|
United States7483 Posts
On August 13 2012 07:09 Typhoon1789 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2012 05:20 Shiori wrote:On August 13 2012 05:17 RogerChillingworth wrote:On August 13 2012 04:46 SolidMoose wrote:On August 13 2012 03:31 MasterFischer wrote:On August 13 2012 03:21 Shiori wrote:On August 13 2012 03:17 MasterFischer wrote:
I got a sort of related question to this debate... Concerning brood war..
Were Zergs considered to be just as behind, if left on equal bases versus p and t as they do in Starcraft 2 ?
I mean... It's always bugged me little bit, that Zerg basically HAS to expand and be greedy, otherwise, they are all-in from the start of the match basically. Was this the case in brood war, and if so, was it just as profoundly implemented in the game mechanics? No idea about BW, but it's not even really true in Sc2. It's grossly exaggerated how many bases Zergs need to be competitive. Yes, eventually they need to expand, but they don't need to do it as greedily as they do now for them to be even. A 4 minute third isn't necessary in ZvT. So 1base zerg is equally as good as 1base terran, is that what you're saying? Or 2base zerg vs 2base Terran? My understanding is that, zerg always needs to be at least 1base ahead of their opponnent to NOT be all-in, basically. This is IMO one of the biggest misunderstandings of the entire game. Zerg really does not to be one base up, you can do a lot on even bases with macro hatches. The simple fact is more bases = more money, so Zerg will always have an advantage with extra mining bases, just like Terran and Protoss. well, it's more about the 3 base dynamic than anything else, which the game revolves around. if p or t is on 3 base you need 4-5 as zerg. i'ts just the way it works with gas and tech. sc2 isn't exclusively a 2-base game anymore. precisely why the game can be stressful for zerg, units aren't nearly as good at feigning aggression and then taking a third like protoss, or the triple/quad cc shit. the pivotal part of this whole thing is t and p scout if zerg is taking that fast third or not, and can respond accordingly. i don't think there are imbalances in the match-up, it's just that people don't have the unit control at lower levels to maximize terran's strengths. the way we saw taeja win unwinnable engangements with pure micro alone, because that's what you're allowed to do with terran. it's just really challenging to pull off. the way zerg has an unlimited skill ceiling with macro, terran has it with unit control. nothing new, but to me it's the reason terrans struggle outside of korea vs top tier opponents. Zerg pretty much always takes a fast third base. Please let me know when you figure out what us Protoss players are supposed to do to react to that. 3 gate expand. Yes i am seriouse about this because its an easy way to throw a zerg off these days... If i see a toss without FFE i simply cannot take a 3rd without massive risk. You could be 4 gating or doing a sentry pressure expand or even some other retarted shit like rushing DT.
If you go 3 gate expand, zerg scouts it and laughs as he's further ahead on two bases with gas against a super slow protoss expand than he is on 3 bases late gas vs. a FFE. 3 Gate expand is just awful.
|
On August 13 2012 08:00 haffy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2012 06:33 Shiori wrote:On August 13 2012 06:29 haffy wrote:On August 13 2012 06:24 Shiori wrote:On August 13 2012 06:21 Dalavita wrote:On August 13 2012 06:08 Shiori wrote:On August 13 2012 06:06 RogerChillingworth wrote:On August 13 2012 05:30 DemigodcelpH wrote:On August 13 2012 05:17 RogerChillingworth wrote:On August 13 2012 04:46 SolidMoose wrote:
[quote]
This is IMO one of the biggest misunderstandings of the entire game. Zerg really does not to be one base up, you can do a lot on even bases with macro hatches. The simple fact is more bases = more money, so Zerg will always have an advantage with extra mining bases, just like Terran and Protoss. well, it's more about the 3 base dynamic than anything else, which the game revolves around. if p or t is on 3 base you need 4-5 as zerg. i'ts just the way it works with gas and tech. sc2 isn't exclusively a 2-base game anymore. precisely why the game can be stressful for zerg, units aren't nearly as good at feigning aggression and then taking a third like protoss, or the triple/quad cc shit. the pivotal part of this whole thing is t and p scout if zerg is taking that fast third or not, and can respond accordingly. i don't think there are imbalances in the match-up, it's just that people don't have the unit control at lower levels to maximize terran's strengths. the way we saw taeja win unwinnable engangements with pure micro alone, because that's what you're allowed to do with terran. it's just really challenging to pull off. the way zerg has an unlimited skill ceiling with macro, terran has it with unit control. nothing new, but to me it's the reason terrans struggle outside of korea vs top tier opponents. Aside from the simple but repetitive task of hitting injects Zerg macro is more simplistic than the other races in that it's not linear, and that everything comes from the same place drones do. shouldn't have to respond to this, because it's brain-melting, but between injects and creep spread and economy management, there's always something you can be doing better. compared to chronoboosting an obvious building and dropping mules, yeah i'd say there's a higher ceiling there. There is, but micro is generally harder than macro. True on the micro part, but even so, it doesn't even have the highest macro skill ceiling among the three races either. I'd say Zerg's macro is easily the most APM-intensive. But it's still just muscle memory and requires basically no real thought to execute. That means anyone who plays the game a lot is invariably going to become really good at it, because it's something you just memorize and remember to do every 40 seconds. Micro is different because it's reactive and you need to be paying attention to your army and act instantly or die. You can say that about any fucking activity your brain carries out regularly. Micro is no different. It is different, though, because it's a reaction. Injecting requires no thought. Creep Spread requires no thought. You don't make a decision there. It's just something you do, like constantly making Probes, or whatever. There's no way for you to mess it up. Micro, though, is usually hard because you have to do other stuff at the same time, and because you don't know when you're going to have to do it. It's pretty hard to be throwing down tech structures, see a blob on the minimap, and instantly have to start landing EMPs/Storms, spreading units, and managing an engagement. It's why we see so many players, even at the highest level, lose because they FFed or split or EMPed a second too late. They weren't just slow. They were distracted. Further, there's way less wiggle room with micro. If you don't split in a timely manner, your entire army is going to die. If your 15th Inject is 5 seconds late, it doesn't make a hell of a lot of difference to the state of the game. You know, I've got better things to do than to respond politely to this fucking made up shit you posted. People are so fucking biased when they post and they have absolutely no self awareness to relaise. Your whole post is made up of complete speculation about a subject you clearly know nothing about, then throw in some SC2 terms and situations with heavy racial bias just to finish things off. By the way, I'm not going to post or read anymore, because reading this kind of stuff frustrates me to no end. I mean seriously, how can you post that dribble.
I like it when they surrender like this. It's very elevating.
|
dude, shiori, you can practice micro and get great at that, too.
point is not level of difficulty per se, as if there's some barometer, it's time consumption. That's why zerg macro has a high skill ceiling; you can always be injecting, creep spreading, and managing your economy better. throw in APM intensive muta play on top of that and it's even more stressful on your total apm. that's why players with 400 apm can do it really well (albeit not perfectly), and players with 160 miss injects, or leave their mutas sitting for extended periods of time, or spread creep inefficiently.
if you don't play zerg at ~masters level or above, it's kind of hard to understand i can imagine. we watch pros play and you just -see- creep flowing across the map and tons of units pouring out of larva. it's just intensive to do it all, and i dare say objectively more intensive than either p or t.
|
On August 13 2012 09:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
dude, shiori, you can practice micro and get great at that, too.
point is not level of difficulty, it's time consumption. That's why zerg macro has a high skill ceiling; you can always be injecting, creep spreading, and managing your economy better. throw in APM intensive muta play on top of that and it's even more stressful on your total apm. that's why players with 400 apm can do it really well (albeit not perfectly), and players with 160 miss injects, or leave their mutas sitting for extended periods of time, or spread creep inefficiently.
if you don't play zerg at ~masters level or above, it's kind of hard to understand i can imagine. we watch pros play and you just -see- creep flowing across the map and tons of units pouring out of larva. it's just intensive to do it all, and i dare say objectively more intensive than either p or t.
