Also anyone who argues for the infestor being harder to use over HT/Ghosts is clueless.
the facts to back up this statement.
EMP/STORM are projectile/time delayed spells, so they require proper timing and aim to hit. FEEDBACK/SHIPE straight up requires you to click on individual units. FUNGAL GROWTH, however, requires neither of those, it is instant, not to mention that the radius of FUNGAL GROWTH(2) is greater than both EMP(1.5) and PSI STORM(1.5)
Infestors are also as fast as ghosts(2.25) and way faster than high templars(1.88), on creep they are way faster then both, 2.92. lol thats faster than banshees!
i LOL so hard every time somebody cries about how infestors are hard to use, because most people know all of these things and still spit out that nonsensical statement.
they are way easier to use, and good against everything.
I guess they are hard to use considering an average zerg player (or even average pro zerg player) hardly micros anything. It's hard to stop being lazy, man.
Honestly, I think it's more of an issue of Zergs don't need to micro to win.
If you don't need to do something to win, then why bother doing it? Only truly dedicated players like Sase tend to the details and you will see him do minute things even if they have little to no benefit. I respect this type of player.
With that said, I think most Zerg players even in the top GM are accustomed to A-moving their army, so there is no reason to change that if they have a lot of success with it.
On August 09 2012 07:43 gfever wrote: is there truely a terran buff?? took em a year and half for a terran buff, rejoice!
When your race is favored for a year and a half, you don't need buffs.
No, you are wrong. Terran players have just been the better players.
This is why you guys aren't being taken seriously.
I don't think it's so much that Terran players were better as it was that there were actually just a lot more really top Terran players. Same with now. There are Zergs who do really well (DRG, Symbol, pre-slump Nestea) but the rest of the playing field seems to drop off after the top. It's not so much a balance thing either. I mean, Terran was definitely OP for awhile after release, but there were also a tonne of super good T players that are still pretty damn good today. Zergs really didn't (and still don't) have that depth of talent. Protoss didn't have it until around 6 months ago. Today, I'd say most of the top players are Terran, followed by Toss, followed by Zerg.
well first of all that is a very narrow and skeptical way of viewing this topic. You are wrong sir. Where is your evidence to support such an idiotic statement?
I can list like 10+ Code S Terrans that I would say are and have pretty much always been mechanically stunning players. I can name about 5 Zergs, a few of whom weren't even good in 2011. Like, think back to when Nestea was the best Zerg player. Who else was there? Seriously. Who else was there? Then DRG came. Then Leenock for a brief moment. Then Symbol for a little. Seriously, that's like a who's who of post-Fruitdealer Zergs.
And on the flip side I could name more "good" foreigner Zergs than foreigner T's. Could that mean... One race is harder to play?
It actually further supports his argument, since foreigners aren't as good as koreans but the zerg race allows them to still shine through. If you take a look at the EU GM top16 atm, it's 2 terrans - one of them being forgg. On the other hand there are many "good" up and coming players everyone seems so excited about. JohnnyRecco, Illusion, BabyKnight, Slivko.. the list goes on if you take other top GM players into account. What do they all have in common? They don't play terran. There is no up and coming terran player. There never has been, all the terrans we see have been around for 12months+. I don't think it's a coincidence, the truth of the matter is that many players, especially the up and coming ones, get carried by their race.
I agree with this and have been saying it for a while.
I think the fact that foreigners Zergs are able to compete with Koreans only strengthens the argument that the Zerg race props them up, not that they are better players. (We all know the best players are Terran) +1. Would read again.
On August 09 2012 09:28 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote: They weren't trying to make it easier to spread creep so much as give zerg a better way to fight back against hellions and maybe hellion-related allins.
Yes, making roaches was beyond the grasp of zerg players!
I don't think you quite get the point of the patch. The patch, at least from what I recall, was more to change things than to balance things. At the time, balance was perfect, but the way it was perfect was wrong, at least in Blizzard's eyes. The belief was that Zerg's scouting was weak (which it was) and that Zerg was too susceptible to allins (which it was). Although going solely by the numbers, balance was perfect, it was only by the numbers that balance was perfect. Blizzard did the patch to shake up the metagame, so that when the dust settled again, it would be a better matchup, kind of like what HotS is supposed to be. We could reach perfect balance in WoL just fine, if we wanted to, but HotS will hopefully allow us to reach perfect balance AND have a better game to boot.
And...you think having really boring games that are basically 100% passive with no potential for serious non-all-in aggression for the first 10 minutes are better?Dafuq
On August 10 2012 07:41 graNite wrote: Besides, why was Zerg never given opportunity to come up with a way to counter the ghost play like terran is given time every time a buff of the other races happens? Here are a few counters to ghosts: zerglings, banelings, hydras, roaches, nydus play, overlord drops, infested terrans...
Yeah but Zergs didn't actually have to adapt and/or improve their play during any of these times. They were simply buffed.
I think the best part of the Raven change will be the added harass against Zerg in the mid game. Although mutas will likely be out, it at least gives Terran another option of play
There is nothing new about this type of HSM use. And please tell me when a Protoss player would mass void rays and then subsequently clump them versus a Raven composition.
There is nothing new about this type of HSM use. And please tell me when a Protoss player would mass void rays and then subsequently clump them versus a Raven composition.
^ Monobattles aren't a good place to look at for balance. It's no different than having 3 HT versus 10 Ravens, and watching Feedback wreck the Ravens before they even get close.
