I am making another thread about a balance/design decision, so please do not jump on my back too hard before reading through.
This time I wanted to bring up the raven buff blizzard has recently proposed and describe issues with TvZ and you will note by the end that a raven speed buff does nothing to address any of the core balance concerns.
Recently, after months of diminishing Terran tournament results as well TvZ balance issues have become obvious to the point that blizzard has acknowledged that Zerg is favored in the match up right now.
The raven has been pointed to as an answer to "lategame," being brought up in many discussions, as well as blizzard releasing news that they are planning to buff the raven to help Terrans lategame.
This thread will be about discussing blizzard's proposed raven buff, and how it does not actually do anything for balance at all, and how they can look at the raven to make it useful, as well as other issues that are basically plaguing the match-up.
There are a few core issues to why so many Terrans, including pro korean Terran players are suddenly being beaten handily by inferior Zergs, most often when the game goes to lategame.
1) Raven HSM can be cost effective if the opponent clumps up broodlord/infestor, but you need about a 3 minute wait time to ever get HSM and you have to perfectly predict your opponent 100% committing to broodlord/infestor/corruptor. The problem: time, efficiency, fungal growth.
No one is really arguing that ravens aren't the answer to TvZ lategame. What I will argue here is that the reason ravens don't work even when you do build them is because fungal growth many times locks down ravens making it so you cannot HSM (regardless of how well you split). I will also argue that the amount of time, research cost, and energy for the HSM is not appropriate or proportional or balanced for what the HSM is supposed to be able to do.
Templar/infestors are able to become useful 100% right when they pop out in the form of either feedbacks, archons, fungal, or IT. Ravens are a gamble and incredible risk because of the time necessary to make them pay off with HSMs, and even in the case you do get an HSM, if your raven is fungalled you suddenly have a paper weight in terms of an investment. Then the ravens die, that's -200 gas for TErran and the infestors are able to burrow and get away.
A raven speed buff does zero to address these issues because the problem is and never will be raven speed. The problem is how fungal growth pins down ravens making HSM unusable, and the amount of time necessary to put ravens into play and make them pay themselves off.
2) The queen buff. The queen range buff has been controversial, for obvious reasons. Blizzard recently has acknowledged that creep spread is incredibly powerful but I want to go over why creep has come into the forefront as a balance concern in zvt.
Everyone knows how Zerg works. Their economy with larva inject can grow exponentially, faster than both Terran and Protoss in theory. The catch? You can only get this super economy if you are able to drone, drone, drone unhindered.
Why has creepspread become such an issue? Well, it's a factor of many things. The queen buff (many dubb it the "queendralisk" nowadays) allows Zergs to make a unit that requires no larva, can accumulate heals, and also can spread creep - creep which helps deny a lot of timing attacks by simply being on the map giving vision/time to react.
Pre-queen buff, creep was more easily able to be controlled with hellions that could kite queens, allowing Terran to keep Zerg's economy in check. Ever since the queen buff, you now see queens holding off virtually all aggression in the first 10 minutes of the game to the point that Terrans have indeed been trying equivalent "greed" builds but all of these greed builds naturally lend themselves towards a lategame TvZ, which right now, as mentionted above - the raven is a gamble due to the amount of preparation time required to pay itself off.
The queen preventing hellions denying creep...allows more creep spread...allows denial of attacks...allow all larva to be used on drones until Zerg can power 100% units/tech...all of this snowballs to the point where Terran "has to do damage" but cannot due to the reaction time creep spread allows to deny attacks + the queens themselves.
3) Fungal growth/infestor I believe this one is another core issue for late game, not only with TvZ but PvZ as well (yeh, as a random masters player I can talk a bit about this one too).
Broodlord infestor is basically the super army in both lategame TvZ/PvZ. The problem is not how strong broodlords are per se, it's the combination of fungal growth locking down stalkers/units, as well as fungalling vikings/ravens.
Fungal growth completely negates any possible micromanagement from Protoss/Terrans and simply makes the game into a game of running away from the fungal growth, or in the Zerg's case hitting 1 fungal growth means you 100% force an engagement because the opponent cannot flee or use their units.
For TvZ, a lot of lategame air vs air battles turn into "dodging the 1 fungal growth" to the point every pro terran will scan everywhere when engaging brood/corruptor with vikings/ravens to see where the infestors are. 1 fungal results in a chain of 5-10 more fungals can often times mean the end of a game or losing a large expensive chunk of your army for free. In Terran's case, that means their AA is gone from 1 fungal landing into chain fungals, in Protoss's case it's many times a ton of blink stalkers that simply will never be able to reach the broodlords, or archons being trapped in place.
The infestor is not OP per se, but the stunning effect of fungal is quite problematic in every match-up. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The above essentially describes what has happened with TvZ. The raven speed buff will not change a thing because the above issues are the core issues. It does not matter how fast your raven is if it gets fungalled. You can build ravens but never have them guaranteed to pay themselves off like infestors/templar are able to because of the current HSM energy/time/research requirements.