Also if you don't play terran or protoss at master or above it's also pretty tough to what it takes for them to actually compete against zergs at their level.
|
sure, but when i played random for a while at that level, i realized zerg had the highest MACRO skill ceiling, and terran had the highest MICRO skill ceiling. that isn't to say, overall, one is more difficult or easier to play than the other. that was never the argument here. and i think -most- people would agree with something along those lines.
|
larvae inject is a constant regardless of the state of the game, there is no decision/ opportunity cost besides early creep. You literally dont need to think to inject because injecting is better than not injecting at ALL stages of the game.
|
On August 13 2012 09:13 RogerChillingworth wrote:
sure, but when i played random for a while at that level, i realized zerg had the highest MACRO skill ceiling, and terran had the highest MICRO skill ceiling. that isn't to say, overall, one is more difficult or easier to play than the other. that was never the argument here. and i think -most- people would agree with something along those lines.
Injecting is the same thing as making units. It's not as hard as you think; it's more accurate to call it fairly basic. You just think this way because you main Z obviously.
|
On August 13 2012 09:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
dude, shiori, you can practice micro and get great at that, too.
point is not level of difficulty per se, as if there's some barometer, it's time consumption. That's why zerg macro has a high skill ceiling; you can always be injecting, creep spreading, and managing your economy better. throw in APM intensive muta play on top of that and it's even more stressful on your total apm. that's why players with 400 apm can do it really well (albeit not perfectly), and players with 160 miss injects, or leave their mutas sitting for extended periods of time, or spread creep inefficiently.
if you don't play zerg at ~masters level or above, it's kind of hard to understand i can imagine. we watch pros play and you just -see- creep flowing across the map and tons of units pouring out of larva. it's just intensive to do it all, and i dare say objectively more intensive than either p or t.
It's not intensive because it's just memorization. There's no way for you to fuck it up if you practice a lot. There's no missing a Forcefield and losing to a Roach pressure. There's no getting all your Vikings Fungaled because you were sending an SCV to make an expansion. When you miss your Injects, you're a little bit behind, but you didn't actually lose the game straight up, especially because missing Injects generally happens in the late game when you have more to think about. It's honestly not that hard for a player to do a repetitive action like Injecting and Creep Spreading. And micro isn't really hard either, but the difference is that micro scales with skill in a direct way, in the sense that you can actually do creative things with micro to win engagements you otherwise would have lost, whereas macroing is just something you do. Every pro player can be expected to macro pretty damn well, and while it's definitely hard to keep all your Queens at low energy all the time, it's way harder to split Marines, use Ghosts, keep Vikings spread, and send out some drops all the while ensuring that your Barracks are still producing units.
In that respect, Terran and Protoss aren't really much different from Zerg. Every X seconds, we need to make sure we build units or our production cycles go to waste. It's very similar to Injecting. Creep Spreading is important and requires APM, but again, it's not something that requires any particular accuracy or concentration. You just select the creep Tumors, hit C, and click. Simple. Overlord rallying? Simple. You rally the units.
Like honestly, none of this is mechanically demanding. It's remembering to do it that's difficult. On the other hand, the biggest thing that makes micro challenging is that it needs to be EXACT, and that it needs to be timely. If you don't split, you lose the game. If you don't Storm at that precise moment, you won't get another chance. If you miss an Inject for 2 seconds you...Inject 2 seconds later.
See the difference? On top of that, Zerg players don't really need to micro much in most situations, which means that their entire undivided attention can go on macro and making sure everything goes well for them. Unfortunately, Protoss and Terrn players also need to micro in addition to their macro, which, while less APM intensive, takes their focus and often vision away from their army just as much as Injects/Creep/Overlords do.
I mean yeah, you guys have slightly harder macro, but Protoss/Terran players have astronomically harder micro with some pretty difficult macro to go along with it. The thing is, though, everyone at the pro level has good macro. Not everyone has amazing micro/decision making. Zergs only have to worry about the latter. That's the problem.
|
On August 13 2012 10:14 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2012 09:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
dude, shiori, you can practice micro and get great at that, too.
point is not level of difficulty per se, as if there's some barometer, it's time consumption. That's why zerg macro has a high skill ceiling; you can always be injecting, creep spreading, and managing your economy better. throw in APM intensive muta play on top of that and it's even more stressful on your total apm. that's why players with 400 apm can do it really well (albeit not perfectly), and players with 160 miss injects, or leave their mutas sitting for extended periods of time, or spread creep inefficiently.
if you don't play zerg at ~masters level or above, it's kind of hard to understand i can imagine. we watch pros play and you just -see- creep flowing across the map and tons of units pouring out of larva. it's just intensive to do it all, and i dare say objectively more intensive than either p or t. It's not intensive because it's just memorization. There's no way for you to fuck it up if you practice a lot. There's no missing a Forcefield and losing to a Roach pressure. There's no getting all your Vikings Fungaled because you were sending an SCV to make an expansion. When you miss your Injects, you're a little bit behind, but you didn't actually lose the game straight up, especially because missing Injects generally happens in the late game when you have more to think about. It's honestly not that hard for a player to do a repetitive action like Injecting and Creep Spreading. And micro isn't really hard either, but the difference is that micro scales with skill in a direct way, in the sense that you can actually do creative things with micro to win engagements you otherwise would have lost, whereas macroing is just something you do. Every pro player can be expected to macro pretty damn well, and while it's definitely hard to keep all your Queens at low energy all the time, it's way harder to split Marines, use Ghosts, keep Vikings spread, and send out some drops all the while ensuring that your Barracks are still producing units. In that respect, Terran and Protoss aren't really much different from Zerg. Every X seconds, we need to make sure we build units or our production cycles go to waste. It's very similar to Injecting. Creep Spreading is important and requires APM, but again, it's not something that requires any particular accuracy or concentration. You just select the creep Tumors, hit C, and click. Simple. Overlord rallying? Simple. You rally the units. Like honestly, none of this is mechanically demanding. It's remembering to do it that's difficult. On the other hand, the biggest thing that makes micro challenging is that it needs to be EXACT, and that it needs to be timely. If you don't split, you lose the game. If you don't Storm at that precise moment, you won't get another chance. If you miss an Inject for 2 seconds you...Inject 2 seconds later. See the difference? On top of that, Zerg players don't really need to micro much in most situations, which means that their entire undivided attention can go on macro and making sure everything goes well for them. Unfortunately, Protoss and Terrn players also need to micro in addition to their macro, which, while less APM intensive, takes their focus and often vision away from their army just as much as Injects/Creep/Overlords do. I mean yeah, you guys have slightly harder macro, but Protoss/Terran players have astronomically harder micro with some pretty difficult macro to go along with it. The thing is, though, everyone at the pro level has good macro. Not everyone has amazing micro/decision making. Zergs only have to worry about the latter. That's the problem.
It sounds like you've never played zerg before, and disregarding "memorization" because its not intensive? Of course it is intensive, because as the game goes on for longer and longer you still have to perform these repetitive tasks on top of what ever you doing. This normally differentiates the good zerg players to the bad ones (mechanically speaking). When you start missing injects, these delays add up til eventually you might end up in a scenario where you run out of larvae for a short period of time.
Lets put it into perspective. Do you use your chrono boost energy all the time which theoretically should be possible?
Also I like how you make it sound like P and T share similar demands in the micro department but they simply don't. Its also laughable how you claim micro isn't as important to a zerg when if that was the case, id doubt any zergs would ever win any game..
|
@ shiori
it doesn't seem like you've seen a Z fly over marines and lose 20 mutas instantly, or get swiped by 2 colossi and lose 6 infestors. you kind of lose me when you argue zerg only has to worry about injects, and not on its units. the argument is silly to begin with, but you make it a tad sillier with the racial bias.
z macro is mechanically demanding because you could always be doing it better. how is that not linear logic? if the best pros can be doing their shit better, then how is it not a demanding mechanic? yes, it is more mundane than making split decisions and amazing micromanagements on the fly, but it doesn't instantly mean controlling units made of glass, spreading creep constantly, and landing all your injects across 5-7 hatcheries isn't requiring of high and efficient APM.
