive units that permit Zerg to reach 3 base full saturation with ease? Your reasons are terribly weak, and in the end, I think you'd be hard pressed to find a good player who wouldn't forgo spending larva, dropping extra spines to produce more queens.
On June 27 2012 11:15 AKomrade wrote: Maybe a damage upgrade for siege mode ONLY at Fusion Core tech? It would reduce splash, but increase base damage (+10). Wouldn't rebreak TvP because its at Fusion Core tech and chargelots would be just as effective, plus rushing Fusion Core would significantly reduce your tank count early on. It'd flow with TvT late game through BC/viking/tank and it wouldn't drop off vs ultras in vZ, making remax tech switches more difficult.
What exactly would this solve? It wouldn't do jack shit for TvP, trying to transition into tanks at fusion core tech would be a joke, especially without mechanical ground upgrades. TvT already has mass tanks. The damage upgrade would only help vs ultras and nerf it vs every other unit Zerg has since the siege tank already 1 or 2 hits all the units and the +10 damage would not change the number of hits to a kill (still kills lings/blings one shot, infestors two shot, and no one makes roach/hydra that late, although it wouldn't affect roaches anyways).
Well, its all negotiable. Buffing tanks to do SOMETHING instead of the napkin damage they do now would be fairly effective. You obviously can't just throw in extra shit right off the bat because it'd just regress the TvX matchups back to the 1/1/1 and providing limpwristed upgrades late into the game (like the Phoenix range buff) would be totally pointless. The idea was also to go MMT or mech vs Protoss so you wouldn't have to invest
Shit, I dunno. I like the way tanks fuck shit up and ravens are so gas heavy and useful after EVERYTHING is upgraded, feels like tanks would be more logical to upgrade or buff since every matchup does or will include them PLUS all of the benefits of having tanks. Unsiege time decrease? Redo the 1.1 nerf? Just having tanks would force broodlords and simply forcing broodlords to be made to clear tanks would mean you could start viking production far earlier into the game without being afraid of wasting the supply.
I liked the NSH.Sting build vs SlayersCoca on Ohana. Elevated hellions into to main take advantage of no gas openings. Even 4 hellions can do some significant damage and at least partially behind.
I like queens, but they have obvious problems vs fast units if creep spread is not optimal. Also their pathing at mineral lines is not amazing, but is less pronnouched after they increased the range by 2.
In my opinion, the ghost nerf may have been needed as a way of keeping the game interesting. We can't have one unit that counters all units even if it requires exceptional micro.
The ghost nerf was rushed. There were only a handful of lategame TvZs that went the mass ghost route, and zergs won half of them. The other half was won by pretty much MVP alone in situations where he was advantaged before even getting the ghosts. We never got to see zergs response to the mass ghost play and what it would lead to,
No that wasnt a "handful" of lategame TvZ, that thing was everywhere on ladder, i played against that, and litteraly no matter how ahead I was, a million snipe was the solution to everything, the MVP game was just the highlight of it.
Also, it wasnt really something that could have waited for the metagame to catch-up or something because unlike many other claim of imbalance you cant really tell zerg to "Make x unit/army comp" against ghost, because zerg had absolutely no anti-caster unit in their tech tree, like there would have never ever been any counter to that.
I do aggree that snipe got "overnerfed" though, and that a snipe wont 1Shot a baneling anymore is pretty sad
In my opinion, the ghost nerf may have been needed as a way of keeping the game interesting. We can't have one unit that counters all units even if it requires exceptional micro.
However, if the ghost is to be nerfed, we must have other options, i.e. The Raven. However, for 100/200 the Raven is not at all worth its cost. All it takes is 1 fungal from infestors on your Ravens and it's GG in the late game. And Ravens by no means give you an advantage IF you are even able to tech to them. Ravens only allow you to compete in the late game a little bit by offering the threat of HSM at reckless BL/Corrupter/Infestor comps. The Raven needs a few things like a speed increase, perhaps a 50 gas reduction, and the ability to cast while it's being fungaled, which right now renders the unit basically useless.
it doesn't have to be a 45->25 damage nerf. they could've tested something like 30,35, or 40 for snipe nerf imo same as 3->5 for queens, but zzz
1. only applies when the expansion is already here. Until then, it's a no point. SC2 might have new ideas coming in, but the scene is established, the best players are established and the metagame is established, and we can use history and experience to be able to analyze current situations and changes better. Back then none of these factors were present.
2. I'm sure you enjoy the matchup, and I might as well if I played zerg. However I don't think it's unfair to say that the matchup is worse off because of the change, and considering what we gained with the change (zergs have to try less hard to defend against hellions I guess?) to a previously balanced matchup and what we had to give up to get it. I didn't mind all the trillion bunker nerfs that terrans got even though Blizzard might have gone overboard in combination with larger maps, because they made the matchup better overall. This change? No positive change whatsoever. I don't think I'm the only one feeling this way, since there hasn't been this much of an uproar over a change since ever, and the uproar is cross race.
