|
On August 13 2012 22:03 Jermstuddog wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2012 21:50 Dalavita wrote:On August 13 2012 21:40 Jermstuddog wrote:On August 13 2012 21:31 Dalavita wrote:
Random TvZs are conclusive evidence of balance. You heard it here first. Made up numbers are even better. Sorry for basing my facts on actual games played. You should be sorry for using random TvZs with random occurences and at random skill levels as an example of TvZs in general. I haven't said anything good about made up numbers either, so you should be sorry for making that accusation as well. Sorry for using top master level, knowing that the difference between my play and a GMs play is they take more calculated risks than I do? Ok... first pro ZvT rep on sc2rep dKiller vs FXOTree: 7:30 Terran has 32 SCVs, 3 orbitals and 2 MULE's for a total of: 1400/224 Zerg has 29 drones 2 hatches for a total of: 860/336 Zerg and Terran are actually fighting in the early game, so this isn't a good argument for macro potential. Also, T fucks up and lets Zerg all the way into his main killing his own income for the next major portion of the game. Next game down the list Mill.Tarson vs AcerBly 7:30 T: 36+2 Mules - 1480/224 Z: 47 - 1240/432 9:30 T: 47+0 Mules - 1120/464 Z: 43 - 1240/432 Point to any pro level rep you want, because apparently top of masters isn't good enough. It's always the same, always has been. Zerg econ struggles in the early game. This is why Terrans find themselves not knowing wtf to do now. They've been beating up on the fat kid for 2 years. Now that Terran can't bully Zerg around BEFORE they get on equal income, Terran feels behind. Little do they realize, they've always been way ahead.
this is stupid. you don't post any replays, and you try to make a direct comparison without telling any situation of what might've happened. why would there be only 4 drones made between 7:30 and 9:30, literally nothing said about this.
|
On August 13 2012 22:15 Jermstuddog wrote:
Sorry for now finding that nobody here actually knows wtf they're talking about and really we just want to cry at each other without ever looking into anything beforehand.
You're forgiven, easy mistake to make.
On August 13 2012 22:15 Jermstuddog wrote:
The queen buff has made ZvT early game EQUAL.
No.
On August 13 2012 22:15 Jermstuddog wrote:
It's not some imba bullshit that Blizzard put together to make sure Terran never wins ever.
The PROBLEM with the queen buff is that it has shown the shittiness of the entire Terran race. The whole fucking race is based on marine micro, the early game advantage of Terran macro, and taking advantage of both those facts to bypass anything useful the other guy has.
You want to fix Terran? nerf the marine and buff elsewhere. Otherwise, we'll continue to see top-level terrans dominate while the race struggles everywhere else.
Been saying it for 2 years, but I don't see Blizz ever doing it, don't know why I bother...
Rofl, so it's the terran race that's badly designed, not the other two.
Good to know!
Also, I'll let other people demolish the replays you're talking about since they're probably awful examples. I simply don't care about the numbers in specific, rather about your presentation of the numbers.