Arguing that it's nothing but "remembering to do x, y, and z" is a straw man. There's simply more APM in zerg macro than there is in T or P macro if we're trying to achieve the ceiling of what's possible. As is true with the Terran micro ceiling. Objectively, there is. I've said it in every post I've responded with so far. The mechanics for each race behave differently, yes, we are all aware. Yes, they have similarities in some of their timings. Zerg simply has to do more to gain its advantages. And, once again (for the third time), it doesn't mean it's a harder race to play.
There are countless examples of "if x race doesn't do y, then they lose the game" no matter the match-up. Drawing upon a few of those, like splitting or forcefielding, is just another straw man, and evident of your racial bias. All races have moments where, if they do y, they'll lose the game. It's the nature of starcraft 2, the fragility of most units, and the ridiculously high DPS of everything.
|
And here I was, hoping that reading the last few pages of this 60 page thread would give me some kind of idea of what the consensus of these changes is...
Nope.
Just the usual balance flaming. 
I'm sure (or I hope!) there are some good posts in the thread though, but as I don't want to read 60 pages of balance flaming (sorry), can someone repeat/link me to someone that actually played the map a lot on high level, and arrived at some kind of unbiased conclusion on what these changes do? Maybe even link to some serious discussion in the OP? thanks.
|
On August 13 2012 10:14 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2012 09:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
dude, shiori, you can practice micro and get great at that, too.
point is not level of difficulty per se, as if there's some barometer, it's time consumption. That's why zerg macro has a high skill ceiling; you can always be injecting, creep spreading, and managing your economy better. throw in APM intensive muta play on top of that and it's even more stressful on your total apm. that's why players with 400 apm can do it really well (albeit not perfectly), and players with 160 miss injects, or leave their mutas sitting for extended periods of time, or spread creep inefficiently.
if you don't play zerg at ~masters level or above, it's kind of hard to understand i can imagine. we watch pros play and you just -see- creep flowing across the map and tons of units pouring out of larva. it's just intensive to do it all, and i dare say objectively more intensive than either p or t. I mean yeah, you guys have slightly harder macro, but Protoss/Terran players have astronomically harder micro with some pretty difficult macro to go along with it. The thing is, though, everyone at the pro level has good macro. Not everyone has amazing micro/decision making. Zergs only have to worry about the latter. That's the problem.
If everyone at the pro level has good macro, then all three races need only worry about the latter; it would not just be Zerg. That doesn't seem like a problem.
Edit - Oh, by latter you meant the order of your first sentence, with the latter being macro.
|
On August 13 2012 07:44 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2012 01:38 superstartran wrote:On August 13 2012 00:43 Coffee Zombie wrote:On August 12 2012 23:23 Assirra wrote:On August 12 2012 22:50 zmansman17 wrote:On August 12 2012 09:58 Shiori wrote:On August 12 2012 09:21 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:
watch teaja closely, terrans lategame strength is .. mules = unlimited macro. no zerg nerf required, just adjust your strategy. its not like teaja has insane micro, his main strength is macro+strategy Oh shut up. None of the games Taeja has played against Zerg have been anywhere near standard. Most of them have been the Zerg failing at metagaming him or Baneling Busting. If you try to 4CC on ladder you're going to get smashed. I love how so many Zergs point to Taeja and say "Do that." That's like saying: "Play perfectly and register an average of 300 apm". So? The game should be balanced for the top and not lower. Lets say we buff terran till everyone here is happy, any idea how powerful Teaja will be then considering how he is now? One thing I will never understand why people here consider an absolutely brilliant player being dominant a problem to be rectified with faction balance. To make a parallel to fighting games where most of you have less emotional investment, a Japanese guy called Daigo Umehara was very, very good and he played Ryu. He just won stupidly much. But the smart people did not cry "Nerf Ryu": They recognized it was simply Daigo being awesome.* Similarily, at this year's EVO (biggest most prestigious fighting game event), a Korean player called Infiltration just demolished everyone. And I mean absolutely everyone. He was utterly untouchable, defeating players like Daigo (who's at a normal high end pro level or so atm if you ask me) 2-0 first game, 2-0 second one in the top8. He just made everyone look free. Again, are there cries to nerf Akuma, who is already regarded as one of the best characters in the game with very few bad matchups? No. People rightly recognized that it was just Infiltration being a monster, something that has been seen from time to time with different players and different characters. If some poor schmuck won with Oni (who is quite bad)? Well, yeah, perhaps there is still something in there to explore. But instantly "Oni is okay, no problems there"? Not a chance. Similarily, people sometimes win ridiculously bad matchups by being very, very good, but those matchups do not cease to be horrible. Current TvZ has all the traits of a bad matchup that I have ever seen, and the game is an RTS where balance is much more keenly felt in gameplay than an equal imbalance ever could in a fighting game. So, fellow zergies, get some goddamn perspective already. That perspective includes the idea that "pressing sddd without a care about anything not-heavily-allin" is actually not balanced, but broken. * Make no mistake, there were nerf Ryu cries still, and those cries were quite justified - Ryu was indeed pretty goddamn stupid in some gameplay related things. If you've ever thought of warpgates, fungal or forcefields being retarded, you know the kind of annoying design that was the cause. But still people were able to separate Ryu's power from Daigo's power, which is the point here. On August 13 2012 00:20 superstartran wrote:
This is not the same situation at all; not even remotely close. FD was playing on bad maps, when the game was still young and developing. This is a completely different situation. And very safe thirds and naturals on super huge maps with free Ferrarilord parking spots are not bad in the other direction? What? When did I say safe 3rds on super huge maps with tons of dead air space were good? I'm merely pointing out that anyone trying to utilize the FD situation to this one is completely wrong and likely ignorant and dumb all at the same time. FD was dealing with very bad maps for Z, in a metagame that heavily was biased against Z due to the fact that the game was so young at this point. Anyone trying to say otherwise needs to just stop posting. Taeja is playing when the game is much more fully developed, to the point where we are no longer going to see massive metagame shifts due to maps, new builds, new timing attacks, etc. like we could have during the FD era. This is why alot of Terran players were telling Zerg players to shut up and deal with it, because the game hadn't reached a point where it was anywhere near done yet. Alot of the cheesy things Terran were doing were because of the MAPS not any inherent imbalance in the game itself. Things like 3 rax Reaper, Siege Tank cliff dropping, Thor drops, Medivac race car suicide squads, etc. were actually problems due to the incredibly short rush distances and bad gimmicky things with the maps themselves. High yield minerals was another map issue, not an inherent game balance issue. Alot of people forget that in BW, most balance issues were solved by making better maps, not by bitching and moaning for free buffs, something alot of Z players tend to forget that they got for free. That's not to say Terran players weren't guilty of this either. They were in fact the catalyst for the buff for the Infestor in the first place. I remember Link came onto these very forums bitching about not being able to do a 1-1-1 expand opening against a Protoss that opened 3 gate probe cut Stalker/VR all-in with minimal Marine building. As we all know, today, even with far better execution now adays, a 3 Gate/VR all in is pretty easy to hold if you see it coming, and you utilize the correct build. However, of course, Link, Maka, and a few other Terran players went crying directly to Dustin, David Kim, and the rest of the balance team that this was in fact broken, when the 3 Gate/VR all-in hadn't even made a single appearance in GSL or MLG. There was no time given to Terran players to adapt to the opening, they were just given a free get out of jail free card. It wasn't until Protoss players continually busted Terrans with 4 gates, 3 Gate/Immortal play, and other 2 base 6-8 Gate variations that Terran players stopped being dumb and stopped the whole 1-1-1 = > Expand type of opening. 