3. Whether it was wrong or not, it was generally considered that zergs had the super lategame going for them even back then due to the larva mechanics. They did have something to look forward too when they worked at surviving. At the moment as a terran, your thought process is basically "oh, I didn't cripple him the first ten minutes, it's time to slowly die unless he goes full retard."
1. This makes no sense to me. That's like saying in the early days that we can't hope for new improvements until they actually release them? Lol. We already know 2 expansions are coming out, simple as that. You know 100% that there will be massive metagame shifts and unit composition changes, what is there to argue? My point is that it's NOT THAT BAD. Now you just enter into mid and lategame without easily being able to gain an advantage unless you do something clever, you can't simply do the exact same cookie-cutter build every game and have a very high chance of crippling your opponent...back in the early days Zergs had to worry about simply dying in the first 10 minutes of every single game...just let that sink in for a moment as you reflect upon how bad you guys have it now, lawl. Also, I'm still not convinced that Terrans simply don't require more build changes and strategy improvement, Terrans have been crying about this change since the day it came out and I really think that 90% of the people complaining have done hardly a thing to try and change their own play up in compensation. The only reason you see a difference between Terran complaints now and past Zerg complaints is because you are very, very biased.
2. Maybe you think there is no positives but I see plenty. For one, Zergs typically aren't dying nearly as often because one of their Queens was out of position by a quarter of an inch allowing Hellions to run by a gap the Zerg thought was covered. Secondly, ZvZ is greatly improved and a hell of a lot more fun now as well.
3. Actually Zergs still died all the time in the super late game vs Protoss and Terrans...so, your opinion is simply that, your opinion. Also, you seem to still think that Zerg has an advantage over Zerg in the late game but I really doubt that, Terrans can play late game just fine if they utilize their units properly and play it out right. I still almost never see Terrans build Ghosts, yet the few that do always make me happy to play against because their late game is 3x as hard to fight as a scrub Terran who refuses to build them even once.
Beenu, You are obviously "very, very biased" yourself. Simply saying "Terran's need to evolve" and "use their units properly" does not get rid of the pink elephant in the room. Want to talk about bias? Morrow (Pro Zerg and Terran) player, believes they are too powerful and the buff was unnecessary. As a former GM, I would hope you take some advice when i say there is only so much you can do mechanically when a zerg queens up to 5-7 queens, turtles then takes a substantial eco advantage. It becomes a all-in coin flip for Terran. I suggest you watch some of these interviews and read some legitmate Pro threads before you throw your, less experienced, two sense in.
Watch around 5:30
Kawaii rice interview
blah blah blah, yawn. I'm not really biased much at all really, I understand Terrans are having a tough time and for some players that may be a legitimate concern, no argument here. Whether or not the buff was "necessary" or not is still irrelevant, it exists simple as that so you need to learn to deal with it until either the problem goes away with metagame changes or blizzard makes changes. But no, most Terrans seem to prefer to just weep and cry about Queens and then use that opportunity to start crying about Infestors all over again [rooooooofl] and quite frankly, when people keep crying about Infestors they just lose all credibility with me. It's hard not to generalize, but this thread makes me think Terrans just wanna cry for the sake of crying when they can't even stay on-topic for what they want to cry about in the first place.
1. only applies when the expansion is already here. Until then, it's a no point. SC2 might have new ideas coming in, but the scene is established, the best players are established and the metagame is established, and we can use history and experience to be able to analyze current situations and changes better. Back then none of these factors were present.
2. I'm sure you enjoy the matchup, and I might as well if I played zerg. However I don't think it's unfair to say that the matchup is worse off because of the change, and considering what we gained with the change (zergs have to try less hard to defend against hellions I guess?) to a previously balanced matchup and what we had to give up to get it. I didn't mind all the trillion bunker nerfs that terrans got even though Blizzard might have gone overboard in combination with larger maps, because they made the matchup better overall. This change? No positive change whatsoever. I don't think I'm the only one feeling this way, since there hasn't been this much of an uproar over a change since ever, and the uproar is cross race.
3. Whether it was wrong or not, it was generally considered that zergs had the super lategame going for them even back then due to the larva mechanics. They did have something to look forward too when they worked at surviving. At the moment as a terran, your thought process is basically "oh, I didn't cripple him the first ten minutes, it's time to slowly die unless he goes full retard."
1. This makes no sense to me. That's like saying in the early days that we can't hope for new improvements until they actually release them? Lol. We already know 2 expansions are coming out, simple as that. You know 100% that there will be massive metagame shifts and unit composition changes, what is there to argue? My point is that it's NOT THAT BAD. Now you just enter into mid and lategame without easily being able to gain an advantage unless you do something clever, you can't simply do the exact same cookie-cutter build every game and have a very high chance of crippling your opponent...back in the early days Zergs had to worry about simply dying in the first 10 minutes of every single game...just let that sink in for a moment as you reflect upon how bad you guys have it now, lawl. Also, I'm still not convinced that Terrans simply don't require more build changes and strategy improvement, Terrans have been crying about this change since the day it came out and I really think that 90% of the people complaining have done hardly a thing to try and change their own play up in compensation. The only reason you see a difference between Terran complaints now and past Zerg complaints is because you are very, very biased.