|
On August 13 2012 22:15 Jermstuddog wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2012 22:06 Dalavita wrote:On August 13 2012 22:03 Jermstuddog wrote:On August 13 2012 21:50 Dalavita wrote:On August 13 2012 21:40 Jermstuddog wrote:On August 13 2012 21:31 Dalavita wrote:
Random TvZs are conclusive evidence of balance. You heard it here first. Made up numbers are even better. Sorry for basing my facts on actual games played. You should be sorry for using random TvZs with random occurences and at random skill levels as an example of TvZs in general. I haven't said anything good about made up numbers either, so you should be sorry for making that accusation as well. Sorry for using top master level, knowing that the difference between my play and a GMs play is they take more calculated risks than I do? Ok... first pro ZvT rep on sc2rep dKiller vs FXOTree: 7:30 Terran has 32 SCVs, 3 orbitals and 2 MULE's for a total of: 1400/224 Zerg has 29 drones 2 hatches for a total of: 860/336 Zerg and Terran are actually fighting in the early game, so this isn't a good argument for macro potential. Also, T fucks up and lets Zerg all the way into his main killing his own income for the next major portion of the game. Next game down the list Mill.Tarson vs AcerBly 7:30 T: 36+2 Mules - 1480/224 Z: 47 - 1240/432 9:30 T: 47+0 Mules - 1120/464 Z: 43 - 1240/432 Point to any pro level rep you want, because apparently top of masters isn't good enough. It's always the same, always has been. Zerg econ struggles in the early game. This is why Terrans find themselves not knowing wtf to do now. They've been beating up on the fat kid for 2 years. Now that Terran can't bully Zerg around BEFORE they get on equal income, Terran feels behind. Little do they realize, they've always been way ahead. Do you need an explanation in presentation? I'm fine with you using top masters level replays if you provide information about the replay along with a link of the replay so other people can watch it for themselves if they want to, and to show the validity of the replay used to demonstrate an example. You did neither in your previous post, and you should be sorry about using top masters level replays without stating so or linking the replay in question as well. Until you have credible sources and links, your numbers can just as well be made up. This shit has been known for 2 years. I thought it was common knowledge and I was shutting up the one guy who doesn't realize the situation as it has stood since the release of the game. Sorry for now finding that nobody here actually knows wtf they're talking about and really we just want to cry at each other without ever looking into anything beforehand. The queen buff has made ZvT early game EQUAL. It's not some imba bullshit that Blizzard put together to make sure Terran never wins ever. The PROBLEM with the queen buff is that it has shown the shittiness of the entire Terran race. The whole fucking race is based on marine micro, the early game advantage of Terran macro, and taking advantage of both those facts to bypass anything useful the other guy has. You want to fix Terran? nerf the marine and buff els ewhere. Otherwise, we'll continue to see top-level terrans dominate while the race struggles everywhere else. Been saying it for 2 years, but I don't see Blizz ever doing it, don't know why I bother...
Not only do you not know anything about the Terran race, but it seems like you lack the proper knowledge of your own race. I'd consider playing more before coming here to "compare replays" or "balance whine". At least the proper trolls do it well.
|
On August 13 2012 22:16 Chaggi wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2012 22:03 Jermstuddog wrote:On August 13 2012 21:50 Dalavita wrote:On August 13 2012 21:40 Jermstuddog wrote:On August 13 2012 21:31 Dalavita wrote:
Random TvZs are conclusive evidence of balance. You heard it here first. Made up numbers are even better. Sorry for basing my facts on actual games played. You should be sorry for using random TvZs with random occurences and at random skill levels as an example of TvZs in general. I haven't said anything good about made up numbers either, so you should be sorry for making that accusation as well. Sorry for using top master level, knowing that the difference between my play and a GMs play is they take more calculated risks than I do? Ok... first pro ZvT rep on sc2rep dKiller vs FXOTree: 7:30 Terran has 32 SCVs, 3 orbitals and 2 MULE's for a total of: 1400/224 Zerg has 29 drones 2 hatches for a total of: 860/336 Zerg and Terran are actually fighting in the early game, so this isn't a good argument for macro potential. Also, T fucks up and lets Zerg all the way into his main killing his own income for the next major portion of the game. Next game down the list Mill.Tarson vs AcerBly 7:30 T: 36+2 Mules - 1480/224 Z: 47 - 1240/432 9:30 T: 47+0 Mules - 1120/464 Z: 43 - 1240/432 Point to any pro level rep you want, because apparently top of masters isn't good enough. It's always the same, always has been. Zerg econ struggles in the early game. This is why Terrans find themselves not knowing wtf to do now. They've been beating up on the fat kid for 2 years. Now that Terran can't bully Zerg around BEFORE they get on equal income, Terran feels behind. Little do they realize, they've always been way ahead. this is stupid. you don't post any replays, and you try to make a direct comparison without telling any situation of what might've happened. why would there be only 4 drones made between 7:30 and 9:30, literally nothing said about this.
Because 4 queens can't protect the entire Zerg base once Terran starts getting a decent amount of units out, so Zerg has to make units themselves. Unlike the other two races, Zerg has to pick between drones and combat units.
That being said, It's still usually more in the range of 8-10, but this is also the time where Zerg builds most of their infrastructure. Evo chambers, extractors, hatcheries, spire, infestation pit, bling nest all cost drones. So you see Zerg rush up to the mid 40s and stay there because... you know... they like to have the ability to fight back when pressure comes.