Blizzard has said they are nerfing creep spread. They are looking at the raven obviously. What I would suggest and bring up for discussion is to tweak the raven hsm energy/upgrade research times/build times/tweak the splash+damage accordingly and make it so these units do not end up as paper weights so often like they do.
To be honest, at this point what would be best for the game period (including ZvP) is to revert the queen change. The overlord speed buff was an excellent change, giving zerg a better scouting option, but the queen change has proven over the last 2-4 months to be too much - perhaps it's time to acknowlege a mistake.
But if blizzard does not want to go the route of reverting the change, they need to buff the raven or tweak something else in some way. A raven speed change does nothing for the match-up nor address any of the current problems with ravens or unhindered Zerg economies.
If other masters/gm/pro Terrans can leave their input in this thread, that would surely be appreciated by the entire community. I hope I at least put out some food for thought and that this will lead to discussion.
The worst thing that could possibly happen in terms of a balance patch is ravens are given a speed buff and then Terran is left alone for the next 5 months wondering, "how did this address anything?"
Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
"If other masters/gm/pro Terrans can leave their input in this thread, that would surely be appreciated by the entire community. I hope I at least put out some food for thought and that this will lead to discussion."
I think you should have bolded this, avilo. Obivously some people just see your name and don't bother reading - or can't *shrugs*
@ InDesconrowl - Taeja is an anonmaly and even he loses.
Seriously, if you can't offer a legitmate argument and your opinion on this well thought out thread, don't take up space from those who really want to discuss this.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally, though I do believe my experience as a player into the "mega late game" and using ravens/etc. does make me somewhat qualified to start a discussion like this.
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
the game doesnt need a giant change doing small things like making ravens faster and creep slower is exactly what blizz needs to do
the game is so balanced right now that a careless nerf or buff just makes it more imbalanced they need small nerfs taht are carefully thought out and tested and watched religiously
people said the same thing about warp prisoms now warp prism harass is hugely hard to deal with as Zerg
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
isn't C once again evening out?
Blizzard said there is only a SLIGHT imbalance at the HIGHEST levels of play (aka Not NA Ladder.)
I guess avilo didn't read Minigun's comments about the NA ladder...
Yea, lets just ignore having this discussion because avilo started the thread? Im guessing if this thread was started by someone else the discussion would have started insteaded of just being ignored completely.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
the game doesnt need a giant change doing small things like making ravens faster and creep slower is exactly what blizz needs to do
the game is so balanced right now that a careless nerf or buff just makes it more imbalanced they need small nerfs taht are carefully thought out and tested and watched religiously
people said the same thing about warp prisoms now warp prism harass is hugely hard to deal with as Zerg
You mean no careless unnecessary giant changes like giving the queen an extra two range in an already close to 50-50 balanced match-up...right?
As for blizzard going slow with changes, that is great, but changing raven speed does nothing to address any of the balance issues for the TvZ match-up that occurred after the queen buff patch.
The creep spread nerf I'm sure most players agree blizzard needs to do.
The answer always seems to be marines, when in doubt make more. As everyone knows BL/infestors are about as mobile as siegetanks and you are free to send your bio all over the place, all out bio will be the future of TvZ
125 energy is pretty ridiculous, maybe lower energy in exchange for smaller splash/splash fallout but higher impact damage, that way it can be used to snipe ultras/BL
While I'm not defending the OP in any regard, I do have to call out the people responding with "just look at Taeja". One player's amazing success in the face of current trends doesn't make anything okay. It's identical to people saying "just look at FruitDealer" or "just look at NesTea" back in 2010.
Feel free to debate whether or not Terran is really underpowered in TvZ, but don't use a single pro player as conclusive evidence that everything's okay.
I reserve judgement on Raven usefulness until after I see Terrans use Ghosts more to counter Infestors. Ghosts can 2x snipe or EMP to take care of Infestors, then Ravens are free to HSM. Increased speed/acceleration should give Ravens the ability to run away a bit more easily than before.
Actually...I think Ravens are still largely useless due to the time it takes to get just one HSM (as you mentioned). I really just wanted to comment on the lack of good Ghost usage vs. Infestors in the TvZ matchup.
First Avilo thread I actually think is spot on. Good job bro. Everyone who's talking about Taeja needs to think very carefully, because a whole lot of Zerg whine happened when Nestea/Fruitdealer were winning.
On August 19 2012 11:24 CelestialX wrote: You lose to hydralisks in TvZ, get good and shut the fuck up.
I don't know why you're being so hostile towards him, he's only stating some opinions he has wether you agree with him or not you don't need to insult him.
On August 19 2012 11:10 InDesconrowl wrote: Give it some time, Taeja is doing just fine in TvZ.
Instead of asking blizzard to change the game because you are struggling why don't you analyze Taeja's gameplay and learn how he succeeds in TvZ.
dude stop... that's always everyone excuse, mvp is doing fine, taeja is doing fine, well guess what, nestea won an entire gsl without dropping a single game, if you wanna say taeja is doing fine, then zerg shouldn't have ever been buffed, because nestea is doing fine
On August 19 2012 11:10 InDesconrowl wrote: Give it some time, Taeja is doing just fine in TvZ.