2. Maybe you think there is no positives but I see plenty. For one, Zergs typically aren't dying nearly as often because one of their Queens was out of position by a quarter of an inch allowing Hellions to run by a gap the Zerg thought was covered. Secondly, ZvZ is greatly improved and a hell of a lot more fun now as well.
3. Actually Zergs still died all the time in the super late game vs Protoss and Terrans...so, your opinion is simply that, your opinion. Also, you seem to still think that Zerg has an advantage over Zerg in the late game but I really doubt that, Terrans can play late game just fine if they utilize their units properly and play it out right. I still almost never see Terrans build Ghosts, yet the few that do always make me happy to play against because their late game is 3x as hard to fight as a scrub Terran who refuses to build them even once.
Beenu, You are obviously "very, very biased" yourself. Simply saying "Terran's need to evolve" and "use their units properly" does not get rid of the pink elephant in the room. Want to talk about bias? Morrow (Pro Zerg and Terran) player, believes they are too powerful and the buff was unnecessary. As a former GM, I would hope you take some advice when i say there is only so much you can do mechanically when a zerg queens up to 5-7 queens, turtles then takes a substantial eco advantage. It becomes a all-in coin flip for Terran. I suggest you watch some of these interviews and read some legitmate Pro threads before you throw your, less experienced, two sense in.
blah blah blah, yawn. I'm not really biased much at all really, I understand Terrans are having a tough time and for some players that may be a legitimate concern, no argument here. Whether or not the buff was "necessary" or not is still irrelevant, it exists simple as that so you need to learn to deal with it until either the problem goes away with metagame changes or blizzard makes changes. But no, most Terrans seem to prefer to just weep and cry about Queens and then use that opportunity to start crying about Infestors all over again [rooooooofl] and quite frankly, when people keep crying about Infestors they just lose all credibility with me. It's hard not to generalize, but this thread makes me think Terrans just wanna cry for the sake of crying when they can't even stay on-topic for what they want to cry about in the first place.
A lot of Terran's are not whining...they're just switching to zerg LOL. Why not, its arguably the most powerful race. I was just watching the ogs4gg stream. He just lost to DeMuslim who is offracing as zerg! DeMuslim, like he mentions in his interview criticizing the riduclous buff, just started playing zerg and made mass queendralisks on 3base...GG to 4GG helions and banshee push! Awesome. So to answer your question, we dont whine, I just hope Blizzard is satisfied when they have a notoriously low level of Terran players on ladder.
1. only applies when the expansion is already here. Until then, it's a no point. SC2 might have new ideas coming in, but the scene is established, the best players are established and the metagame is established, and we can use history and experience to be able to analyze current situations and changes better. Back then none of these factors were present.
2. I'm sure you enjoy the matchup, and I might as well if I played zerg. However I don't think it's unfair to say that the matchup is worse off because of the change, and considering what we gained with the change (zergs have to try less hard to defend against hellions I guess?) to a previously balanced matchup and what we had to give up to get it. I didn't mind all the trillion bunker nerfs that terrans got even though Blizzard might have gone overboard in combination with larger maps, because they made the matchup better overall. This change? No positive change whatsoever. I don't think I'm the only one feeling this way, since there hasn't been this much of an uproar over a change since ever, and the uproar is cross race.
3. Whether it was wrong or not, it was generally considered that zergs had the super lategame going for them even back then due to the larva mechanics. They did have something to look forward too when they worked at surviving. At the moment as a terran, your thought process is basically "oh, I didn't cripple him the first ten minutes, it's time to slowly die unless he goes full retard."
1. This makes no sense to me. That's like saying in the early days that we can't hope for new improvements until they actually release them? Lol. We already know 2 expansions are coming out, simple as that. You know 100% that there will be massive metagame shifts and unit composition changes, what is there to argue? My point is that it's NOT THAT BAD. Now you just enter into mid and lategame without easily being able to gain an advantage unless you do something clever, you can't simply do the exact same cookie-cutter build every game and have a very high chance of crippling your opponent...back in the early days Zergs had to worry about simply dying in the first 10 minutes of every single game...just let that sink in for a moment as you reflect upon how bad you guys have it now, lawl. Also, I'm still not convinced that Terrans simply don't require more build changes and strategy improvement, Terrans have been crying about this change since the day it came out and I really think that 90% of the people complaining have done hardly a thing to try and change their own play up in compensation. The only reason you see a difference between Terran complaints now and past Zerg complaints is because you are very, very biased.
2. Maybe you think there is no positives but I see plenty. For one, Zergs typically aren't dying nearly as often because one of their Queens was out of position by a quarter of an inch allowing Hellions to run by a gap the Zerg thought was covered. Secondly, ZvZ is greatly improved and a hell of a lot more fun now as well.