PS: It's actually 4 drones lost. And I added links to the post since going to the site and looking at the first available ZvT is too hard.
|
On August 13 2012 22:17 Dalavita wrote:
Also, I'll let other people demolish the replays you're talking about since they're probably awful examples. I simply don't care about the numbers in specific, rather about your presentation of the numbers.
Not bothering with anything else because it doesn't matter.
Pick ANY PRO REPLAY WHERE THEY ARE SITTING BACK MACROING. The numbers will be slightly different at best during those two time windows because that's the way this shit works.
i've given you two pro replays easy enough to find. The onus is now on you to disprove me.
|
On August 13 2012 22:23 Jermstuddog wrote:
i've given you two pro replays easy enough to find. The onus is now on you to disprove me.
Only if I disagree with your numbers or your argument. Haven't said anything either way, and I don't care enough about the subject issue of income or worker count to argue it to begin with.
I don't have to do a single thing, except criticize your posts when they're badly presented.
And what in particular is it that doesn't matter for you? Making a good post so people don't call you out on BS?
|
On August 13 2012 07:44 avilo wrote:
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.
I don't mind a speed buff to HSM. It should be impossible to outrun for Brood Lords (but slow enough that you can still split against it, with difficulty), tough to outrun for Infestors. It should, however, take as long as it does to use. If you can't avoid a direct engagement for those 3 minutes, you definitely would not do well as an early game Zerg.
But do yourself a favor and stop complaining about Fungal. It's been given one substantial nerf, and if you think it deserves another, you stand pretty much alone. If pro Zergs can learn to split their slow-as-hell Brood Lords to mitigate damage from HSM and Vortex, I'm sure you can learn to split Ravens before the fight, 'cause Fungal is not going anywhere.
|
On August 12 2012 23:01 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2012 22:50 submarine wrote:On August 12 2012 21:21 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:On August 12 2012 19:49 Bagi wrote:On August 12 2012 17:45 Schnullerbacke13 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 still think Teaja's OC-heavy style is key. You don't go 22-3 just by being a superior player. Teaja outmacros with OC's + mules, so he can fight zerg late game with a macro advantage. Mules are insane, as you do not have oversaturation. You can mine 4000 minerals from one base if you have enough OC's, so you have to cover only few bases and don't lose supply to scv's. The problem is reaching this point safely on a map that isn't Metropolis or Atlantis Spaceship. Most zergs will push the advantage when they get to hive tech. If all other things are equal but you've invested thousands of minerals into extra CC's, there's no way to hold the typical BL push for example. It really was the failed early aggression that won Taeja those games, along with the maps that make greedy play so much easier to pull off. Well, ofc this is not easy, you have to do this reactively (scouting required  ) same as a droning zerg. When the Zerg drones hard, you can build OC's, else better build army. You have to understand that an orbital takes far longer to pay for itself compared to a round of drones. Terran is not designed to play reactive on that level. Terran can't build an army in 2 production cycles like zerg does. To have a certain army at a certain time you have to build the necessary infrastructure far ahead in time. If zerg builds a fast 3rd he can choose to use it to produce an army with it. An OC does not offer that kind of flexibility. I understand that, however OC's a re still good  . The time for ROI (return on investment) of drones is about 1,5 to 2 minutes (build time 17s + walk to minerals line [depends] + 75 seconds of mining). Roi of Macro Orbital: it takes les than one mule to mine the net cost of 215. so 100s for macro cc+35s for orbital+~75s = 210s for ROI. that's significantly longer. However long term OC's seem of enormous value to me ..
OCs aren't good if you can't secure a base. They only drain the resources on your current bases faster.
|
On August 12 2012 23:12 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:Show nested quote +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". There are tons of pros with a similar APM and even better micro. Taeja+Gumiho do well because they discovered some effective Strategies. One important aspect is obviously the use of macro OC's. And when watching lower level terrans (< GM) it is also obvious they do not make use OC's full potential.
