|
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.
12:09 KST Page 98 |
On June 22 2012 01:45 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2012 01:16 Doodsmack wrote:On June 22 2012 00:40 ntssauce wrote:On June 22 2012 00:32 Doodsmack wrote:
Hey guys, it's impossible that Terrans could still figure out a way to deal with this problem against Zerg. After all, there's no precedent for Terrans complaining about an imbalance for a long period of time without trying out different options that later turned out to work. Not even when they cried that BL/infestor was OP after the fungal buff but HADN'T EVEN TRIED USING GHOSTS. Nope, what should have happened was Blizzard should have reversed the fungal buff within one month because lots of Terran pros were complaining and they hadn't found a solution.
Smarten up. ok ok man chill out, we'll start using a t3 unit against a hatch tech unit now NP! ok case closed... omg you guys suggest the weirdest things in your search for an excuse that this buff has not screwed TvZ. Why would we have to build a t3 unit ( raven ghost whatever that costs mins+ gas , to stop your fuing hatch tech unit. i mean honestly. Reading comprehension. I wasn't saying ghosts and Ravens should be used against queens. I was saying Terran still might develop strategies/timings to deal with their difficulties against Zerg right now. Keep in mind, every single time there's a balance change that gives people a hard time they start speaking with the same conviction and doom and gloom that you see in this thread. Fungal buff, khaydarin amulet, etc. Back then people were saying "i win button" and "HTs are now obsolete" left and right. Anyone now saying that it's over for Terran is, frankly, not discerning enough to have learned any lessons about balance changes after two years of WoL. We are going to be cheering the terran who starts using the raven as a dector. Not as an active unit, but a passive one that is only used for its vision. There are so many professional games lately where infestors burrow and sneak into or beyond the tank line. One or two ravens would make them think twice about risking such a pricey unit. However,because terrans have never use it, zergs abuse the mobility and stealth of the unit. That and pushing back creep would be much cheaper. Forget the spells, those are like a bonus. PDD is cool, but should only be used to protect vikings from corruptors. Forget HSC. Mobil detection in the terran army will do wonders for pushing back creep. It may be pricey gas wise, but 3-6 scans costs a lot too.
Ravens can only start to make it late into the game, by the time you can get them feasibly without straight dying to a Roach/Bane bust you have given free 4 bases along with complete map control to the Z. I would like to start seeing more Ravens later in the game for detection and possible auto turret zoning, but it's still a pretty bad unit for the most part.
Anyone who says "just build a Banshee/Raven" is just plain out stupid. STC tried that gimmicky build against Nestea and it hardly worked, and he expended so much gas early it's very possible he could have straight died to a Roach/Bane bust if Nestea knew he was doing that.
|
On June 22 2012 01:45 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2012 01:16 Doodsmack wrote:On June 22 2012 00:40 ntssauce wrote:On June 22 2012 00:32 Doodsmack wrote:
Hey guys, it's impossible that Terrans could still figure out a way to deal with this problem against Zerg. After all, there's no precedent for Terrans complaining about an imbalance for a long period of time without trying out different options that later turned out to work. Not even when they cried that BL/infestor was OP after the fungal buff but HADN'T EVEN TRIED USING GHOSTS. Nope, what should have happened was Blizzard should have reversed the fungal buff within one month because lots of Terran pros were complaining and they hadn't found a solution.
Smarten up. ok ok man chill out, we'll start using a t3 unit against a hatch tech unit now NP! ok case closed... omg you guys suggest the weirdest things in your search for an excuse that this buff has not screwed TvZ. Why would we have to build a t3 unit ( raven ghost whatever that costs mins+ gas , to stop your fuing hatch tech unit. i mean honestly. Reading comprehension. I wasn't saying ghosts and Ravens should be used against queens. I was saying Terran still might develop strategies/timings to deal with their difficulties against Zerg right now. Keep in mind, every single time there's a balance change that gives people a hard time they start speaking with the same conviction and doom and gloom that you see in this thread. Fungal buff, khaydarin amulet, etc. Back then people were saying "i win button" and "HTs are now obsolete" left and right. Anyone now saying that it's over for Terran is, frankly, not discerning enough to have learned any lessons about balance changes after two years of WoL. We are going to be cheering the terran who starts using the raven as a dector. Not as an active unit, but a passive one that is only used for its vision. There are so many professional games lately where infestors burrow and sneak into or beyond the tank line. One or two ravens would make them think twice about risking such a pricey unit. However,because terrans have never use it, zergs abuse the mobility and stealth of the unit. That and pushing back creep would be much cheaper. Forget the spells, those are like a bonus. PDD is cool, but should only be used to protect vikings from corruptors. Forget HSC. Mobil detection in the terran army will do wonders for pushing back creep. It may be pricey gas wise, but 3-6 scans costs a lot too.