3. Actually Zergs still died all the time in the super late game vs Protoss and Terrans...so, your opinion is simply that, your opinion. Also, you seem to still think that Zerg has an advantage over Zerg in the late game but I really doubt that, Terrans can play late game just fine if they utilize their units properly and play it out right. I still almost never see Terrans build Ghosts, yet the few that do always make me happy to play against because their late game is 3x as hard to fight as a scrub Terran who refuses to build them even once.
Beenu, You are obviously "very, very biased" yourself. Simply saying "Terran's need to evolve" and "use their units properly" does not get rid of the pink elephant in the room. Want to talk about bias? Morrow (Pro Zerg and Terran) player, believes they are too powerful and the buff was unnecessary. As a former GM, I would hope you take some advice when i say there is only so much you can do mechanically when a zerg queens up to 5-7 queens, turtles then takes a substantial eco advantage. It becomes a all-in coin flip for Terran. I suggest you watch some of these interviews and read some legitmate Pro threads before you throw your, less experienced, two sense in.
blah blah blah, yawn. I'm not really biased much at all really, I understand Terrans are having a tough time and for some players that may be a legitimate concern, no argument here. Whether or not the buff was "necessary" or not is still irrelevant, it exists simple as that so you need to learn to deal with it until either the problem goes away with metagame changes or blizzard makes changes. But no, most Terrans seem to prefer to just weep and cry about Queens and then use that opportunity to start crying about Infestors all over again [rooooooofl] and quite frankly, when people keep crying about Infestors they just lose all credibility with me. It's hard not to generalize, but this thread makes me think Terrans just wanna cry for the sake of crying when they can't even stay on-topic for what they want to cry about in the first place.
A lot of Terran's are not whining...they're just switching to zerg LOL. Why not, its arguably the most powerful race. I was just watching the ogs4gg stream. He just lost to DeMuslim who is offracing as zerg! DeMuslim, like he mentions in his interview criticizing the riduclous buff, just started playing zerg and made mass queendralisks on 3base...GG to 4GG helions and banshee push! Awesome. So to answer your question, we dont whine, I just hope Blizzard is satisfied when they have a notoriously low level of Terran players on ladder.
There already is a notoriously low amount of Terran players on ladder. I rarely see Terran on the ladder. It's like 55% Zerg, 40% Protoss, 5% Terran from the people I play.
1. only applies when the expansion is already here. Until then, it's a no point. SC2 might have new ideas coming in, but the scene is established, the best players are established and the metagame is established, and we can use history and experience to be able to analyze current situations and changes better. Back then none of these factors were present.
2. I'm sure you enjoy the matchup, and I might as well if I played zerg. However I don't think it's unfair to say that the matchup is worse off because of the change, and considering what we gained with the change (zergs have to try less hard to defend against hellions I guess?) to a previously balanced matchup and what we had to give up to get it. I didn't mind all the trillion bunker nerfs that terrans got even though Blizzard might have gone overboard in combination with larger maps, because they made the matchup better overall. This change? No positive change whatsoever. I don't think I'm the only one feeling this way, since there hasn't been this much of an uproar over a change since ever, and the uproar is cross race.
3. Whether it was wrong or not, it was generally considered that zergs had the super lategame going for them even back then due to the larva mechanics. They did have something to look forward too when they worked at surviving. At the moment as a terran, your thought process is basically "oh, I didn't cripple him the first ten minutes, it's time to slowly die unless he goes full retard."
1. This makes no sense to me. That's like saying in the early days that we can't hope for new improvements until they actually release them? Lol. We already know 2 expansions are coming out, simple as that. You know 100% that there will be massive metagame shifts and unit composition changes, what is there to argue? My point is that it's NOT THAT BAD. Now you just enter into mid and lategame without easily being able to gain an advantage unless you do something clever, you can't simply do the exact same cookie-cutter build every game and have a very high chance of crippling your opponent...back in the early days Zergs had to worry about simply dying in the first 10 minutes of every single game...just let that sink in for a moment as you reflect upon how bad you guys have it now, lawl. Also, I'm still not convinced that Terrans simply don't require more build changes and strategy improvement, Terrans have been crying about this change since the day it came out and I really think that 90% of the people complaining have done hardly a thing to try and change their own play up in compensation. The only reason you see a difference between Terran complaints now and past Zerg complaints is because you are very, very biased.
2. Maybe you think there is no positives but I see plenty. For one, Zergs typically aren't dying nearly as often because one of their Queens was out of position by a quarter of an inch allowing Hellions to run by a gap the Zerg thought was covered. Secondly, ZvZ is greatly improved and a hell of a lot more fun now as well.
3. Actually Zergs still died all the time in the super late game vs Protoss and Terrans...so, your opinion is simply that, your opinion. Also, you seem to still think that Zerg has an advantage over Zerg in the late game but I really doubt that, Terrans can play late game just fine if they utilize their units properly and play it out right. I still almost never see Terrans build Ghosts, yet the few that do always make me happy to play against because their late game is 3x as hard to fight as a scrub Terran who refuses to build them even once.