You clearly do not understand the game. Taeja's strategies are not what make him a good player. They are only a small part of what make him a great player. Taeja's execution, skill, APM, decision-making, cerebral play are what him one of the World's best Terrans.
|
On August 12 2012 23:30 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2012 23:25 Shiori wrote:On August 12 2012 23:12 Schnullerbacke13 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". There are tons of pros with a similar APM and even better micro. Taeja+Gumiho do well because they discovered some effective Strategies. One important aspect is obviously the use of macro OC's. And when watching lower level terrans (< GM) it is also obvious they do not make use OC's full potential. Considering half of the Zergs in GM Roach all-in since most of the maps are smaller than Atlantis Spaceship, you can barely 3OC safely. 4OC? You will die because of your lack of production. Zergs fail to account for the fact that when Terran completes an Orbital, they don't get a production boost until they make more Barracks. Zerg gets the production the instant it comes up, which makes mass expanding more viable. well given that the current TvZ is ~45%:55% some minor tweaks in playstyle and strategy might swing that back to the historical 60:40. Despite the massive Terran QQ 45:55 is not that imbalanced and a zerg nerf will most probably overcompensate. I think Terrans partially got used to their race advantage a bit
Once again you provide mis-information. TvZ was never a "historical 60:40". Instead, before all of these Zerg buffs, TvZ was actually just about at 50% for nearly every month. Yet during these times of ostensibly complete balance, Zergs whined and got buffed as a result.
|
On August 13 2012 01:09 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2012 01:03 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:On August 13 2012 00:58 Rain.100 wrote:On August 13 2012 00:50 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:On August 13 2012 00:41 Shiori wrote:On August 13 2012 00:26 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:On August 12 2012 23:41 submarine wrote:On August 12 2012 22:45 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:
Boah, never did the math ..
1 OC costs 400+150 (OC)
you save:
100 for a depot
200 for 4 scv (1 mule ~ 4 scv's)
resulting cost ~250 minerals.
if you turtle well early game, it should not be a problem to get 4 early OC's safely. with 10 OC's you have the mineral income roughly equal to a 3 base zerg with ~50 drones on minerals, while only requiring one mining base.
EDIT: subtract another ~35 as you also save the 4 supply that 4 SCV's would require, so net cost is 215 This is madness. And i hope you know that. If not i'm sorry for you. Even the numbers you chose make no fuckin sense. why 100 for depot? A OC gives 11 not 8 supply. 4 scvs need 4 supply, a supply depot provides 8. Why do you subtract 35? You also fail to mention build times and mining time lost for that. On top of that: The value you calculated is the cost you have to pay more compared to that you had to pay for the same utility provided by scvs and normal supply depots. You made a lot of errors in the calculations. And even if your 215 were right and opportunity cost did not matter: having 215 less is a noticeable difference in early game. You build macro OCs in early game to build scvs faster and mule on top of that. You build macro OCs in late game because you can free up supply with them. An economy based on scvs and mules can grow much faster compared to a pure mule OC eco. If you still think that that cute idea of yours does work then please start a game and try it.Spoileralert: IT. DOES. NOT. WORK. !!! Ok, i am not that familar with terran numbers, thought a depot was 11 supply so correction (they get even better): 1 OC costs 550 minerals and gives 11 supply you save: ~1,3 depots = 130 mins ~4 scv's = 200 mins + save 4 supply = 50 mins, sum: 250 mins sum savings = 380 mins subtract from cost of 550: = 170 net cost (+opportunity cost) edit: +67 mins lost mining time (however you also would lose mining time when building 1,3 depots) I am not telling you a "cute idea" like going blindly 4 OC. I just want to mention that OC's are pretty effective and probably underused, and that for some reason successful terran players seem to make heavy use of macro OC's  , especially use them as counter to greedy zerg openings You can't, like, 4OC on Ohana and hold a Roach all-in. You're just gonna die. This shit only works on huge maps like Metropolis against opponents you know are going to play extremely greedily. you can counter greedy play with more macro OC's. that's what the pros do and that's what you should do. There is no 100% safe opening, get over it. zerg openings are safe since the queen patch they are safer now, thanks god. Wasn't fun before that for zergs. Zergs are forced to get their economy up, so they were forced to gamble. Anyway its not like a well micro'd bunker rush/proxy rax or banshee/hellions cannot inflict heavy damage. Yeah, Zerg players were gambling so much that DRG managed to win a GSL and MLG. I guess that means the game was balanced at the highest level? If you actually read DRG's interview, he says straight up that for him it wasn't a gamble. He knew how to scout well enough that he almost never had to gamble. Why, then, was there a need for the Queen/Overlord buff if the game was balanced at the highest level?