1-1-1 was no longer a staple, it became a relic of the past unless it was an all-in. So what happened? The VR got changed. In a very, very, very bad way. The removal of the speed buff and the lethality of an all-in forced Blizzard to try and make the VR do something more creative. It became an anti-massive unit. Everyone thought it would be fine and dandy. Except somebody figured out that VRs actually compliment the Protoss Stalker/Colossus ball pretty well, to the point where you had nothing but P players going 200/200 deathballs. Alot of P players continued to just clown on Z players badly with this 200/200 deathball all over the place, while Z players continued to attempt to play ultra greedy and not aggressive (I actually got into an argument with many high level players on this forum that a Z player should be doing a 3 Hatch aggression before the P hits critical mass, killing off their 3rd because there's an actual window where they can do such a thing; many high level Z players dismissed this and just said "GAME IS BROKEN"). Fair enough; maybe it isn't fair Z couldn't match that P deathball (even though Z had ample opportunity to pretty much crunch on a P player badly before critical mass deathball hit). What happens though? Infestor buff. And we all know what happened here. You had idiotic matches where people would do nothing but make 20+ Infestors and just simply run you over. So what's the point of my hilariously long dragged out post? It's that people bitched and moaned too much early on for changes. Everyone did. Protoss players, Zerg players, Terran players, everyone did. Alot of the stuff that you saw back in the day wasn't even legitimately broken; it was mainly due to the way the maps were designed with dumb shit like high yield minerals, rocks at 3rd, rocks in dumb places, incredibly short rush distances, close map positions, cliffs above expansions, etc. What happened was that the so called "great" Starcraft community forced Blizzard's hand (both amateurs and professionals had a hand in this) into creating this terrible boring meta where both T and P are forced to all-in Z's because of various reasons (P no longer has any mobility in HT to counter Muta play, so hitting a Z before he hits critical mass Infestors or Mutas is in the P's favor; T got nerfed to kingdom come due to various dumb reasons). You have no clue what you're talking about in terms of VRs. 3 gate void was nerfed because it was way too powerful for the longest time, as well as void rays were appropriately nerfed early on because you could easily kite infinitey marines with 1-2 void rays. Stop making shit up lmao. Some of the things in beta were hilariously broken and were appropriately fixed. If you want an example of how broken VRS were before there was a time when protoss would even proxy 2-3 gateways in front of the Terran's base (very near it) with their stargate/voidray opening so they could charge up on their own building and essentially get a freewin -__- ;d More on-topic...a raven speed buff does nothing really. The issue is not the speed. The issue is fungal locks the unit in place making it so you can't use HSM. The issue is it takes 3 minutes or so to get a raven/HSM ready for use vs broodlord/corruptor. Speed addresses neither of those, so basically the game remains the same if they go through with a raven speed buff. The creep change is good in one way or another, though I think it'd be better to make the creep recede much more quickly than nerf how far it goes out. The biggest problem with creep is that if you do clear it you're suiciding raw material of units and a queen may just put out another tumor anyways. It's quite frustrated to have "cleared" creep and then have to wait an entire minute or whatever it is for it to go away.
What?
I really don't care that you're avilo, I don't care that you're a high level player, but you cannot tell me with a straight fucking face that Link and Maka were anywhere near objective with their replays that they sent into David Kim because they got 3 Gate VRs nerfed on replays that were demonstrating an extremely greedy 1-1-1 expand with minimal Marines. If they had demonstrated that they were losing to 3 Gate VR while opening 2 rax or 1 rax CC followed into 3 rax Marine, then they'd have a point. But they didn't; they were getting crushed because they were building a CC off a 1-1-1, and half the time they were losing not even because they were getting killed by charged VRs, but because they were getting all-inned when they were being ultra greedy.
BTW, I was referring to VR change during retail, and not beta. The change that occured was because both Maka and Link0 directly cried to David Kim before the opening was even utilized to any extent in GSL or MLG. MC still was successful with his VR timings not even because the VRs were good, but because everyone T he played against played utterly greedy and would get boned when MC came in with a charged VR.
You can look up the replay yourself in the old thread here on TL; Link's only evidence that 3 gate VR was overpowered was him doing a 1-1-1 build that was utterly greedy to the point it was stupid. Maka said "there's no way to defend against this" when 1-1-1 was the standard in TvP play for the fast medivac, or opening 1 rax Marauder pressure expand. Terran crying foul was a huge part of why the VR was changed into extra damage to massive, which resulted in the shitstorm you have today. There is no making shit up; you're fucking lying if you think Link or Maka or any other Terran pro was even being remotely objective when they were saying 3 Gate VRs were overpowered after the range nerf/dmg nerf from the beta. In retail VRs were perfectly fine; it was the Terran race crying that they couldn't play ultra greedy while pressuring behind their medivac that made Blizzard change the VR.
Guess what happened? The VR got changed, and P players kept CONTINUALLY VR all-inning Terran players with tremendous success (or Immortal busting them) until the Terran players STOPPED playing so greedy. The VR change was absolutely useless; the primary reason why the change occurred was more due to crying because Terran pros were dying to all-ins that they didn't think they could possibly defend rather than them actually attempting to come up with something legitimate that could defend against it.
David Kim admitted to nerfing Void Rays based off of ONE replay from Maka (and Link I believe), who at the time was an ultra greedy player. He tried to play aggressive all while eco'ing heavily at the same time with minimal amount of units, cutting as many edges as he can rather than playing a safe macro style like MVP does. And yet somehow you think that's justified trolololololololol.
|
On August 13 2012 10:40 YyapSsap wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2012 10:14 Shiori wrote:On August 13 2012 09:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
dude, shiori, you can practice micro and get great at that, too.
point is not level of difficulty per se, as if there's some barometer, it's time consumption. That's why zerg macro has a high skill ceiling; you can always be injecting, creep spreading, and managing your economy better. throw in APM intensive muta play on top of that and it's even more stressful on your total apm. that's why players with 400 apm can do it really well (albeit not perfectly), and players with 160 miss injects, or leave their mutas sitting for extended periods of time, or spread creep inefficiently.
if you don't play zerg at ~masters level or above, it's kind of hard to understand i can imagine. we watch pros play and you just -see- creep flowing across the map and tons of units pouring out of larva. it's just intensive to do it all, and i dare say objectively more intensive than either p or t. It's not intensive because it's just memorization. There's no way for you to fuck it up if you practice a lot. There's no missing a Forcefield and losing to a Roach pressure. There's no getting all your Vikings Fungaled because you were sending an SCV to make an expansion. When you miss your Injects, you're a little bit behind, but you didn't actually lose the game straight up, especially because missing Injects generally happens in the late game when you have more to think about. It's honestly not that hard for a player to do a repetitive action like Injecting and Creep Spreading. And micro isn't really hard either, but the difference is that micro scales with skill in a direct way, in the sense that you can actually do creative things with micro to win engagements you otherwise would have lost, whereas macroing is just something you do. Every pro player can be expected to macro pretty damn well, and while it's definitely hard to keep all your Queens at low energy all the time, it's way harder to split Marines, use Ghosts, keep Vikings spread, and send out some drops all the while ensuring that your Barracks are still producing units. In that respect, Terran and Protoss aren't really much different from Zerg. Every X seconds, we need to make sure we build units or our production cycles go to waste. It's very similar to Injecting. Creep Spreading is important and requires APM, but again, it's not something that requires any particular accuracy or concentration. You just select the creep Tumors, hit C, and click. Simple. Overlord rallying? Simple. You rally the units. Like honestly, none of this is mechanically demanding. It's remembering to do it that's difficult. On the other hand, the biggest thing that makes micro challenging is that it needs to be EXACT, and that it needs to be timely. If you don't split, you lose the game. If you don't Storm at that precise moment, you won't get another chance. If you miss an Inject for 2 seconds you...Inject 2 seconds later. See the difference? On top of that, Zerg players don't really need to micro much in most situations, which means that their entire undivided attention can go on macro and making sure everything goes well for them. Unfortunately, Protoss and Terrn players also need to micro in addition to their macro, which, while less APM intensive, takes their focus and often vision away from their army just as much as Injects/Creep/Overlords do. I mean yeah, you guys have slightly harder macro, but Protoss/Terran players have astronomically harder micro with some pretty difficult macro to go along with it. The thing is, though, everyone at the pro level has good macro. Not everyone has amazing micro/decision making. Zergs only have to worry about the latter. That's the problem. It sounds like you've never played zerg before, and disregarding "memorization" because its not intensive? Of course it is intensive, because as the game goes on for longer and longer you still have to perform these repetitive tasks on top of what ever you doing. This normally differentiates the good zerg players to the bad ones (mechanically speaking). When you start missing injects, these delays add up til eventually you might end up in a scenario where you run out of larvae for a short period of time. Lets put it into perspective. Do you use your chrono boost energy all the time which theoretically should be possible? Also I like how you make it sound like P and T share similar demands in the micro department but they simply don't. Its also laughable how you claim micro isn't as important to a zerg when if that was the case, id doubt any zergs would ever win any game..
