[D] The raven buff does not address TvZ issues - Page 29

On August 20 2012 09:15 Steel wrote:
I don't have a huge argument to put in but look at recent results- with the slow but steady style adaptation we have seen from terran players, the matchup is becoming increasingly balanced in terms of win rates, both on the ladder and in the pro scene. I don't think there is much room for complaint anymore.

In my opinion, the main problem to address is the maps. We've seen Terran's go toe to toe many times in long games on those very big GSL maps (think metropolis, atlantis spaceship), and we've seen Zerg unable to transition into the late game properly on the smaller maps (ohana, antigua, cloud kingdom). The only thing that seems to work for Zerg on these maps is the extremely greedy play into a very fast hive and a 'tier 3 all-in' where there is not much room for transition. It's been working, but the style is being figured out and slowly dying off. In my opinion, the problem lies in those big-ish maps, like daybreak. It's not big enough for Terran to take bases quickly and go toe-to-toe with the Zerg macro wise, but it's too big to be agressive. Blizzard needs to switch their map making philosophy and gear it towards balance instead making Zerg maps and Terran maps. That's what the GSL does, and Terrans are doing just fine.

On August 20 2012 09:23 sM.Zik wrote:
"This argument is totally stupid. First of all, Terran is significantly harder than Z by alot. Like, alot. Most of the Z builds are set in stone, and require almost no risk at all. It's pure memorization of what to do, what to build, etc. You're the one who has the map control, the vision on the map, and all the cards in your hands. The Terran either has to have absolutely phenomenal Helion/Banshee control, or has to ridiculously cut corners to keep even on economy; otherwise he just has to straight all-in. "

Yo do realize that zerg is a reactive race? We don't control the game, we react to what you do, of course we have tool to have map control, we need that.

"It's a hell of alot easier to play Z than it is to play Terran right now. Zerg players get so much more free shit than Terrans do. They can't be bunkered on alot of maps in tournament play, they have a virtually free natural due to the extremely long rush distances now, the nerfing of bunker timings and the barracks timings, they also get a free third now no matter what due to the presence of the new Queen range. Sure, you can beat it; but it's a hell of alot harder to play from behind economically, against a race that can outproduce you by a country mile. "

I get bunker rush a lot, whatever the map is. Unless the terran is a complete noob, it often hurts me quite a lot.

"If you think it's just bitching, then why aren't people making threads about how Terran sucks complete dick against Protoss late game? You do understand that Protoss late game actually matches up much better against Terran than Zerg does right? Late game, at least you can abuse the mobility of Broodlords on larger maps; there is no such thing in TvP. If the Protoss takes a 4th and secures it, you are likely 99.9% dead if the Protoss doesn't severely misplays. Hell, the Protoss taking a 3rd is already a huge advantage towards the Protoss. And yet Avilo, nor various other notable players bitch about TvP at all. Want to know why? Because Protoss doesn't get a free pass to just sit there on their asses with complete control of the map with all the vision in the world. They don't get to take a free third, nor do they get to probe as hard as they want. Terran actually has options to actually punish a Protoss player if he plays too greedy. That is not the case in TvZ; a Z WILL take that third no matter what, and it's only a matter of time."

Dude, when did you start playing starcraft? Zerg needed at least 1 more base than T/P for more than a decade. It was like that in Sc1 and it's like that in Sc2 because zergs unit arent as cost efficient as your units.

"The Protoss player has to WORK to secure his third, and his natural. If he plays too greedy, he dies to all sorts of shennanigans or is severely hurt by it (such as proxy Mara builds, or various double reactor builds off 1 rax CCs, etc.) A Z basically has no fear of getting hit by any of that, because between Creep, OLs, and Lings at watch towers, you can spot any kind of all-in/timing well ahead of time, and produce units by the dozen off of 3 hatch easily and deflect any pressure. The upgraded Queen Range just put the nail in the coffin."

I honestly don't know what to answer to that. You seem to believe that zergs has an auto-pilot button that does everything by itself.

On August 20 2012 09:31 Iron_ wrote:
I did not read every post in the thread, but I agree with many who said that the main problem is the rooting of units by fungal. This stops actions and causes chain fungals. I've been saying the infestor is the real problem for a long time and I agree completely that if it was a slow effect rather than a root, the matchup would literally be instantly fixed.