Note Zerg doesn't gamble when they mass expand. We know what is coming and you can prepare accordingly. And as it stands, very few timings are even potent enough to do damage versus standard play in either ZvT or ZvP. And with some basic scouting, those timings can be discovered and placated.
Conversely, if I'm playing Terran and I try to drop a 3rd OC in TvZ, I am taking a big risk and I need to sacrifice SCVs to scout the Zerg, or scan to ensure I am not being all-inned. A 4th OC is out of the question. Even against a Zerg who you know dropped a 4th hatch, you cannot safely drop a 4th OC. My point is that Zerg can safely macro and expand within reason with relative impunity, whereas Protoss and Terran cannot do so w/o taking a risk, even if that risk is calculated *you can still die.
|
To add to that, many times, mass expanding is a very calculated risk, not a gamble. The idea is that if I expand to my fourth and fifth (and even sixth) at the same time (which more often than not are on different parts of the map), you have to make a decision on which expansion to deny. The time it takes for you to kill one of those expansions pays for the 300 (or 600) mineral investment.
|
On August 13 2012 02:24 Shiori 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). Some of this is true, but some of it (3rax reaper, thor drops) was legitimately imbalanced.
There was a time a long, long time ago when Terran was legitimately imbalanced.
Exhibit (A) Reapers before supply depots
Exhibit (B) Bunker rushing Zerg before Rax and Bunker nerf.
|
You know, when Jermstuddog said that the Marine scales so well with micro and that that's a problem which needs to be nerfed, I actually felt sad. That's one of the only good things in this game. If anything, give other races units similar to the Marine. If you nerf the Marine and take away its micro potential, you get another shitty, boring a-move race. That's not Starcraft. We need more units that amazing players can do magic with. Not more Broodlords or Battlecruisers or Colossi or other uninspired, expensive a-move trash.
|
On August 13 2012 23:33 Shiori wrote:
You know, when Jermstuddog said that the Marine scales so well with micro and that that's a problem which needs to be nerfed, I actually felt sad. That's one of the only good things in this game. If anything, give other races units similar to the Marine. If you nerf the Marine and take away its micro potential, you get another shitty, boring a-move race. That's not Starcraft. We need more units that amazing players can do magic with. Not more Broodlords or Battlecruisers or Colossi or other uninspired, expensive a-move trash.
I agree with this. I think most of us appreciate the beauty of a well-microed platoon of marines. It's a beautiful thing to see when executed by the world's best.
I do wish other races had more micro-intensive units like the marine. Because it is precisely these types of units which make starcraft such a great game to watch. They add a way to differentiate skill and they enable a player to be stingy in terms of army, while bolstering their economy.
I do want to add, however, that marines are the most over-rated unit in the game. As someone who plays all three races at a high level, I can candidly say that marines are not good passed a certain in-game time. I've always been surprised that more people didn't talk about the crackling, which in my opinion, scales much better throughout the game in either MU and is a potent weapon at any phase of the game.
In the end, I Think the new Terran HotS units are a step backwards. Sure we give Terran some nice A-move units, which we need (God knows we don't need more micro-intensive units). However, why not give Protoss and Zerg some more variety and micro-intensive options.
|
On August 13 2012 23:33 Shiori wrote:
You know, when Jermstuddog said that the Marine scales so well with micro and that that's a problem which needs to be nerfed, I actually felt sad. That's one of the only good things in this game. If anything, give other races units similar to the Marine. If you nerf the Marine and take away its micro potential, you get another shitty, boring a-move race. That's not Starcraft. We need more units that amazing players can do magic with. Not more Broodlords or Battlecruisers or Colossi or other uninspired, expensive a-move trash.
So true. The problem is that each unit was designed to counter another one, it's like "produce unit X, and you'll auto-win against Y", making micro rather useless because the fate is almost decided before the battle even happens. Also, if AoE spells weren't that strong, battles would last longer, making micro more rewarding.
|
I am glad that Blizzard is admitting the problem in tvz (I was quite afraid of the Terran future after hearing Dustin Browder say how great it is), but I personally think the problem boils down to one unit. The infestor.