The biggest problem I feel with that is 1. It's not good for an aggresive terran who tries to trade a lot, as he'll keep losing ravens. 2. You want to kill the creep tumors ahead of you, not when you are already on top of it, as otherwise the zerg can see when you are vurnable and slaughter you. That's why terrans send small balls of mm forward and scans. Doing that with a raven is not only harder, but means that the zergs can easily snipe your raven.
|
|
|
On June 21 2012 23:32 FairForever wrote:It makes me laugh. When TvP was ridiculous with 1-1-1 for a month, Terrans: "L2P" Now when TvP and TvZ are a bit of a struggle for a month, Terrans: "OMG IMBA!" Balance whine is ridiculous, it was ridiculous when Zergs were struggling ZvT and it was ridiculous when Protoss complained about 1-1-1. It's just as ridiculous now.
So what you're saying is that protoss never needed the buffs/nerfs that were handed out to counter the 1-1-1 strategy?
This isn't some overpowered strategy that may or may not come in a matchup. This is an entire metagame destroyed because everything hinged on terran being able to force zerg to make something other than drones in order to even out the matchup. Now that they've removed that option zerg gets and keeps an advantage economically all game AND has a way stronger/more efficient late game than terran.
This is almost as stupid as SOTG's arguement about the immortal range buff, that opened up new timings and made defense easier but it did not change the entire metagame of a matchup.
|
To be honest I think that mech is an underused style that would work well in the current metagame. If you use hellions like mutalisks, especially in leagues lower than diamond, they can absolutely obliterate drone lines. 4-6 queens can't kill 10-20 blue flame hellions that hit 2-4 bases at one time. On top of the fact that hellions can be as effective as mutalisks if you take an early third command center hellions are nearly free. Now some would argue that counter attacks would be to powerful. This is not true if you use siege tanks, which you should have when going mech, and building walls possibly even planetary fortresses to defend yourself. On top of that if you go hellion drops you can quickly switch to viking production should brood lords come out and ultras can be taken care of by thors which can be repaired by 10 SCVs late game because you should have 4-5 orbitals pumping mules so you shouldn't need 60-70 SCVs. I acknowledge that my reasoning is possibly flawed due to being in platinum league and playing Zerg so if anyone can tell me why I may be wrong I will actively advocate for a change from Blizzard. GL on ladder!
|
I think one of the most important points why people have a hard time trying to understand the sense of the current patch is the new econ style on three hatches.
Before the patch, hatch first was considered greedy play, with a chance of beeing punished by bunker rushes etc. It became more an more standard, but there was still a risk involved.
Post patch we see many zergs rushing to third expansions between 5-6 minutes. They do this with less units out and less spines out. Nonetheless beeing safer to do so because of queens. This is a best case scenario for zerg, something many zerg players may have dreamed of in the past. But for terran players, and for neutral observers, it's hard to understand, why this is viable at all.
Now it seems that ultra greedy builds from zerg are not greedy anymore, but just standard. And that is, at least in my eyes, a questionable scenario.
What seems quite unfair on top of this is the fact, that zerg players succesfully can counter-allin a gready terran build. Which is now more likely to be scouted. And there are some games, when zerg goes baneling/roach/ling allin on 3 hatches, when it turns out that it was not even an allin, because of 3 base economy.
I can understand zerg players beeing negative about hellion openers in the past. But they were not op in any way. It was up to zergs to react to this, but they had all the options to do so. Hellion openers were more fun to watch compared to current early game, because their was apm required on both sides, feinting and charging, canceling tumors to bait hellions in particular positions, ling surronds etc..
When I compare this to current early game, I find it less exciting and worth watching.