On August 20 2012 09:31 superstartran wrote:



1) Your race has the best ability to counter and tech switch. You do not need the best map control in the game. That leads to idiotic gameplay as we see now. If we both had maphacks and you were Z and I were T, you'd win 9 out of 10 times just because you can easily tech switch and beat me. Believing that Z needs the best map control/vision in the game just because they are the "reactionary" race is a load of bullshit. It should be the other way around. You should have to work to keep vision and control of the map, not have free control of it through bad map designing and bad game design. There's no way any other RTS community would ever view the current incarnation of Z anywhere closed to balance in relation to TvZ. Z has complete control of the map through creep, all the vision of the map through creep, OLs, and watch tower control, and can economically outgrow Terran players despite the fact that Terran players open really greedy like 3 OC/4 OC. You can't keep a game balanced around that, because it just results in stupid gameplay where the Terran is forced to race against the clock, especially considering Terran's late game is substantially worse than Zerg's.

2) What? Infestors? Hello? Queens in early game are pretty damn cost efficient too, considering they stave off any kind of Helion/Banshee harass quite handily and control the map through creep, while also exponentially upgrading your economy big time. Did I mention they also are decent ground DPS units that can defend against virtually any all-in attack? This isn't Z of SC1 where they were extremely cost inefficient to the point it was stupid. Your cost efficiency isn't even related to resources half the time; it's mostly dependent on whether or not you were cost efficient per the amount of larvae spent or not. There is no need for Z to be up a base all the time anymore, especially considering Z by far has one of the strongest mid/late game compositions in the game with Infestors. The winrates post Ghost nerf and pre-Queen buff completely support my assertion that there was absolutely no need for Z to always be up a base, because their units are much more cost efficient than they were in SC1, and you can exponentially drone way faster than you could in SC1.

That's not even mentioning that in SC1, Terran was a HELL of alot more cost efficient than they are in SC2. By alot. Between Sci Vessels and Tanks, you could completely lock down sections of the map while also harassing a Z's army/resource lines to death. When a Terran switched over to full Mech in BW, he became even more cost efficient. Mech isn't even a remotely viable composition in SC2 unless your opponent just doesn't know how to react or play against it (and it's very map dependent when it is viable; only a few select maps really favor Mech play over Bio).

3) No; a Z player doesn't have autopilot. He doesn't have to think. He just memorizes counters, build orders, etc. He doesn't have to adapt at all. The Terran player is the one who has to go attack him and make things happen.

On August 20 2012 08:18 IPA wrote:
I wish people in this thread (and in the community in general) realize that they are just bad players. As a Terran, you're not playing DRG, viOLet, Stephano or Life; you're playing Random Scrub Diamond Zerg #22354.

I am a 1.1k masters Z; I am awful. I get rolled by better Terrans often -- I think it's probably about a 50/50 matchup for me. I am confident in it but I still lose often to players of my own skill. For everyone below GM, you are making so many countless mistakes (myself included) that balance is an absurd abstract for you to be complaining about. Queen range and fungal aren't beating you -- you're beating yourself because you're fucking awful.

At the highest level, it is perhaps slightly Zerg favored; yet, Terrans continue to compete -- and win -- major events. As a member of the 99.9% scrubhood, I implore you to improve the myriad of things you're bad at. You'll beat the other scrub zergs you're playing, I promise.

<3 gl hf

On August 20 2012 09:40 zmansman17 wrote:


Your problem is that you assume that what is true, in your own words, 'slightly Zerg favored', at the highest levels is true of all other levels of play. And of course, that is not necessarily true.

Perhaps Zerg is only slightly favored at the highest levels, but even such a statement is tenuous and I'll explain why. For example, to weaken your statement, I could add that the best players in the world are Terran, so, at the highest levels, they are able to reach a slight disadvantage through exceptional play and skill, when a greater overall imbalance exists.

However, it is probably true that at Diamond level, Low-Mid Master level, Rank 1 Master-Low GM level, Upper Tier GM level, there are indeed varying rates at which Zerg may or may not be favored. As someone who plays all 3 races in the third category, I certainly feel Zerg has a tad more than a slight advantage. But then again, that's just my opinion and it may or may not be generalized to the whole.

In the end, though, be wary about making assumptions and then applying them as a blanket to all levels.

On August 20 2012 09:46 IPA wrote:


Fair enough. I guess I am speaking from my own experience at master level; from watching tournaments often; and from watching my platinum roomie. I feel like it's really hard for bad players (which is all of us) to complain about balance because -- hey, look! we just got supply blocked, engaged in a choke, and (to top it off) we're floating 800-1200 mins! But, seriously, zerg is OP.

I just think it's a little too easy on TL to blame your ladder losses on perceived balance issues when in truth you're just bad. Really bad. Balance is a handy crutch for many, in my opinion. Thanks for being civil at least.