There is nothing new about this type of HSM use. And please tell me when a Protoss player would mass void rays and then subsequently clump them versus a Raven composition.
That's almost as unlikely as a pro Terran player massing battlecruisers, then stacking them up and a-moving them against a mothership/archon composition.
There is nothing new about this type of HSM use. And please tell me when a Protoss player would mass void rays and then subsequently clump them versus a Raven composition.
That's almost as unlikely as a pro Terran player massing battlecruisers, then stacking them up and a-moving them against a mothership/archon composition.
Yea Let's pretend that DRG vs Ryung game 1 GSL Season 3 R16 never happened.
There is nothing new about this type of HSM use. And please tell me when a Protoss player would mass void rays and then subsequently clump them versus a Raven composition.
That's almost as unlikely as a pro Terran player massing battlecruisers, then stacking them up and a-moving them against a mothership/archon composition.
Yea Let's pretend that DRG vs Ryung game 1 GSL Season 3 R16 never happened.
There are simply waaaaay too many posters here trying to pull the "Zerg players are worse players than T/P" bullshit. This is why nobody cares about balance whine. The majority of you just try to sit on a "well I'm a diamond that DESERVES to be masters but I'm not Zerg so its harder for me" excuse instead of looking at your own actual mistakes.
I mean ffs when you see crap like this:
Yeah but Zergs didn't actually have to adapt and/or improve their play during any of these times. They were simply buffed.
Ok so your argument is Zerg, the reactive race, has never had to change any of its play. So based on your own statement, we're all still using 1 base roach all-in every matchup, right?
If that wasn't bad enough, I see stuff like this:
I think the fact that foreigners Zergs are able to compete with Koreans only strengthens the argument that the Zerg race props them up, not that they are better players. (We all know the best players are Terran) +1. Would read again.
So Stephano is "just being propped up" because he's a Zerg? What mouth-diarrhea.
There is nothing new about this type of HSM use. And please tell me when a Protoss player would mass void rays and then subsequently clump them versus a Raven composition.
That's almost as unlikely as a pro Terran player massing battlecruisers, then stacking them up and a-moving them against a mothership/archon composition.
Yea Let's pretend that DRG vs Ryung game 1 GSL Season 3 R16 never happened.
Just want to give credit where credit is due regarding zerg micro. baneling/ling ZvZ is very fast and requires very high level of micro. Everything else however only require basic micro. Banshee vs marines / Stalkers vs marines , now that is hardcore micro.
On August 10 2012 11:44 sCCrooked wrote: There are simply waaaaay too many posters here trying to pull the "Zerg players are worse players than T/P" bullshit. This is why nobody cares about balance whine. The majority of you just try to sit on a "well I'm a diamond that DESERVES to be masters but I'm not Zerg so its harder for me" excuse instead of looking at your own actual mistakes.
Yeah but Zergs didn't actually have to adapt and/or improve their play during any of these times. They were simply buffed.
Ok so your argument is Zerg, the reactive race, has never had to change any of its play. So based on your own statement, we're all still using 1 base roach all-in every matchup, right?
The point waas that when when abusable tactics emerge vs Zerg (snipe, BFH, bunker rush) the tactic gets nerfed. But when abusable tactics are discovered vs terran (bl/infestor, ultra tech switch) they are left for the terran to figure out.
Congrats, seeker missle works vs players who spam click their units to the same position, like some disorder, and stand still as a wtf-flock of ravens inches their way towards them to dump off missles.
I mean seriously, you have to be actively be trying to get your units that clumped up for them to sit there and take that type of damage from seeker missle.
Congrats, seeker missle works vs players who spam click their units to the same position, like some disorder, and stand still as a wtf-flock of ravens inches their way towards them to dump off missles.
I mean seriously, you have to be actively be trying to get your units that clumped up for them to sit there and take that type of damage from seeker missle.
On August 10 2012 10:36 zmansman17 wrote: I think the best part of the Raven change will be the added harass against Zerg in the mid game. Although mutas will likely be out, it at least gives Terran another option of play
I think if you're expecting to see midgame Raven harass ecome out of this, you're going to be disappointed. It's a huge commitment to get them out, there's a huge risk of losing them to Mutas/Infestors, and aut-turrets are really easily shut down by Lings or Roaches. You're still not going to see them before the late game in high level play, as an aid against Brood compositions.
On August 10 2012 11:44 sCCrooked wrote: There are simply waaaaay too many posters here trying to pull the "Zerg players are worse players than T/P" bullshit. This is why nobody cares about balance whine. The majority of you just try to sit on a "well I'm a diamond that DESERVES to be masters but I'm not Zerg so its harder for me" excuse instead of looking at your own actual mistakes.
I mean ffs when you see crap like this:
Yeah but Zergs didn't actually have to adapt and/or improve their play during any of these times. They were simply buffed.
Ok so your argument is Zerg, the reactive race, has never had to change any of its play. So based on your own statement, we're all still using 1 base roach all-in every matchup, right?
The point waas that when when abusable tactics emerge vs Zerg (snipe, BFH, bunker rush) the tactic gets nerfed. But when abusable tactics are discovered vs terran (bl/infestor, ultra tech switch) they are left for the terran to figure out.
Yeah, because the bunker rush takes just as much skill to do as teching to BL/infestor and then switching into ultras. Next your going to tell us that 4 gating is hard to do.
EPT