How are your perceptions from a viewers perspective?
|
On June 22 2012 02:00 Talack wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2012 23:32 FairForever wrote:It makes me laugh. When TvP was ridiculous with 1-1-1 for a month, Terrans: "L2P" Now when TvP and TvZ are a bit of a struggle for a month, Terrans: "OMG IMBA!" Balance whine is ridiculous, it was ridiculous when Zergs were struggling ZvT and it was ridiculous when Protoss complained about 1-1-1. It's just as ridiculous now. So what you're saying is that protoss never needed the buffs/nerfs that were handed out to counter the 1-1-1 strategy? This isn't some overpowered strategy that may or may not come in a matchup. This is an entire metagame destroyed because everything hinged on terran being able to force zerg to make something other than drones in order to even out the matchup. Now that they've removed that option zerg gets and keeps an advantage economically all game AND has a way stronger/more efficient late game than terran. This is almost as stupid as SOTG's arguement about the immortal range buff, that opened up new timings and made defense easier but it did not change the entire metagame of a matchup.
The buff was a +1 immortal range buff. Helpful for sure, but hardly gamebreaking. (Yes there was a bug fix but that wasn't fixed due to the 1-1-1).
Honestly, people should try adjusting. It's been what... a month? I'm pretty sure Protoss had to deal with "ridiculous" 1-1-1 for over a month. People have figured out ways to stop 1-1-1, and while the minor buffs helped, I'm pretty sure that 1-1-1 would not be nearly as dominant now even if Blizzard made no adjustments.
|
On June 22 2012 02:04 Tryagain4free wrote:
I think one of the most important points why people have a hard time trying to understand the sense of the current patch is the new econ style on three hatches.
Before the patch, hatch first was considered greedy play, with a chance of beeing punished by bunker rushes etc. It became more an more standard, but their was still a risk involved.
Post patch we see many zergs rushing to third expansions between 5-6 minutes. They do this with less units out and less spines out. Nonetheless beeing safer to do so because of queens. This is a best case scenario for zerg, something many zerg players may have dreamed of in the past. But for terran players, and for neutral observers, it's hard to understand, why this is viable at all.
Now it sseems that ultra greedy builds from zerg are not greedy anymore, but just standard. And that is, at least in my eyes, a questionable scenario.
What seems quite unfair on top of this is the fact, that zerg players succesfully can counter-allin a gready terran build. Which is now more likely to be scouted. And their are some games, when zerg goes baneling/roach/ling allin on 3 hatches, when it turns out that it was not even an allin, because of 3 base economy.
I can understand zerg players beeing negative about hellion openers in the past. But they were not op in any way. It was up to zergs to react to this, but they had all the options to do so. Hellion openers were more fun to watch compared to current early game, because their was apm required on both sides, feinting and charging, canceling tumors to bait hellions in particular positions, ling surronds etc..
When I compare this to current early game, I find it less exciting and worth watching.
How are your perceptions from a viewers perspective?
Your analysis:
Hellion openers = not op before (I agree)
Zerg openers = op (?)
Hellion openers = fun to watch (opinion)
Current openers = not (opinion)
No strong analysis to support your position at all O_O I think this is honestly much exaggerated.
|
Regardless of how the metagame evolves and if a solution is found...
The queen range buff is just purely wrong!
Just have a close look at what you get for 150 minerals and pool tech:
175 HP, Armor 1 - that's quite a lot for this cost. Units with even little more costs have usually less HP (Stalker 160, siege tank 160).
Only unit type bio and psyonic - All units that have neither armored nor light are incredible strong in SC2, since a lot of units have bonus dmg against one of those types - combined with the large amount of HP this is pretty strong!
This unit can heal via Transfusion at a rate of 2,5hp per Energy spent (for comparison: medivac heals at 3hp per Energy). Transfusion heals 125 hp per cast, therefor it may generate overheal and is not useful to heal units with little total HP numbers.
Ground attack: 8 DPS, Range 5 (comparison, a Stalker has 6,9 DPS against non armored units!)
Air attack: 9 DPS, Range 7
The attack of the queen is often described as a tiggle. But if you compare it to real fighting units, it becomes very clear, that this is not the case. And with Range 5, they can be seen as a normal range unit.
To sum it up: For 150 minerals and very low tech you get a very tough range unit, with decent DPS and range against ground and decent DPS and large range against air, that can heal high HP units and buildings!!! nearly as good as a medivac.
Oh and yeah, there are those tiny things like Larva inject and creep tumors that I forgot to mention....