Actually, as the game goes pretty late you don't necessarily have to keep up on injects any more. If you're on five or six bases with a 200/200 BL/infestor army, your larvae just start pooling anyway since you're not losing very many units and you can't make more because of supply cap. You can miss two out of three injects and still have plenty of larvae to remax when the time comes. About the only remax that still needs consistent injects is if you lose your whole army and then want to remax with zerglings, and generally you could just mix a few ultras in to make more efficient use of your larvae.
By the way, using all your chrono boost might theoretically be "possible," but it's not useful. People used to say those things about how we can tell the SC2 pro scene still sucks because no one uses all their chrono boost late game, but the reason that happens is because there's nothing to spend it on. If you have a 200/200 army and 25-30 warpgates, chrono boosting them probably isn't going to make much difference. You could make fewer warpgates and chrono boost the ones you have more, but it's not like you need the minerals, and using more gateways means your units come out in the first round, instead of having to wait for the chrono-boosted second warpgate cycle.
As for zerg units needing less micro, why would that mean zergs wouldn't win? If zerg units are designed such that they are very strong on an attack move command, while Terran or Protoss units are designed such that they require a great deal of micro to be effective, wouldn't that make it easier for zerg to win? I'm not saying there's no such thing as good and bad zerg micro (ZvZ ling bling wars are definitely very challenging, at the very least), but it's generally understood that crazy micro is both more useful and more necessary for T and P than for Z. Consider hellions vs. zerglings, or marines vs. zerglings for that matter. Both hellion micro and marine stutter-step micro are considered fairly complex and difficult to do, while zerglings generally either attack move, or move command past the marines/hellions for a surround and then a-move once the enemy is surrounded.
|
On August 13 2012 11:02 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2012 10:40 YyapSsap wrote:On August 13 2012 10:14 Shiori wrote:On August 13 2012 09:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
dude, shiori, you can practice micro and get great at that, too.
point is not level of difficulty per se, as if there's some barometer, it's time consumption. That's why zerg macro has a high skill ceiling; you can always be injecting, creep spreading, and managing your economy better. throw in APM intensive muta play on top of that and it's even more stressful on your total apm. that's why players with 400 apm can do it really well (albeit not perfectly), and players with 160 miss injects, or leave their mutas sitting for extended periods of time, or spread creep inefficiently.
if you don't play zerg at ~masters level or above, it's kind of hard to understand i can imagine. we watch pros play and you just -see- creep flowing across the map and tons of units pouring out of larva. it's just intensive to do it all, and i dare say objectively more intensive than either p or t. It's not intensive because it's just memorization. There's no way for you to fuck it up if you practice a lot. There's no missing a Forcefield and losing to a Roach pressure. There's no getting all your Vikings Fungaled because you were sending an SCV to make an expansion. When you miss your Injects, you're a little bit behind, but you didn't actually lose the game straight up, especially because missing Injects generally happens in the late game when you have more to think about. It's honestly not that hard for a player to do a repetitive action like Injecting and Creep Spreading. And micro isn't really hard either, but the difference is that micro scales with skill in a direct way, in the sense that you can actually do creative things with micro to win engagements you otherwise would have lost, whereas macroing is just something you do. Every pro player can be expected to macro pretty damn well, and while it's definitely hard to keep all your Queens at low energy all the time, it's way harder to split Marines, use Ghosts, keep Vikings spread, and send out some drops all the while ensuring that your Barracks are still producing units. In that respect, Terran and Protoss aren't really much different from Zerg. Every X seconds, we need to make sure we build units or our production cycles go to waste. It's very similar to Injecting. Creep Spreading is important and requires APM, but again, it's not something that requires any particular accuracy or concentration. You just select the creep Tumors, hit C, and click. Simple. Overlord rallying? Simple. You rally the units. Like honestly, none of this is mechanically demanding. It's remembering to do it that's difficult. On the other hand, the biggest thing that makes micro challenging is that it needs to be EXACT, and that it needs to be timely. If you don't split, you lose the game. If you don't Storm at that precise moment, you won't get another chance. If you miss an Inject for 2 seconds you...Inject 2 seconds later. See the difference? On top of that, Zerg players don't really need to micro much in most situations, which means that their entire undivided attention can go on macro and making sure everything goes well for them. Unfortunately, Protoss and Terrn players also need to micro in addition to their macro, which, while less APM intensive, takes their focus and often vision away from their army just as much as Injects/Creep/Overlords do. I mean yeah, you guys have slightly harder macro, but Protoss/Terran players have astronomically harder micro with some pretty difficult macro to go along with it. The thing is, though, everyone at the pro level has good macro. Not everyone has amazing micro/decision making. Zergs only have to worry about the latter. That's the problem. It sounds like you've never played zerg before, and disregarding "memorization" because its not intensive? Of course it is intensive, because as the game goes on for longer and longer you still have to perform these repetitive tasks on top of what ever you doing. This normally differentiates the good zerg players to the bad ones (mechanically speaking). When you start missing injects, these delays add up til eventually you might end up in a scenario where you run out of larvae for a short period of time. Lets put it into perspective. Do you use your chrono boost energy all the time which theoretically should be possible? Also I like how you make it sound like P and T share similar demands in the micro department but they simply don't. Its also laughable how you claim micro isn't as important to a zerg when if that was the case, id doubt any zergs would ever win any game.. Actually, as the game goes pretty late you don't necessarily have to keep up on injects any more. If you're on five or six bases with a 200/200 BL/infestor army, your larvae just start pooling anyway since you're not losing very many units and you can't make more because of supply cap. You can miss two out of three injects and still have plenty of larvae to remax when the time comes. About the only remax that still needs consistent injects is if you lose your whole army and then want to remax with zerglings, and generally you could just mix a few ultras in to make more efficient use of your larvae. By the way, using all your chrono boost might theoretically be "possible," but it's not useful. People used to say those things about how we can tell the SC2 pro scene still sucks because no one uses all their chrono boost late game, but the reason that happens is because there's nothing to spend it on. If you have a 200/200 army and 25-30 warpgates, chrono boosting them probably isn't going to make much difference. You could make fewer warpgates and chrono boost the ones you have more, but it's not like you need the minerals, and using more gateways means your units come out in the first round, instead of having to wait for the chrono-boosted second warpgate cycle. As for zerg units needing less micro, why would that mean zergs wouldn't win? If zerg units are designed such that they are very strong on an attack move command, while Terran or Protoss units are designed such that they require a great deal of micro to be effective, wouldn't that make it easier for zerg to win? I'm not saying there's no such thing as good and bad zerg micro (ZvZ ling bling wars are definitely very challenging, at the very least), but it's generally understood that crazy micro is both more useful and more necessary for T and P than for Z. Consider hellions vs. zerglings, or marines vs. zerglings for that matter. Both hellion micro and marine stutter-step micro are considered fairly complex and difficult to do, while zerglings generally either attack move, or move command past the marines/hellions for a surround and then a-move once the enemy is surrounded.
That is one scenario. If its a "turtle-fest" then of course it won't matter, but games where constant tradings between armies occur (especially in TvZ), then one or two missed injected can cost you the game. Pros do it so well that it doesn't look like its a hard task to do but on ladder, its completely different.