The queen range allowed zergs to macro freely off the start. This is not a bad thing by itself. Less 2 rax cheese is fine with me, and there have been other meta game things like super fast 3 OC to try and combat this. I don't think its a perfect situation, but I really do not feel like this is the core of the problem.
If they can fix this unit in some way, the matchup will be fine. Here is my little list of points about the infestor as to why I believe they are the single reason for imbalance in this matchup:
1) Late game compositions are slanted towards zerg because of the infestor, we would be able to handle them otherwise.
2) Attacking with anything but tanks is not possible once infestors pop. And tanks are the worst offensive unit we have.
3) Fungal is better than storm, yet does not need an upgrade, and they can insta fungal with the energy upgrade (remember warp in storms? .....yea).
4) Infestor counters our entire army.
5) Infestors are huge, and thus emp's are quite ineffective.
6) Fungal is instant cast with no animation or projectile, thus making it much easier to cast than anything terran has.
7) Fungal cancels all commands, and you need to frantically try and move your units to not get chain fungaled once the fungal is over. This adds even more apm needed to an army that is already much harder to use than the zerg army.
8) Fungal completely takes away the only thing we have to win, which is micro (by holding units in place).
There are more, but I am sure you get my point. Now I am not saying to be rid of the infestor, but I think there are some things that can be done. I think a minor change (I said minor, no need to set me on fire) to fungal would produce a much better result than making a useless unit faster (sorry Raven lovers, that unit is just terrible). Much of this has been suggested at one point or another, but here is a small list of possibilities:
1) Fungal does not effect air units.
Result: Medivacs stop getting fungaled and they can be massed easier allowing the Terran to possibly heal through fungals. Also, if you see a pack coming, you can load up and run. Also, air units being "stuck in place" is really weird and doesn't make common sense.
2) Infestor loses the energy upgrade.
Result: Infestors can not insta cast fungal (same exact deal as with the old templar). This would allow timings in mid game to be more effective.
3) Fungal slows units instead of locking them in place, and thus *does not cancel commands*.
Result: Some micro is still allowed, and banelings will kill 10 marines instead of 20 at a time. The biggest thing here though, is that it would allow the Terran to issue commands. So it would be kind of like concussive where your units are vulnerable but can still be told what to do.
4) Fungal gets a small nerf in damage or area, or both.
Result: More fungals are needed to kill packs of units, so the zerg would need to build more infestors.
5) Fungal gets an animation and/or projectile.
Result: Fungal can be somewhat avoided and take more amp to cast.
I am sure there are more suggestions, but there are some good ones (I particularly would LOVE to not have my commands cancelled and be able to issue commands during fungal). Please let me be clear, I feel that the infestor is the main problem in tvz, but I think they can do something minor to the unit (fungal) to fix this. The queen range only allowed the zerg to freely enter the mid game at full strength. The infestor is what pulls the matchup off the see saw.
|
On August 14 2012 00:15 Iron_ wrote:
1) Fungal does not effect air units.
Result: Medivacs stop getting fungaled and they can be massed easier allowing the Terran to possibly heal through fungals. Also, if you see a pack coming, you can load up and run. Also, air units being "stuck in place" is really weird and doesn't make common sense.
This would gimp Zerg in every matchup, where more than half of the Infestor's use is often to kill air units. Hydras limit Zerg tech immensely, and they are easily countered by Infestors/Colossi/Tanks. A couple Banshees added on to Marine-Tank would be insane in the midgame, and Medivacs would be unkillable. Muta-Ling is only viable against bio, as it is easily countered with 1/4-decent marinetank control, and Zerg does not have the ability to fund both vs any decent player. Moreover, Infestors' ability to counter air units is not even debatably overpowered, given that Zerg is the only race without early game offensive anti-air. Air units are guaranteed map control vs Zerg before the Lair comes out, which is why the Infestor needs AA functionality.
2) Infestor loses the energy upgrade.
Result: Infestors can not insta cast fungal (same exact deal as with the old templar). This would allow timings in mid game to be more effective.