If you don't judge this as imbalanced (because there is simply NO unit at the other races that has this much of a total package in it with this small pricetag), I don't know..... I just simply don't know then.....
|
On June 22 2012 01:49 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2012 01:45 Plansix wrote:On June 22 2012 01:16 Doodsmack wrote:On June 22 2012 00:40 ntssauce wrote:On June 22 2012 00:32 Doodsmack wrote:
Hey guys, it's impossible that Terrans could still figure out a way to deal with this problem against Zerg. After all, there's no precedent for Terrans complaining about an imbalance for a long period of time without trying out different options that later turned out to work. Not even when they cried that BL/infestor was OP after the fungal buff but HADN'T EVEN TRIED USING GHOSTS. Nope, what should have happened was Blizzard should have reversed the fungal buff within one month because lots of Terran pros were complaining and they hadn't found a solution.
Smarten up. ok ok man chill out, we'll start using a t3 unit against a hatch tech unit now NP! ok case closed... omg you guys suggest the weirdest things in your search for an excuse that this buff has not screwed TvZ. Why would we have to build a t3 unit ( raven ghost whatever that costs mins+ gas , to stop your fuing hatch tech unit. i mean honestly. Reading comprehension. I wasn't saying ghosts and Ravens should be used against queens. I was saying Terran still might develop strategies/timings to deal with their difficulties against Zerg right now. Keep in mind, every single time there's a balance change that gives people a hard time they start speaking with the same conviction and doom and gloom that you see in this thread. Fungal buff, khaydarin amulet, etc. Back then people were saying "i win button" and "HTs are now obsolete" left and right. Anyone now saying that it's over for Terran is, frankly, not discerning enough to have learned any lessons about balance changes after two years of WoL. We are going to be cheering the terran who starts using the raven as a dector. Not as an active unit, but a passive one that is only used for its vision. There are so many professional games lately where infestors burrow and sneak into or beyond the tank line. One or two ravens would make them think twice about risking such a pricey unit. However,because terrans have never use it, zergs abuse the mobility and stealth of the unit. That and pushing back creep would be much cheaper. Forget the spells, those are like a bonus. PDD is cool, but should only be used to protect vikings from corruptors. Forget HSC. Mobil detection in the terran army will do wonders for pushing back creep. It may be pricey gas wise, but 3-6 scans costs a lot too. Ravens can only start to make it late into the game, by the time you can get them feasibly without straight dying to a Roach/Bane bust you have given free 4 bases along with complete map control to the Z. I would like to start seeing more Ravens later in the game for detection and possible auto turret zoning, but it's still a pretty bad unit for the most part. Anyone who says "just build a Banshee/Raven" is just plain out stupid. STC tried that gimmicky build against Nestea and it hardly worked, and he expended so much gas early it's very possible he could have straight died to a Roach/Bane bust if Nestea knew he was doing that.
I agree that the unit has almost no place in the early game and cost far to much gas to be effective. But the amount of minerals spend on scans to keep the creep spread down in the mid and game is to much. At a point in the game where the terran is struggling to keep up in macro and production, the cost of scans could be funneled into factories and raxs.
I am not saying just get a raven. But, as a protoss player, I see the need for terran to have mobil detection in their army. I would like to see a player got the raven in the "late" mid game with the following rules:
1: I will use the raven for detection.
2: I will not use it agressively and avoid risking it
3: I will use its abilities to defend my units and support them
I would like to see how it changes the way terrans are able to play. Clearly there are times when you don't want a raven(aka, against mutas), but mobile detection that only has one up front cost could free up a lot of minerals down the line.
|
On June 22 2012 02:08 FairForever wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2012 02:04 Tryagain4free wrote:
I think one of the most important points why people have a hard time trying to understand the sense of the current patch is the new econ style on three hatches.
Before the patch, hatch first was considered greedy play, with a chance of beeing punished by bunker rushes etc. It became more an more standard, but their was still a risk involved.
Post patch we see many zergs rushing to third expansions between 5-6 minutes. They do this with less units out and less spines out. Nonetheless beeing safer to do so because of queens. This is a best case scenario for zerg, something many zerg players may have dreamed of in the past. But for terran players, and for neutral observers, it's hard to understand, why this is viable at all.
Now it sseems that ultra greedy builds from zerg are not greedy anymore, but just standard. And that is, at least in my eyes, a questionable scenario.
What seems quite unfair on top of this is the fact, that zerg players succesfully can counter-allin a gready terran build. Which is now more likely to be scouted. And their are some games, when zerg goes baneling/roach/ling allin on 3 hatches, when it turns out that it was not even an allin, because of 3 base economy.