As for chronoboost, theoretically trying to use chronos on all upgrades, production cool downs will always be useful than not using it at all. I mean short cool downs, faster upgrades is not beneficial? There are instances/periods like you point out where chrono isn't effective (when the game grounds to a halt/idlness) but throughout the course of the game, a P player who effectively manages chrono on almost everything the ENTIRE game will be way ahead because these in SC2 tend have a snow balling effect. Its something to look out for since l have never seen a P player show such skills yet.
Crazy micro for a P? is that you Shiori? And for a record, unless you got ALOT of lings, surrounding say 4 hellions with ~16 lings can be a very very difficult task. Its all situational, and almost all units require the same basic level of micro independent of race. Its from there where some units do require more attention to detail, where in case of zerg units which are mostly melee, getting the best surface area can be very micro intensive because the opposing player will try everything he can to minimize it.
|
On August 13 2012 11:50 YyapSsap wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2012 11:02 ChristianS wrote:On August 13 2012 10:40 YyapSsap wrote:On August 13 2012 10:14 Shiori wrote:On August 13 2012 09:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
dude, shiori, you can practice micro and get great at that, too.
point is not level of difficulty per se, as if there's some barometer, it's time consumption. That's why zerg macro has a high skill ceiling; you can always be injecting, creep spreading, and managing your economy better. throw in APM intensive muta play on top of that and it's even more stressful on your total apm. that's why players with 400 apm can do it really well (albeit not perfectly), and players with 160 miss injects, or leave their mutas sitting for extended periods of time, or spread creep inefficiently.
if you don't play zerg at ~masters level or above, it's kind of hard to understand i can imagine. we watch pros play and you just -see- creep flowing across the map and tons of units pouring out of larva. it's just intensive to do it all, and i dare say objectively more intensive than either p or t. It's not intensive because it's just memorization. There's no way for you to fuck it up if you practice a lot. There's no missing a Forcefield and losing to a Roach pressure. There's no getting all your Vikings Fungaled because you were sending an SCV to make an expansion. When you miss your Injects, you're a little bit behind, but you didn't actually lose the game straight up, especially because missing Injects generally happens in the late game when you have more to think about. It's honestly not that hard for a player to do a repetitive action like Injecting and Creep Spreading. And micro isn't really hard either, but the difference is that micro scales with skill in a direct way, in the sense that you can actually do creative things with micro to win engagements you otherwise would have lost, whereas macroing is just something you do. Every pro player can be expected to macro pretty damn well, and while it's definitely hard to keep all your Queens at low energy all the time, it's way harder to split Marines, use Ghosts, keep Vikings spread, and send out some drops all the while ensuring that your Barracks are still producing units. In that respect, Terran and Protoss aren't really much different from Zerg. Every X seconds, we need to make sure we build units or our production cycles go to waste. It's very similar to Injecting. Creep Spreading is important and requires APM, but again, it's not something that requires any particular accuracy or concentration. You just select the creep Tumors, hit C, and click. Simple. Overlord rallying? Simple. You rally the units. Like honestly, none of this is mechanically demanding. It's remembering to do it that's difficult. On the other hand, the biggest thing that makes micro challenging is that it needs to be EXACT, and that it needs to be timely. If you don't split, you lose the game. If you don't Storm at that precise moment, you won't get another chance. If you miss an Inject for 2 seconds you...Inject 2 seconds later. See the difference? On top of that, Zerg players don't really need to micro much in most situations, which means that their entire undivided attention can go on macro and making sure everything goes well for them. Unfortunately, Protoss and Terrn players also need to micro in addition to their macro, which, while less APM intensive, takes their focus and often vision away from their army just as much as Injects/Creep/Overlords do. I mean yeah, you guys have slightly harder macro, but Protoss/Terran players have astronomically harder micro with some pretty difficult macro to go along with it. The thing is, though, everyone at the pro level has good macro. Not everyone has amazing micro/decision making. Zergs only have to worry about the latter. That's the problem. It sounds like you've never played zerg before, and disregarding "memorization" because its not intensive? Of course it is intensive, because as the game goes on for longer and longer you still have to perform these repetitive tasks on top of what ever you doing. This normally differentiates the good zerg players to the bad ones (mechanically speaking). When you start missing injects, these delays add up til eventually you might end up in a scenario where you run out of larvae for a short period of time. Lets put it into perspective. Do you use your chrono boost energy all the time which theoretically should be possible? Also I like how you make it sound like P and T share similar demands in the micro department but they simply don't. Its also laughable how you claim micro isn't as important to a zerg when if that was the case, id doubt any zergs would ever win any game.. Actually, as the game goes pretty late you don't necessarily have to keep up on injects any more. If you're on five or six bases with a 200/200 BL/infestor army, your larvae just start pooling anyway since you're not losing very many units and you can't make more because of supply cap. You can miss two out of three injects and still have plenty of larvae to remax when the time comes. About the only remax that still needs consistent injects is if you lose your whole army and then want to remax with zerglings, and generally you could just mix a few ultras in to make more efficient use of your larvae. By the way, using all your chrono boost might theoretically be "possible," but it's not useful. People used to say those things about how we can tell the SC2 pro scene still sucks because no one uses all their chrono boost late game, but the reason that happens is because there's nothing to spend it on. If you have a 200/200 army and 25-30 warpgates, chrono boosting them probably isn't going to make much difference. You could make fewer warpgates and chrono boost the ones you have more, but it's not like you need the minerals, and using more gateways means your units come out in the first round, instead of having to wait for the chrono-boosted second warpgate cycle. As for zerg units needing less micro, why would that mean zergs wouldn't win? If zerg units are designed such that they are very strong on an attack move command, while Terran or Protoss units are designed such that they require a great deal of micro to be effective, wouldn't that make it easier for zerg to win? I'm not saying there's no such thing as good and bad zerg micro (ZvZ ling bling wars are definitely very challenging, at the very least), but it's generally understood that crazy micro is both more useful and more necessary for T and P than for Z. Consider hellions vs. zerglings, or marines vs. zerglings for that matter. Both hellion micro and marine stutter-step micro are considered fairly complex and difficult to do, while zerglings generally either attack move, or move command past the marines/hellions for a surround and then a-move once the enemy is surrounded. That is one scenario. If its a "turtle-fest" then of course it won't matter, but games where constant tradings between armies occur (especially in TvZ), then one or two missed injected can cost you the game. Pros do it so well that it doesn't look like its a hard task to do but on ladder, its completely different. As for chronoboost, theoretically trying to use chronos on all upgrades, production cool downs will always be useful than not using it at all. I mean short cool downs, faster upgrades is not beneficial? There are instances/periods like you point out where chrono isn't effective (when the game grounds to a halt/idlness) but throughout the course of the game, a P player who effectively manages chrono on almost everything the ENTIRE game will be way ahead because these in SC2 tend have a snow balling effect. Its something to look out for since l have never seen a P player show such skills yet. Crazy micro for a P? is that you Shiori? And for a record, unless you got ALOT of lings, surrounding say 4 hellions with ~16 lings can be a very very difficult task. Its all situational, and almost all units require the same basic level of micro independent of race. Its from there where some units do require more attention to detail, where in case of zerg units which are mostly melee, getting the best surface area can be very micro intensive because the opposing player will try everything he can to minimize it.