Zerg relies on Infestors because they are the only cost-efficient unit pre-lategame. Pathogen glands creates a 30 second lagtime before the morphing of first Infestors to allow timings for Terran to do damage, but once that period is survived, allows Zerg to operate more efficiently. 40 seconds=insanely long time for Terran to do damage. Zerg already gets more severely punished for losing army than other races. This would only make it worse, only the Infestors would die because they never had energy in the first place. Templar don't get starting energy because Protoss has cost efficient units to defend them with.
3) Fungal slows units instead of locking them in place, and thus *does not cancel commands*.
Result: Some micro is still allowed, and banelings will kill 10 marines instead of 20 at a time. The biggest thing here though, is that it would allow the Terran to issue commands. So it would be kind of like concussive where your units are vulnerable but can still be told what to do.
The spell-lock is necessary in ZvP to deal with Blink Stalkers. I've seen 4/3 the supply of Roach-Hydra die to fantastic blink micro. Infestors are the only way Zerg can deal with that. Such a nerf just would completely gimp Infestors in ZvP.
4) Fungal gets a small nerf in damage or area, or both.
Result: More fungals are needed to kill packs of units, so the zerg would need to build more infestors.
This has already been done, and now it is very much possible to mitigate fungal growth with solid marine micro. If you get more than 5-6 marines Fungal'd at once, it's because you screwed up your unit control.
5) Fungal gets an animation and/or projectile.
Result: Fungal can be somewhat avoided and take more amp to cast.
Completely negates ZvP fungals to block Blinking, as players with fantastic Blink micro can easily avoid Fungals with an animation. Also, top Terrans would abuse the shit out of it. Seems like only giving an inch, but our inches are their miles.
I am sure there are more suggestions, but there are some good ones (I particularly would LOVE to not have my commands cancelled and be able to issue commands during fungal). Please let me be clear, I feel that the infestor is the main problem in tvz, but I think they can do something minor to the unit (fungal) to fix this. The queen range only allowed the zerg to freely enter the mid game at full strength. The infestor is what pulls the matchup off the see saw.
Or you can just keep practicing your marine control. The cheapest unit in your race has the highest skill cap of any unit in the game. In a couple years, people will be scoffing at the concept of marines dying en masse to Fungals.
|
On August 14 2012 00:15 Iron_ wrote:
1) Fungal does not effect air units.
Result: Medivacs stop getting fungaled and they can be massed easier allowing the Terran to possibly heal through fungals. Also, if you see a pack coming, you can load up and run. Also, air units being "stuck in place" is really weird and doesn't make common sense.
2) Infestor loses the energy upgrade.
Result: Infestors can not insta cast fungal (same exact deal as with the old templar). This would allow timings in mid game to be more effective.
3) Fungal slows units instead of locking them in place, and thus *does not cancel commands*.
Result: Some micro is still allowed, and banelings will kill 10 marines instead of 20 at a time. The biggest thing here though, is that it would allow the Terran to issue commands. So it would be kind of like concussive where your units are vulnerable but can still be told what to do.
4) Fungal gets a small nerf in damage or area, or both.
Result: More fungals are needed to kill packs of units, so the zerg would need to build more infestors.
5) Fungal gets an animation and/or projectile.
Result: Fungal can be somewhat avoided and take more amp to cast.
It's a really delicate thing to buff/nerf something in a certain matchup, since it almost alway affects another matchup(s). For instance, I wouldn't change the "unit bound in place" of fungal in PvZ (unless the fungal slows AND cancels blink/charge). Out of these changes, I think only nr. 5 is viable, maaaaybe nr. 1 (even though... imagine an unstoppable wild flock of phoenix in PvZ) and a tiny damage nerf.
The energy upgrade is good as it is, IMHO - one fungal alone per freshly popped infestor is not all that powerful. They are useless without energy, unlike HT's (archon morph).
Slowing the units... I don't know. If it cancels the mobility upgrades such as blink/charge or even stim, then maybe. Nerfing the area is a bit too harsh.
Just my opinion.
|
On August 14 2012 00:39 Shantastic wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2012 00:15 Iron_ wrote:
1) Fungal does not effect air units.
Result: Medivacs stop getting fungaled and they can be massed easier allowing the Terran to possibly heal through fungals. Also, if you see a pack coming, you can load up and run. Also, air units being "stuck in place" is really weird and doesn't make common sense.