Beenu, You are obviously "very, very biased" yourself. Simply saying "Terran's need to evolve" and "use their units properly" does not get rid of the pink elephant in the room. Want to talk about bias? Morrow (Pro Zerg and Terran) player, believes they are too powerful and the buff was unnecessary. As a former GM, I would hope you take some advice when i say there is only so much you can do mechanically when a zerg queens up to 5-7 queens, turtles then takes a substantial eco advantage. It becomes a all-in coin flip for Terran. I suggest you watch some of these interviews and read some legitmate Pro threads before you throw your, less experienced, two sense in.
blah blah blah, yawn. I'm not really biased much at all really, I understand Terrans are having a tough time and for some players that may be a legitimate concern, no argument here. Whether or not the buff was "necessary" or not is still irrelevant, it exists simple as that so you need to learn to deal with it until either the problem goes away with metagame changes or blizzard makes changes. But no, most Terrans seem to prefer to just weep and cry about Queens and then use that opportunity to start crying about Infestors all over again [rooooooofl] and quite frankly, when people keep crying about Infestors they just lose all credibility with me. It's hard not to generalize, but this thread makes me think Terrans just wanna cry for the sake of crying when they can't even stay on-topic for what they want to cry about in the first place.
A lot of Terran's are not whining...they're just switching to zerg LOL. Why not, its arguably the most powerful race. I was just watching the ogs4gg stream. He just lost to DeMuslim who is offracing as zerg! DeMuslim, like he mentions in his interview criticizing the riduclous buff, just started playing zerg and made mass queendralisks on 3base...GG to 4GG helions and banshee push! Awesome. So to answer your question, we dont whine, I just hope Blizzard is satisfied when they have a notoriously low level of Terran players on ladder.
There already is a notoriously low amount of Terran players on ladder. I rarely see Terran on the ladder. It's like 55% Zerg, 40% Protoss, 5% Terran from the people I play.
looking at my sc2gears I've gotten 37% terran 32% Protoss 30% Zerg 1% Random the past week at mid master.
i know im gonna get extremely flamed for this but what if snipe was made autocast against units with more than 35hp with smartcasting to avoid overkill
each cast of fungal right now is doing ~200 damage. thats insane damage per 75 energy and damage per click
snipe does 25 damage per energy, 25 damage per click. but its virtually impossible to actually cast all you need
however what if snipe was autocast? in reality fungal growth needs time to spread its damage among an entire army. but if snipe was autocast, mass ghosts could just blanket their snipes against everything (except ling/bane which tanks/hellions could take care of)
festors right now are doing 200 damage per click of fungal, however normally only 4-5 fungals max can be used every 4 seconds because 4-5 fungals hits his entire army, and additional fungals do nothing. you must wait for the fungals to wear off before csating again
this means fungal is doing about, lets say 1000 damage every 4 seconds if your using 5 fungals for his entire army
5 infestors can sustain that for 8 seconds. 10 infestors can sustain that for 16 seconds
ghosts on the otherhand if snipe was made autocast would rival the damage infestors. each ghost would be dealing 75 dps so 10ghosts would sustain 750 dps for 2.6 seconds
but then look at a mass ghost scenario. 30 ghosts would sustain 2250 dps for 2.6 seconds. meaning a terran lategame army with mass ghosts would could contest the power of infestors because 30 infestors only sustain 1000 dps, but 30 ghosts would sustain 2250 dps. however the infestors could do it for much longer so the burst dps of the ghosts could even things out
in pure damage numbers if snipe was made autocast, 2250 dps over 2.6 seconds from 30 ghosts could kill 11.5 ultralisks in 2.6 seconds. 30 ghosts is 60food and 11.5 ultras is 69 food so the ghosts would be pretty powerful then
On June 27 2012 12:54 andropopp wrote: i know im gonna get extremely flamed for this but what if snipe was made autocast against units with more than 35hp with smartcasting to avoid overkill
each cast of fungal right now is doing ~200 damage. thats insane damage per 75 energy and damage per click
snipe does 25 damage per energy, 25 damage per click. but its virtually impossible to actually cast all you need
however what if snipe was autocast? in reality fungal growth needs time to spread its damage among an entire army. but if snipe was autocast, mass ghosts could just blanket their snipes against everything (except ling/bane which tanks/hellions could take care of)
festors right now are doing 200 damage per click of fungal, however normally only 4-5 fungals max can be used every 4 seconds because 4-5 fungals hits his entire army, and additional fungals do nothing. you must wait for the fungals to wear off before csating again
this means fungal is doing about, lets say 1000 damage every 4 seconds if your using 5 fungals for his entire army
5 infestors can sustain that for 8 seconds. 10 infestors can sustain that for 16 seconds
ghosts on the otherhand if snipe was made autocast would rival the damage infestors. each ghost would be dealing 75 dps so 10ghosts would sustain 750 dps for 2.6 seconds
but then look at a mass ghost scenario. 30 ghosts would sustain 2250 dps for 2.6 seconds. meaning a terran lategame army with mass ghosts would could contest the power of infestors because 30 infestors only sustain 1000 dps, but 30 ghosts would sustain 2250 dps. however the infestors could do it for much longer so the burst dps of the ghosts could even things out
in pure damage numbers if snipe was made autocast, 2250 dps over 2.6 seconds from 30 ghosts could kill 11.5 ultralisks in 2.6 seconds. 30 ghosts is 60food and 11.5 ultras is 69 food so the ghosts would be pretty powerful then
I see what you mean, but I don't really like autocasting ____.