I can understand zerg players beeing negative about hellion openers in the past. But they were not op in any way. It was up to zergs to react to this, but they had all the options to do so. Hellion openers were more fun to watch compared to current early game, because their was apm required on both sides, feinting and charging, canceling tumors to bait hellions in particular positions, ling surronds etc..
When I compare this to current early game, I find it less exciting and worth watching.
How are your perceptions from a viewers perspective? Your analysis: Hellion openers = not op before (I agree) Zerg openers = op (?) Hellion openers = fun to watch (opinion) Current openers = not (opinion) No strong analysis to support your position at all O_O I think this is honestly much exaggerated.
How is this exaggerated? Nobody is doing well in TvZ. Nobody.
|
On June 22 2012 02:06 FairForever wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2012 02:00 Talack wrote:On June 21 2012 23:32 FairForever wrote:It makes me laugh. When TvP was ridiculous with 1-1-1 for a month, Terrans: "L2P" Now when TvP and TvZ are a bit of a struggle for a month, Terrans: "OMG IMBA!" Balance whine is ridiculous, it was ridiculous when Zergs were struggling ZvT and it was ridiculous when Protoss complained about 1-1-1. It's just as ridiculous now. So what you're saying is that protoss never needed the buffs/nerfs that were handed out to counter the 1-1-1 strategy? This isn't some overpowered strategy that may or may not come in a matchup. This is an entire metagame destroyed because everything hinged on terran being able to force zerg to make something other than drones in order to even out the matchup. Now that they've removed that option zerg gets and keeps an advantage economically all game AND has a way stronger/more efficient late game than terran. This is almost as stupid as SOTG's arguement about the immortal range buff, that opened up new timings and made defense easier but it did not change the entire metagame of a matchup. The buff was a +1 immortal range buff. Helpful for sure, but hardly gamebreaking. (Yes there was a bug fix but that wasn't fixed due to the 1-1-1). Honestly, people should try adjusting. It's been what... a month? I'm pretty sure Protoss had to deal with "ridiculous" 1-1-1 for over a month. People have figured out ways to stop 1-1-1, and while the minor buffs helped, I'm pretty sure that 1-1-1 would not be nearly as dominant now even if Blizzard made no adjustments.
1-1-1 wasnt "product" of the patch so its not comparable situation. Also Thor was nerfed immediatly after Thorzain MC game in TSL.
|
The fun part of this buff is when super greedy low level zergs take super fast third and like 10 queens for defence. Then you can just roll them with a fast MMM push. So much fun.
|
I have an idea. Queens should be limited to 1 per hatchery (like in monobattles), plus 1.
So on 1 hatch you could have up to 2 queens, on 2 hatch you could have 3 queens, on 3 hatch 4 queens, etc..
After all, they are called a QUEEN, which implies at least some uniqueness to it. If people are going 4/6 queen on two bases, they're not really queens now are they?
They could make up for this change by making the queen build time much faster (so losing queens wouldn't be too crucial)
|
On June 22 2012 02:08 FairForever wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2012 02:04 Tryagain4free wrote:
I think one of the most important points why people have a hard time trying to understand the sense of the current patch is the new econ style on three hatches.
Before the patch, hatch first was considered greedy play, with a chance of beeing punished by bunker rushes etc. It became more an more standard, but their was still a risk involved.
Post patch we see many zergs rushing to third expansions between 5-6 minutes. They do this with less units out and less spines out. Nonetheless beeing safer to do so because of queens. This is a best case scenario for zerg, something many zerg players may have dreamed of in the past. But for terran players, and for neutral observers, it's hard to understand, why this is viable at all.
Now it sseems that ultra greedy builds from zerg are not greedy anymore, but just standard. And that is, at least in my eyes, a questionable scenario.
What seems quite unfair on top of this is the fact, that zerg players succesfully can counter-allin a gready terran build. Which is now more likely to be scouted. And their are some games, when zerg goes baneling/roach/ling allin on 3 hatches, when it turns out that it was not even an allin, because of 3 base economy.
I can understand zerg players beeing negative about hellion openers in the past. But they were not op in any way. It was up to zergs to react to this, but they had all the options to do so. Hellion openers were more fun to watch compared to current early game, because their was apm required on both sides, feinting and charging, canceling tumors to bait hellions in particular positions, ling surronds etc..
When I compare this to current early game, I find it less exciting and worth watching.