This would gimp Zerg in every matchup, where more than half of the Infestor's use is often to kill air units. Hydras limit Zerg tech immensely, and they are easily countered by Infestors/Colossi/Tanks. A couple Banshees added on to Marine-Tank would be insane in the midgame, and Medivacs would be unkillable. Muta-Ling is only viable against bio, as it is easily countered with 1/4-decent marinetank control, and Zerg does not have the ability to fund both vs any decent player. Moreover, Infestors' ability to counter air units is not even debatably overpowered, given that Zerg is the only race without early game offensive anti-air. Air units are guaranteed map control vs Zerg before the Lair comes out, which is why the Infestor needs AA functionality. Show nested quote +
2) Infestor loses the energy upgrade.
Result: Infestors can not insta cast fungal (same exact deal as with the old templar). This would allow timings in mid game to be more effective.
Zerg relies on Infestors because they are the only cost-efficient unit pre-lategame. Pathogen glands creates a 30 second lagtime before the morphing of first Infestors to allow timings for Terran to do damage, but once that period is survived, allows Zerg to operate more efficiently. 40 seconds=insanely long time for Terran to do damage. Zerg already gets more severely punished for losing army than other races. This would only make it worse, only the Infestors would die because they never had energy in the first place. Templar don't get starting energy because Protoss has cost efficient units to defend them with. Show nested quote +
3) Fungal slows units instead of locking them in place, and thus *does not cancel commands*.
Result: Some micro is still allowed, and banelings will kill 10 marines instead of 20 at a time. The biggest thing here though, is that it would allow the Terran to issue commands. So it would be kind of like concussive where your units are vulnerable but can still be told what to do.
The spell-lock is necessary in ZvP to deal with Blink Stalkers. I've seen 4/3 the supply of Roach-Hydra die to fantastic blink micro. Infestors are the only way Zerg can deal with that. Such a nerf just would completely gimp Infestors in ZvP. Show nested quote +
4) Fungal gets a small nerf in damage or area, or both.
Result: More fungals are needed to kill packs of units, so the zerg would need to build more infestors.
This has already been done, and now it is very much possible to mitigate fungal growth with solid marine micro. If you get more than 5-6 marines Fungal'd at once, it's because you screwed up your unit control. Show nested quote +
5) Fungal gets an animation and/or projectile.
Result: Fungal can be somewhat avoided and take more amp to cast.
Completely negates ZvP fungals to block Blinking, as players with fantastic Blink micro can easily avoid Fungals with an animation. Also, top Terrans would abuse the shit out of it. Seems like only giving an inch, but our inches are their miles. Show nested quote +I am sure there are more suggestions, but there are some good ones (I particularly would LOVE to not have my commands cancelled and be able to issue commands during fungal). Please let me be clear, I feel that the infestor is the main problem in tvz, but I think they can do something minor to the unit (fungal) to fix this. The queen range only allowed the zerg to freely enter the mid game at full strength. The infestor is what pulls the matchup off the see saw. Or you can just keep practicing your marine control. The cheapest unit in your race has the highest skill cap of any unit in the game. In a couple years, people will be scoffing at the concept of marines dying en masse to Fungals.
I find this post incredibly ironic. You tell everyone to practice their control, but scoff at any suggestion that would make the Infestor require more than a pulse to use efficiently. Yeah, a projectile would allow Stalkers to dodge Fungal, but that's still making them Blink backward, it's something that you can very easily fuck up, and it still throws a wrench into individual Stalker micro (since you're going to have a bunch of Stalkers with Blink on CD anyway). I guess you've become accustomed to getting an entire Protoss Stalker force for free if you make a few Infestors and land a Fungal or two. Because you know, automatically killing an expensive group of Stalkers with some Lings and a few Infestors is totally fair, especially when the Protoss lacks the ability to retreat at all, even with some of his units.
Furthermore, you don't need Infestors to beat Blink Stalkers. All Blink Stalker all-ins hit before Infestors, and all of them can be defended with Roach Ling. Further, it's not like Infestors would be useless against Stalkers in the later phases of the game. It's just that Stalkers wouldn't be useless against Infestors.
And no, your units are not cost-inefficient. The Roach and Ling are EXTREMELY cost-efficient in ZvP. As is the Infestor. As is the BroodLord. The only thing that isn't cost efficient is the Hydra.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