At the highest level, Terran and Protoss both have to micro far, far more than Zergs do.
|
very nice changes and very good for terran 
|
On August 13 2012 10:14 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2012 09:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
dude, shiori, you can practice micro and get great at that, too.
point is not level of difficulty per se, as if there's some barometer, it's time consumption. That's why zerg macro has a high skill ceiling; you can always be injecting, creep spreading, and managing your economy better. throw in APM intensive muta play on top of that and it's even more stressful on your total apm. that's why players with 400 apm can do it really well (albeit not perfectly), and players with 160 miss injects, or leave their mutas sitting for extended periods of time, or spread creep inefficiently.
if you don't play zerg at ~masters level or above, it's kind of hard to understand i can imagine. we watch pros play and you just -see- creep flowing across the map and tons of units pouring out of larva. it's just intensive to do it all, and i dare say objectively more intensive than either p or t. It's not intensive because it's just memorization. There's no way for you to fuck it up if you practice a lot. There's no missing a Forcefield and losing to a Roach pressure. There's no getting all your Vikings Fungaled because you were sending an SCV to make an expansion. When you miss your Injects, you're a little bit behind, but you didn't actually lose the game straight up, especially because missing Injects generally happens in the late game when you have more to think about. It's honestly not that hard for a player to do a repetitive action like Injecting and Creep Spreading. And micro isn't really hard either, but the difference is that micro scales with skill in a direct way, in the sense that you can actually do creative things with micro to win engagements you otherwise would have lost, whereas macroing is just something you do. Every pro player can be expected to macro pretty damn well, and while it's definitely hard to keep all your Queens at low energy all the time, it's way harder to split Marines, use Ghosts, keep Vikings spread, and send out some drops all the while ensuring that your Barracks are still producing units. In that respect, Terran and Protoss aren't really much different from Zerg. Every X seconds, we need to make sure we build units or our production cycles go to waste. It's very similar to Injecting. Creep Spreading is important and requires APM, but again, it's not something that requires any particular accuracy or concentration. You just select the creep Tumors, hit C, and click. Simple. Overlord rallying? Simple. You rally the units. Like honestly, none of this is mechanically demanding. It's remembering to do it that's difficult. On the other hand, the biggest thing that makes micro challenging is that it needs to be EXACT, and that it needs to be timely. If you don't split, you lose the game. If you don't Storm at that precise moment, you won't get another chance. If you miss an Inject for 2 seconds you...Inject 2 seconds later. See the difference? On top of that, Zerg players don't really need to micro much in most situations, which means that their entire undivided attention can go on macro and making sure everything goes well for them. Unfortunately, Protoss and Terrn players also need to micro in addition to their macro, which, while less APM intensive, takes their focus and often vision away from their army just as much as Injects/Creep/Overlords do. I mean yeah, you guys have slightly harder macro, but Protoss/Terran players have astronomically harder micro with some pretty difficult macro to go along with it. The thing is, though, everyone at the pro level has good macro. Not everyone has amazing micro/decision making. Zergs only have to worry about the latter. That's the problem.
You should note, based on game design Zerg has less leeway for micro even if we wanted to. We do micro lings to surround just as T or P tries to stutter step. Blink is too awesome compared to Roach burrow and we still need to burrow move upgrade. Burrow vs FF, banelings need to be split as well as T splits. Muta is extremely micro intensive. We would micro more if they didn't nerf the NP range, but now we're forced to use just fungal and infested terrans.
Roach is useless in the T matchup, and Hydra is useless is any MU (except maybe ZvZ). At equal army cost T and P mid game armies are extremely cost-efficient vs any thing Z throws at them. Macro and creep are the critical ways that we retain an edge.
Its unfair for people in this forum to say the players of one race has it easier than others, thats total BS, we're all trying to up our skill level whether it be macro or micro . Trying to improve with whatever Blizzard does with game balance.
|
On August 13 2012 11:02 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2012 10:40 YyapSsap wrote:On August 13 2012 10:14 Shiori wrote:On August 13 2012 09:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
dude, shiori, you can practice micro and get great at that, too.
point is not level of difficulty per se, as if there's some barometer, it's time consumption. That's why zerg macro has a high skill ceiling; you can always be injecting, creep spreading, and managing your economy better. throw in APM intensive muta play on top of that and it's even more stressful on your total apm. that's why players with 400 apm can do it really well (albeit not perfectly), and players with 160 miss injects, or leave their mutas sitting for extended periods of time, or spread creep inefficiently.
if you don't play zerg at ~masters level or above, it's kind of hard to understand i can imagine. we watch pros play and you just -see- creep flowing across the map and tons of units pouring out of larva. it's just intensive to do it all, and i dare say objectively more intensive than either p or t. It's not intensive because it's just memorization. There's no way for you to fuck it up if you practice a lot. There's no missing a Forcefield and losing to a Roach pressure. There's no getting all your Vikings Fungaled because you were sending an SCV to make an expansion. When you miss your Injects, you're a little bit behind, but you didn't actually lose the game straight up, especially because missing Injects generally happens in the late game when you have more to think about. It's honestly not that hard for a player to do a repetitive action like Injecting and Creep Spreading. And micro isn't really hard either, but the difference is that micro scales with skill in a direct way, in the sense that you can actually do creative things with micro to win engagements you otherwise would have lost, whereas macroing is just something you do. Every pro player can be expected to macro pretty damn well, and while it's definitely hard to keep all your Queens at low energy all the time, it's way harder to split Marines, use Ghosts, keep Vikings spread, and send out some drops all the while ensuring that your Barracks are still producing units. In that respect, Terran and Protoss aren't really much different from Zerg. Every X seconds, we need to make sure we build units or our production cycles go to waste. It's very similar to Injecting. Creep Spreading is important and requires APM, but again, it's not something that requires any particular accuracy or concentration. You just select the creep Tumors, hit C, and click. Simple. Overlord rallying? Simple. You rally the units. Like honestly, none of this is mechanically demanding. It's remembering to do it that's difficult. On the other hand, the biggest thing that makes micro challenging is that it needs to be EXACT, and that it needs to be timely. If you don't split, you lose the game. If you don't Storm at that precise moment, you won't get another chance. If you miss an Inject for 2 seconds you...Inject 2 seconds later. See the difference? On top of that, Zerg players don't really need to micro much in most situations, which means that their entire undivided attention can go on macro and making sure everything goes well for them. Unfortunately, Protoss and Terrn players also need to micro in addition to their macro, which, while less APM intensive, takes their focus and often vision away from their army just as much as Injects/Creep/Overlords do. I mean yeah, you guys have slightly harder macro, but Protoss/Terran players have astronomically harder micro with some pretty difficult macro to go along with it. The thing is, though, everyone at the pro level has good macro. Not everyone has amazing micro/decision making. Zergs only have to worry about the latter. That's the problem. It sounds like you've never played zerg before, and disregarding "memorization" because its not intensive? Of course it is intensive, because as the game goes on for longer and longer you still have to perform these repetitive tasks on top of what ever you doing. This normally differentiates the good zerg players to the bad ones (mechanically speaking). When you start missing injects, these delays add up til eventually you might end up in a scenario where you run out of larvae for a short period of time. Lets put it into perspective. Do you use your chrono boost energy all the time which theoretically should be possible? Also I like how you make it sound like P and T share similar demands in the micro department but they simply don't. Its also laughable how you claim micro isn't as important to a zerg when if that was the case, id doubt any zergs would ever win any game.. Actually, as the game goes pretty late you don't necessarily have to keep up on injects any more. If you're on five or six bases with a 200/200 BL/infestor army, your larvae just start pooling anyway since you're not losing very many units and you can't make more because of supply cap. You can miss two out of three injects and still have plenty of larvae to remax when the time comes. About the only remax that still needs consistent injects is if you lose your whole army and then want to remax with zerglings, and generally you could just mix a few ultras in to make more efficient use of your larvae. By the way, using all your chrono boost might theoretically be "possible," but it's not useful. People used to say those things about how we can tell the SC2 pro scene still sucks because no one uses all their chrono boost late game, but the reason that happens is because there's nothing to spend it on. If you have a 200/200 army and 25-30 warpgates, chrono boosting them probably isn't going to make much difference. You could make fewer warpgates and chrono boost the ones you have more, but it's not like you need the minerals, and using more gateways means your units come out in the first round, instead of having to wait for the chrono-boosted second warpgate cycle. As for zerg units needing less micro, why would that mean zergs wouldn't win? If zerg units are designed such that they are very strong on an attack move command, while Terran or Protoss units are designed such that they require a great deal of micro to be effective, wouldn't that make it easier for zerg to win? I'm not saying there's no such thing as good and bad zerg micro (ZvZ ling bling wars are definitely very challenging, at the very least), but it's generally understood that crazy micro is both more useful and more necessary for T and P than for Z. Consider hellions vs. zerglings, or marines vs. zerglings for that matter. Both hellion micro and marine stutter-step micro are considered fairly complex and difficult to do, while zerglings generally either attack move, or move command past the marines/hellions for a surround and then a-move once the enemy is surrounded.