I would like to see a buff to the damage 25-> 30? 35? 40? might be nice to test out at least.
1. only applies when the expansion is already here. Until then, it's a no point. SC2 might have new ideas coming in, but the scene is established, the best players are established and the metagame is established, and we can use history and experience to be able to analyze current situations and changes better. Back then none of these factors were present.
2. I'm sure you enjoy the matchup, and I might as well if I played zerg. However I don't think it's unfair to say that the matchup is worse off because of the change, and considering what we gained with the change (zergs have to try less hard to defend against hellions I guess?) to a previously balanced matchup and what we had to give up to get it. I didn't mind all the trillion bunker nerfs that terrans got even though Blizzard might have gone overboard in combination with larger maps, because they made the matchup better overall. This change? No positive change whatsoever. I don't think I'm the only one feeling this way, since there hasn't been this much of an uproar over a change since ever, and the uproar is cross race.
3. Whether it was wrong or not, it was generally considered that zergs had the super lategame going for them even back then due to the larva mechanics. They did have something to look forward too when they worked at surviving. At the moment as a terran, your thought process is basically "oh, I didn't cripple him the first ten minutes, it's time to slowly die unless he goes full retard."
1. This makes no sense to me. That's like saying in the early days that we can't hope for new improvements until they actually release them? Lol. We already know 2 expansions are coming out, simple as that. You know 100% that there will be massive metagame shifts and unit composition changes, what is there to argue? My point is that it's NOT THAT BAD. Now you just enter into mid and lategame without easily being able to gain an advantage unless you do something clever, you can't simply do the exact same cookie-cutter build every game and have a very high chance of crippling your opponent...back in the early days Zergs had to worry about simply dying in the first 10 minutes of every single game...just let that sink in for a moment as you reflect upon how bad you guys have it now, lawl. Also, I'm still not convinced that Terrans simply don't require more build changes and strategy improvement, Terrans have been crying about this change since the day it came out and I really think that 90% of the people complaining have done hardly a thing to try and change their own play up in compensation. The only reason you see a difference between Terran complaints now and past Zerg complaints is because you are very, very biased.
2. Maybe you think there is no positives but I see plenty. For one, Zergs typically aren't dying nearly as often because one of their Queens was out of position by a quarter of an inch allowing Hellions to run by a gap the Zerg thought was covered. Secondly, ZvZ is greatly improved and a hell of a lot more fun now as well.
3. Actually Zergs still died all the time in the super late game vs Protoss and Terrans...so, your opinion is simply that, your opinion. Also, you seem to still think that Zerg has an advantage over Zerg in the late game but I really doubt that, Terrans can play late game just fine if they utilize their units properly and play it out right. I still almost never see Terrans build Ghosts, yet the few that do always make me happy to play against because their late game is 3x as hard to fight as a scrub Terran who refuses to build them even once.
Beenu, You are obviously "very, very biased" yourself. Simply saying "Terran's need to evolve" and "use their units properly" does not get rid of the pink elephant in the room. Want to talk about bias? Morrow (Pro Zerg and Terran) player, believes they are too powerful and the buff was unnecessary. As a former GM, I would hope you take some advice when i say there is only so much you can do mechanically when a zerg queens up to 5-7 queens, turtles then takes a substantial eco advantage. It becomes a all-in coin flip for Terran. I suggest you watch some of these interviews and read some legitmate Pro threads before you throw your, less experienced, two sense in.
blah blah blah, yawn. I'm not really biased much at all really, I understand Terrans are having a tough time and for some players that may be a legitimate concern, no argument here. Whether or not the buff was "necessary" or not is still irrelevant, it exists simple as that so you need to learn to deal with it until either the problem goes away with metagame changes or blizzard makes changes. But no, most Terrans seem to prefer to just weep and cry about Queens and then use that opportunity to start crying about Infestors all over again [rooooooofl] and quite frankly, when people keep crying about Infestors they just lose all credibility with me. It's hard not to generalize, but this thread makes me think Terrans just wanna cry for the sake of crying when they can't even stay on-topic for what they want to cry about in the first place.
A lot of Terran's are not whining...they're just switching to zerg LOL. Why not, its arguably the most powerful race. I was just watching the ogs4gg stream. He just lost to DeMuslim who is offracing as zerg! DeMuslim, like he mentions in his interview criticizing the riduclous buff, just started playing zerg and made mass queendralisks on 3base...GG to 4GG helions and banshee push! Awesome. So to answer your question, we dont whine, I just hope Blizzard is satisfied when they have a notoriously low level of Terran players on ladder.
There already is a notoriously low amount of Terran players on ladder. I rarely see Terran on the ladder. It's like 55% Zerg, 40% Protoss, 5% Terran from the people I play.
looking at my sc2gears I've gotten 37% terran 32% Protoss 30% Zerg 1% Random the past week at mid master.