On August 20 2012 09:39 IPA wrote:


You've been complaining for months now. It's getting impressive. At the level we're playing at (I use "we" because I'll assume you're at least masters if you're going to be this vocal -- masters still being horrendous), you have countless things to improve on before you need to start worrying too much about the top of the foodchain.

Terrans will continue competing and winning despite your whine streak. If it makes you feel better to complain while losing (while other Terrans win), knock yourself out brotha.

On August 20 2012 09:46 IPA wrote:


Fair enough. I guess I am speaking from my own experience at master level; from watching tournaments often; and from watching my platinum roomie. I feel like it's really hard for bad players (which is all of us) to complain about balance because -- hey, look! we just got supply blocked, engaged in a choke, and (to top it off) we're floating 800-1200 mins! But, seriously, zerg is OP.

I just think it's a little too easy on TL to blame your ladder losses on perceived balance issues when in truth you're just bad. Really bad. Balance is a handy crutch for many, in my opinion. Thanks for being civil at least.

On August 20 2012 09:31 superstartran wrote:



1) Your race has the best ability to counter and tech switch. You do not need the best map control in the game. That leads to idiotic gameplay as we see now. If we both had maphacks and you were Z and I were T, you'd win 9 out of 10 times just because you can easily tech switch and beat me. Believing that Z needs the best map control/vision in the game just because they are the "reactionary" race is a load of bullshit. It should be the other way around. You should have to work to keep vision and control of the map, not have free control of it through bad map designing and bad game design. There's no way any other RTS community would ever view the current incarnation of Z anywhere closed to balance in relation to TvZ. Z has complete control of the map through creep, all the vision of the map through creep, OLs, and watch tower control, and can economically outgrow Terran players despite the fact that Terran players open really greedy like 3 OC/4 OC. You can't keep a game balanced around that, because it just results in stupid gameplay where the Terran is forced to race against the clock, especially considering Terran's late game is substantially worse than Zerg's.

2) What? Infestors? Hello? Queens in early game are pretty damn cost efficient too, considering they stave off any kind of Helion/Banshee harass quite handily and control the map through creep, while also exponentially upgrading your economy big time. Did I mention they also are decent ground DPS units that can defend against virtually any all-in attack? This isn't Z of SC1 where they were extremely cost inefficient to the point it was stupid. Your cost efficiency isn't even related to resources half the time; it's mostly dependent on whether or not you were cost efficient per the amount of larvae spent or not. There is no need for Z to be up a base all the time anymore, especially considering Z by far has one of the strongest mid/late game compositions in the game with Infestors. The winrates post Ghost nerf and pre-Queen buff completely support my assertion that there was absolutely no need for Z to always be up a base, because their units are much more cost efficient than they were in SC1, and you can exponentially drone way faster than you could in SC1.

That's not even mentioning that in SC1, Terran was a HELL of alot more cost efficient than they are in SC2. By alot. Between Sci Vessels and Tanks, you could completely lock down sections of the map while also harassing a Z's army/resource lines to death. When a Terran switched over to full Mech in BW, he became even more cost efficient. Mech isn't even a remotely viable composition in SC2 unless your opponent just doesn't know how to react or play against it (and it's very map dependent when it is viable; only a few select maps really favor Mech play over Bio).

3) No; a Z player doesn't have autopilot. He doesn't have to think. He just memorizes counters, build orders, etc. He doesn't have to adapt at all. The Terran player is the one who has to go attack him and make things happen.

On August 20 2012 10:03 bellsNkeys wrote:


Though I respect the view that believing you're bad and practically should start slitting your wrists because of how much you fail at this game, I disagree and think that mindset is retarded. You should always believe you are better than your opponent. I don't care if it's Mvp you're playing against. My basketball coaches have always taught me to believe I am leagues better than the defender in front of me and that not only has helped me in basketball, but in all aspects of life. I also carry that attitude in sc2. It works in a very positive way for me as once my confidence in TvZ went up, so did my winrate (I haven't played much lately but I'm like 7-1 in TvZ this season), but I still think Zerg is favored in that matchup.

Now that that's out of the way I also have to point out that the matchmaking system does a surprisingly amazing job at pitting you against people of your equal skill level. So the fact that you're terrible doesn't matter if the person you're playing is just as bad. Zerg was whining when they were winning GSL's and losing everywhere else, so I don't see why they turn around and give Terran double standards.

On August 20 2012 10:37 Biggun69 wrote:


lol your argument is pretty stupid. A zerg has to memorise counters and build orders the same way a terran has to memorise a build order too.

Yes, zerg does need to be up a base most of the time. I think you actually need to play some zerg so you can understand what its like to play from the other side of the matchup because this is a pretty short-sighted biased analysis.