I really wish people saying zerg is easymode would just play zerg and see.
How is terran micro significantly harder than zerg micro?
Marine splitting? Meet baneling splitting
Target firing with tanks? Target firing with mutas
EMP? Fungal (and infestors all have a death wish)
Hellions versus zerglings? uhhh zerglings vs hellions
Multiple drops? Defending multiple drops (you lose some marines if you fuck up, zerg loses a mineral line or tech building)
Stutter stepping maybe?
1. Zerg has to do it too to keep up.
2. It's really not that hard
3. Zerg often surrounds/flanks and so there's no need anyway.
I'm not saying at all that terran is easy, of course their units are much less replaceable than zerg's, but zerg has to micro as well, often in many places across the map or controlling multiple armies for a flank and all the while macroing.
In a lot of games the zerg gets ahead on macro by capitalising on a terran mistake or not being punished for greed and so the rest of the game it seems like zerg is just a-moving to win but this is not an accurate representation of an even match.
edit: and also zerg macro is way more decision making than T macro. Zerg has to make a decision on whether to make drones or attacking units based on scouting. Terran just blindly follows a build order.
|
On August 13 2012 12:12 Zrana wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2012 11:02 ChristianS wrote:On August 13 2012 10:40 YyapSsap wrote:On August 13 2012 10:14 Shiori wrote:On August 13 2012 09:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
dude, shiori, you can practice micro and get great at that, too.
point is not level of difficulty per se, as if there's some barometer, it's time consumption. That's why zerg macro has a high skill ceiling; you can always be injecting, creep spreading, and managing your economy better. throw in APM intensive muta play on top of that and it's even more stressful on your total apm. that's why players with 400 apm can do it really well (albeit not perfectly), and players with 160 miss injects, or leave their mutas sitting for extended periods of time, or spread creep inefficiently.
if you don't play zerg at ~masters level or above, it's kind of hard to understand i can imagine. we watch pros play and you just -see- creep flowing across the map and tons of units pouring out of larva. it's just intensive to do it all, and i dare say objectively more intensive than either p or t. It's not intensive because it's just memorization. There's no way for you to fuck it up if you practice a lot. There's no missing a Forcefield and losing to a Roach pressure. There's no getting all your Vikings Fungaled because you were sending an SCV to make an expansion. When you miss your Injects, you're a little bit behind, but you didn't actually lose the game straight up, especially because missing Injects generally happens in the late game when you have more to think about. It's honestly not that hard for a player to do a repetitive action like Injecting and Creep Spreading. And micro isn't really hard either, but the difference is that micro scales with skill in a direct way, in the sense that you can actually do creative things with micro to win engagements you otherwise would have lost, whereas macroing is just something you do. Every pro player can be expected to macro pretty damn well, and while it's definitely hard to keep all your Queens at low energy all the time, it's way harder to split Marines, use Ghosts, keep Vikings spread, and send out some drops all the while ensuring that your Barracks are still producing units. In that respect, Terran and Protoss aren't really much different from Zerg. Every X seconds, we need to make sure we build units or our production cycles go to waste. It's very similar to Injecting. Creep Spreading is important and requires APM, but again, it's not something that requires any particular accuracy or concentration. You just select the creep Tumors, hit C, and click. Simple. Overlord rallying? Simple. You rally the units. Like honestly, none of this is mechanically demanding. It's remembering to do it that's difficult. On the other hand, the biggest thing that makes micro challenging is that it needs to be EXACT, and that it needs to be timely. If you don't split, you lose the game. If you don't Storm at that precise moment, you won't get another chance. If you miss an Inject for 2 seconds you...Inject 2 seconds later. See the difference? On top of that, Zerg players don't really need to micro much in most situations, which means that their entire undivided attention can go on macro and making sure everything goes well for them. Unfortunately, Protoss and Terrn players also need to micro in addition to their macro, which, while less APM intensive, takes their focus and often vision away from their army just as much as Injects/Creep/Overlords do. I mean yeah, you guys have slightly harder macro, but Protoss/Terran players have astronomically harder micro with some pretty difficult macro to go along with it. The thing is, though, everyone at the pro level has good macro. Not everyone has amazing micro/decision making. Zergs only have to worry about the latter. That's the problem. It sounds like you've never played zerg before, and disregarding "memorization" because its not intensive? Of course it is intensive, because as the game goes on for longer and longer you still have to perform these repetitive tasks on top of what ever you doing. This normally differentiates the good zerg players to the bad ones (mechanically speaking). When you start missing injects, these delays add up til eventually you might end up in a scenario where you run out of larvae for a short period of time. Lets put it into perspective. Do you use your chrono boost energy all the time which theoretically should be possible? Also I like how you make it sound like P and T share similar demands in the micro department but they simply don't. Its also laughable how you claim micro isn't as important to a zerg when if that was the case, id doubt any zergs would ever win any game.. Actually, as the game goes pretty late you don't necessarily have to keep up on injects any more. If you're on five or six bases with a 200/200 BL/infestor army, your larvae just start pooling anyway since you're not losing very many units and you can't make more because of supply cap. You can miss two out of three injects and still have plenty of larvae to remax when the time comes. About the only remax that still needs consistent injects is if you lose your whole army and then want to remax with zerglings, and generally you could just mix a few ultras in to make more efficient use of your larvae. By the way, using all your chrono boost might theoretically be "possible," but it's not useful. People used to say those things about how we can tell the SC2 pro scene still sucks because no one uses all their chrono boost late game, but the reason that happens is because there's nothing to spend it on. If you have a 200/200 army and 25-30 warpgates, chrono boosting them probably isn't going to make much difference. You could make fewer warpgates and chrono boost the ones you have more, but it's not like you need the minerals, and using more gateways means your units come out in the first round, instead of having to wait for the chrono-boosted second warpgate cycle. As for zerg units needing less micro, why would that mean zergs wouldn't win? If zerg units are designed such that they are very strong on an attack move command, while Terran or Protoss units are designed such that they require a great deal of micro to be effective, wouldn't that make it easier for zerg to win? I'm not saying there's no such thing as good and bad zerg micro (ZvZ ling bling wars are definitely very challenging, at the very least), but it's generally understood that crazy micro is both more useful and more necessary for T and P than for Z. Consider hellions vs. zerglings, or marines vs. zerglings for that matter. Both hellion micro and marine stutter-step micro are considered fairly complex and difficult to do, while zerglings generally either attack move, or move command past the marines/hellions for a surround and then a-move once the enemy is surrounded. I really wish people saying zerg is easymode would just play zerg and see. How is terran micro significantly harder than zerg micro? Marine splitting? Meet baneling splitting Target firing with tanks? Target firing with mutas EMP? Fungal (and infestors all have a death wish) Hellions versus zerglings? uhhh zerglings vs hellions Multiple drops? Defending multiple drops (you lose some marines if you fuck up, zerg loses a mineral line or tech building) Stutter stepping maybe? 1. Zerg has to do it too to keep up. 2. It's really not that hard 3. Zerg often surrounds/flanks and so there's no need anyway. I'm not saying at all that terran is easy, of course their units are much less replaceable than zerg's, but zerg has to micro as well, often in many places across the map or controlling multiple armies for a flank and all the while macroing. In a lot of games the zerg gets ahead on macro by capitalising on a terran mistake or not being punished for greed and so the rest of the game it seems like zerg is just a-moving to win but this is not an accurate representation of an even match. edit: and also zerg macro is way more decision making than T macro. Zerg has to make a decision on whether to make drones or attacking units based on scouting. Terran just blindly follows a build order.
What? Everyone knows Zerg is the most 1-a race in the game. You can ask any Professional player. They will tell yoy straight up. Zerg macro is also very easy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