Dont know what utility you are using but I get live data. There are about 26-27% Terran on ladder. It is currently the least played race.
1. only applies when the expansion is already here. Until then, it's a no point. SC2 might have new ideas coming in, but the scene is established, the best players are established and the metagame is established, and we can use history and experience to be able to analyze current situations and changes better. Back then none of these factors were present.
2. I'm sure you enjoy the matchup, and I might as well if I played zerg. However I don't think it's unfair to say that the matchup is worse off because of the change, and considering what we gained with the change (zergs have to try less hard to defend against hellions I guess?) to a previously balanced matchup and what we had to give up to get it. I didn't mind all the trillion bunker nerfs that terrans got even though Blizzard might have gone overboard in combination with larger maps, because they made the matchup better overall. This change? No positive change whatsoever. I don't think I'm the only one feeling this way, since there hasn't been this much of an uproar over a change since ever, and the uproar is cross race.
3. Whether it was wrong or not, it was generally considered that zergs had the super lategame going for them even back then due to the larva mechanics. They did have something to look forward too when they worked at surviving. At the moment as a terran, your thought process is basically "oh, I didn't cripple him the first ten minutes, it's time to slowly die unless he goes full retard."
1. This makes no sense to me. That's like saying in the early days that we can't hope for new improvements until they actually release them? Lol. We already know 2 expansions are coming out, simple as that. You know 100% that there will be massive metagame shifts and unit composition changes, what is there to argue? My point is that it's NOT THAT BAD. Now you just enter into mid and lategame without easily being able to gain an advantage unless you do something clever, you can't simply do the exact same cookie-cutter build every game and have a very high chance of crippling your opponent...back in the early days Zergs had to worry about simply dying in the first 10 minutes of every single game...just let that sink in for a moment as you reflect upon how bad you guys have it now, lawl. Also, I'm still not convinced that Terrans simply don't require more build changes and strategy improvement, Terrans have been crying about this change since the day it came out and I really think that 90% of the people complaining have done hardly a thing to try and change their own play up in compensation. The only reason you see a difference between Terran complaints now and past Zerg complaints is because you are very, very biased.
2. Maybe you think there is no positives but I see plenty. For one, Zergs typically aren't dying nearly as often because one of their Queens was out of position by a quarter of an inch allowing Hellions to run by a gap the Zerg thought was covered. Secondly, ZvZ is greatly improved and a hell of a lot more fun now as well.
3. Actually Zergs still died all the time in the super late game vs Protoss and Terrans...so, your opinion is simply that, your opinion. Also, you seem to still think that Zerg has an advantage over Zerg in the late game but I really doubt that, Terrans can play late game just fine if they utilize their units properly and play it out right. I still almost never see Terrans build Ghosts, yet the few that do always make me happy to play against because their late game is 3x as hard to fight as a scrub Terran who refuses to build them even once.
Beenu, You are obviously "very, very biased" yourself. Simply saying "Terran's need to evolve" and "use their units properly" does not get rid of the pink elephant in the room. Want to talk about bias? Morrow (Pro Zerg and Terran) player, believes they are too powerful and the buff was unnecessary. As a former GM, I would hope you take some advice when i say there is only so much you can do mechanically when a zerg queens up to 5-7 queens, turtles then takes a substantial eco advantage. It becomes a all-in coin flip for Terran. I suggest you watch some of these interviews and read some legitmate Pro threads before you throw your, less experienced, two sense in.
blah blah blah, yawn. I'm not really biased much at all really, I understand Terrans are having a tough time and for some players that may be a legitimate concern, no argument here. Whether or not the buff was "necessary" or not is still irrelevant, it exists simple as that so you need to learn to deal with it until either the problem goes away with metagame changes or blizzard makes changes. But no, most Terrans seem to prefer to just weep and cry about Queens and then use that opportunity to start crying about Infestors all over again [rooooooofl] and quite frankly, when people keep crying about Infestors they just lose all credibility with me. It's hard not to generalize, but this thread makes me think Terrans just wanna cry for the sake of crying when they can't even stay on-topic for what they want to cry about in the first place.
A lot of Terran's are not whining...they're just switching to zerg LOL. Why not, its arguably the most powerful race. I was just watching the ogs4gg stream. He just lost to DeMuslim who is offracing as zerg! DeMuslim, like he mentions in his interview criticizing the riduclous buff, just started playing zerg and made mass queendralisks on 3base...GG to 4GG helions and banshee push! Awesome. So to answer your question, we dont whine, I just hope Blizzard is satisfied when they have a notoriously low level of Terran players on ladder.
There already is a notoriously low amount of Terran players on ladder. I rarely see Terran on the ladder. It's like 55% Zerg, 40% Protoss, 5% Terran from the people I play.
looking at my sc2gears I've gotten 37% terran 32% Protoss 30% Zerg 1% Random the past week at mid master.
Dont know what utility you are using but I get live data. There are about 26-27% Terran on ladder. It is currently the least played race.