How are your perceptions from a viewers perspective? Your analysis: Hellion openers = not op before (I agree) Zerg openers = op (?) Hellion openers = fun to watch (opinion) Current openers = not (opinion) No strong analysis to support your position at all O_O I think this is honestly much exaggerated.
I think what he is trying to say is that strategies that were considered greedy before and left zerg with a better eco, carried some risk along because they were more suscetible to some timings. With the new patch, those greedy openings are easily pulled and with no backdraw.
|
On June 22 2012 02:16 Mongoose wrote:
I have an idea. Queens should be limited to 1 per hatchery (like in monobattles), plus 1.
So on 1 hatch you could have up to 2 queens, on 2 hatch you could have 3 queens, on 3 hatch 4 queens, etc..
After all, they are called a QUEEN, which implies at least some uniqueness to it. If people are going 4/6 queen on two bases, they're not really queens now are they?
Dont think we can really use the naming as a guideline basis for a change here. I mean I cant fathom how a unit can be called a reaper and be so absolutely useless and yet, its still there.
|
On June 22 2012 02:10 TeeTS wrote:
Regardless of how the metagame evolves and if a solution is found...
The queen range buff is just purely wrong!
You guys are really not getting it, are you? The problem is NOT the queen buff. It's the zerg army being too strong. Infestor + hive wins MAXED battles. The race with the best MACRO MECHANIC and the best ECONOMY has the strongest army. You can nerf queens as much as you want. The problem with TvZ is pure army wise. Zergs actually trade cost efficiëntly + they can remax faster + creep everywhere + the imbalanced broodlord infestor composition.
|
I stopped playing sc2 after queen buff, its just too frustrating. I hope hots will come out soon.
|
On June 22 2012 02:03 thegiantnome wrote:
To be honest I think that mech is an underused style that would work well in the current metagame. If you use hellions like mutalisks, especially in leagues lower than diamond, they can absolutely obliterate drone lines. 4-6 queens can't kill 10-20 blue flame hellions that hit 2-4 bases at one time. On top of the fact that hellions can be as effective as mutalisks if you take an early third command center hellions are nearly free. Now some would argue that counter attacks would be to powerful. This is not true if you use siege tanks, which you should have when going mech, and building walls possibly even planetary fortresses to defend yourself. On top of that if you go hellion drops you can quickly switch to viking production should brood lords come out and ultras can be taken care of by thors which can be repaired by 10 SCVs late game because you should have 4-5 orbitals pumping mules so you shouldn't need 60-70 SCVs. I acknowledge that my reasoning is possibly flawed due to being in platinum league and playing Zerg so if anyone can tell me why I may be wrong I will actively advocate for a change from Blizzard. GL on ladder!
What do you think is going to happen if a Zerg scouts you building so many Helions ? He'll build roaches and plant spines and after that Helions are useless as harass.
|
On June 22 2012 00:22 FakeDeath wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2012 00:08 Tryagain4free wrote:
Hi guys!
I have a question concerning the impact of the queen patch to ZvZ. Some post mentioned a positive impact of these changes to zerg's mirror.
So are there zergs in this thread (or any others) who feel qualified to give me some insight on the matter? TY!
Since the patch, zergs literally all now go for hatch first instead of regular 14/14 since the queen added range with spines help deal with banelings with much better at the early game. That why's ZvZ is much better to watch these days.I am a mid-high masters zerg The queen 5 range is good because it's brings more macro-oriented play in ZvZ and ZvT and less gimmicky play and overall reward players with better macro mechanics. This is good IMO for the game. However,this brings most of the game into the late game which Z excels at. Broodlords+Infestor against Terran who seem to struggle as of late. But one thing i see Terran not making is the ghost in lategame ZvT.I often even see more ravens than ghosts now in lategame in ZvT.Weird though even in competitve games in pro plays, we rarely ever see ghosts. They can be good since Bls+Infestor is only good with infestors support and corruptor support. Infestor is the main key.I feel Terran should be making ghosts. Maybe viking production with a few ghost to push Bls+back or snipe Infestor when they come to fungal your army? But then this is my opinion from a zerg perspective.
I'm sure you understand the game more than me, but it seems to me because Zerg have easier time tech switch (more banked resources, mass production cycle), if you viking/ghost against BL/Festor, and Zerg switch to ling/ultra, then... you have a bunch viking/ghost against ling/ultra... not a pretty picture.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