On June 27 2012 06:19 Dalavita wrote: I don't think any of the terrans will switch to be honest. They'll keep grinding the game in the hopes of finding something new.
Regardless of what they'll find, if they'll discover some endgame composition that works against the endgame of the zerg or whatnot doesn't change the fact that Blizzard hamhandedly broke the earlygame of TvZ, a matchup that was considered balanced.
Edit: Statistics aside. The matchup is less fun than it was before. Who would want to turtle on their ass for 10+ minutes before anything happened? What is the point in those first ten minutes if nothing important happens...
If terrans discovered that turtling on 4 base until BC/Ravens was successful, the earlygame of TvZ would still be broken, regardless of statistical balance.
I see two ways out of this situation, actually.
1) a T build gets developed that takes advantage of the lack of threats from Z in the early game. Everybody starts doing that, the metagame shifts, and Z eventually start cutting corners by getting less queens (because they don't give them an auto-win since aggression isn't that common anymore). At this point, pressure builds, threats and feints become viable again. 2) no such build gets discovered and Blizzard patches this up.
Zerg will never have an incentive to produce less queens. Why would you get less of something that:
1) Doesn't use larva 2) Serves as a replacement for spine crawlers, thereby saving a drone 3) Facilitates the spread of creep 4) Counters any early game aggression with ease 5) Provides Anti Air 6) Has the transfuse ability that can be used on units/spines for any excess queens that accrue energy
because they can't attack off creep and they take up 2 supply? They are not the be-all-end-all of Zerg units. Yes, there is great incentive to build lots early game. But there are plenty of reasons to NOT spend 150 minerals on a 2 supply unit that you cannot (reasonably) bring to your opponent's base (early game).
Ok so if there are plenty of reasons NOT to spend 150 minerals on a 2 supply unit, what are they? You mention there are plenty of reasons and do not even offer one yourself.
Is 2 supply really supply prohibitive in the early game when each larva is important? Is there even a need to attack off-creep, or are queens defensive units that permit Zerg to reach 3 base full saturation with ease? Your reasons are terribly weak, and in the end, I think you'd be hard pressed to find a good player who wouldn't forgo spending larva, dropping extra spines to produce more queens.
Didn't you even read the quote you responded to? They take up 2 supply, and you can't take them to your opponent's base. They are dead supply if you want to attack early-mid game. That is a reason not to build them. Current meta game this doesn't matter (and obviously you will always want 1 per hatch), but if zerg had an incentive/was forced to attack early, they would not build surplus queens like they do now.
On June 27 2012 06:19 Dalavita wrote: I don't think any of the terrans will switch to be honest. They'll keep grinding the game in the hopes of finding something new.
Regardless of what they'll find, if they'll discover some endgame composition that works against the endgame of the zerg or whatnot doesn't change the fact that Blizzard hamhandedly broke the earlygame of TvZ, a matchup that was considered balanced.
Edit: Statistics aside. The matchup is less fun than it was before. Who would want to turtle on their ass for 10+ minutes before anything happened? What is the point in those first ten minutes if nothing important happens...
If terrans discovered that turtling on 4 base until BC/Ravens was successful, the earlygame of TvZ would still be broken, regardless of statistical balance.
I see two ways out of this situation, actually.
1) a T build gets developed that takes advantage of the lack of threats from Z in the early game. Everybody starts doing that, the metagame shifts, and Z eventually start cutting corners by getting less queens (because they don't give them an auto-win since aggression isn't that common anymore). At this point, pressure builds, threats and feints become viable again. 2) no such build gets discovered and Blizzard patches this up.
Zerg will never have an incentive to produce less queens. Why would you get less of something that:
1) Doesn't use larva 2) Serves as a replacement for spine crawlers, thereby saving a drone 3) Facilitates the spread of creep 4) Counters any early game aggression with ease 5) Provides Anti Air 6) Has the transfuse ability that can be used on units/spines for any excess queens that accrue energy
because they can't attack off creep and they take up 2 supply? They are not the be-all-end-all of Zerg units. Yes, there is great incentive to build lots early game. But there are plenty of reasons to NOT spend 150 minerals on a 2 supply unit that you cannot (reasonably) bring to your opponent's base (early game).
Considering the creep spread will cover 90% of the map by the 10 minute mark, the "can't attack off creep" argument is invalid. Further, they are amazing in lategame broodlord/infestor army compositions as they can endlessly transfuse broodlords during fights. I remember a hilarious TvZ of Demuslim vs some guy called Ftizyhere (NA Zerg) where Demuslim was focusing down one single broodlord with every viking he had for an entire fight and it kept getting transfused, meanwhile Demuslim lost his entire army to fungal/broodlord and tapped out.
Queens are just way too versatile a unit, and so is the infestor. I can't see why the race with the best macro and best remax capabilities needs these ridiculous units that are always useful in any situation. What was once the "good econ but cost-inefficient armies" race has become the "out-of-this-world econ and most cost-effective army in the game" race.
Edit: Off-topic, but the guy who said mech TvT isn't viable is just plain wrong.
EPT