Instead of asking blizzard to change the game because you are struggling why don't you analyze Taeja's gameplay and learn how he succeeds in TvZ.
dude stop... that's always everyone excuse, mvp is doing fine, taeja is doing fine, well guess what, nestea won an entire gsl without dropping a single game, if you wanna say taeja is doing fine, then zerg shouldn't have ever been buffed, because nestea is doing fine
Or DRG's 90% win rate in TvZ at one point, infact if that's how we're going to approach it then maybe we should have nerfed zerg!
But seriously, people need to actually have a discussion about the post instead of saying "avilo u r a fag" or "taeja does it". TL discussion is fucking embarrassing sometimes...
I'll be happiest for any buff that increase the rate of creep removal after you kill overlord/structures/tumors. Creep is a big factor in the match up which is something indirectly affecting the match up after the queen buff (as Queens can ward off Hellions easier now with the increase ranged), thus letting creep be spread easier. As we all know, creep = increased mobility + secondary vision + delays any immediate Terran push. If creep was spread as quickly as it currently is I guarantee pushes would have a better chance at dealing more damage than vs less creep spread all over the map. This obviously affects the later game, where Terran needs to stall for time to use their Ravens against the GGLords.
The tumor creep radius area decrease is a start though.
On August 19 2012 11:23 FeUerFlieGe wrote: Ghost EMP is good
yes i agree with ghosts, this is something that terrans are starting to do more of, if you really think about it, what's the easiest way to get rid of infestors? I'm not saying I'm good with ghosts nor am i saying I'm good with terran, but a few good emps sounds like a good try
Here is the catch. The balance between Terran vs Zerg is not that off the chart that it requires immediate remedy. Unlike Reaper opening in the past against Zerg, for example.
HotS is entering its final stages of production, and hence many things will be reset. If Blizzard do change anything for this match up, then it may hint that HotS is likely to delay further. With that being said, it's hard to change something that only affect one match up, there will be effect on other match ups. For example, TvP and ZvP.
In sum, I can't see any changes coming if HotS is on track.
On August 19 2012 11:10 InDesconrowl wrote: Give it some time, Taeja is doing just fine in TvZ.
Instead of asking blizzard to change the game because you are struggling why don't you analyze Taeja's gameplay and learn how he succeeds in TvZ.
dude stop... that's always everyone excuse, mvp is doing fine, taeja is doing fine, well guess what, nestea won an entire gsl without dropping a single game, if you wanna say taeja is doing fine, then zerg shouldn't have ever been buffed, because nestea is doing fine
Or DRG's 90% win rate in TvZ at one point, infact if that's how we're going to approach it then maybe we should have nerfed zerg!
But seriously, people need to actually have a discussion about the post instead of saying "avilo u r a fag" or "taeja does it". TL discussion is fucking embarrassing sometimes...
Agreed... who cares who wrote the article, he has a pretty valid point, lets leave the personal stuff out of this.
I for one think this is well written and hits the nail on the head. I don't think TvZ is quite as imbalanced as it was once perceived to be, but clearly Terrans are not doing as well as the other races. Taeja is essentially a god who cannot be beaten and thus using him as an example that all is well in the match up is absurd. If many of you who are complaining to avilo here watched the latest state of the game, they all agreed that the raven change was ridiculous and was completely stupid.
You guys really should be ashamed of yourselves. If you took the time to look at his post with an unbiased attitude, you would realize that he is not bitching or moaning, but merely pointing out a clear flaw in blizzards thinking as well as a proposed solution.
I agree that the changes to the raven don't help the current meta, however I will argue the hellion vs queen. A queen is designed for 1 purpose to ensure that zerg can drone. If queens are being built to 4-6 the zerg is investing on his economy, here the terran has 2 options. Pressure or macro hard (3cc), with pressure your old builds will NOT work the queen change hinders this spend time developing new builds and look for loop holes. A great player to watch is Taeja.
You can also go macro to attempt to match the zergs macro, personally this doesn't seem like a good idea to me but it works for some terrans.
Stop trying to use hellions early it won't work unless you completely out maneuver your enemy. Hellions still have there place in that they destroy mineral lines quickly, but this is best used later on in the game with multi pronged attacks and where they can go unattested.
The raven from a P/Z player just looks bad on paper it's abilities take to long and the only one really worth it is PDD. Blizzard has there worked cut out for them making it better without being OP, but I agree with you that the speed changes address nothing on there usefulness.
I'm sorry that you're not a good player and can't win a TvZ. Korean Terrans are having fewer and fewer problem against Zerg and the win rate is nearly at 50/50 over the past month or so. No, the patch won't make the Raven more viable, but in the current state of TvZ it doesn't really need to be. More practice and fewer walls of text might help fix your problems that others aren't having.
I'm GM NA. I agree with what you're saying, the queen buff lets zerg drone way too much too quickly. Before the buff, they had to get units against timing sub 10 min, but now this is only the case if it is all in. Otherwise all their precious larva goes to drones off of solely queens. I would not say that the matchup is "imbalanced" but it is a lot harder (skillwise) for terran.
On August 19 2012 11:37 Mr Showtime wrote: I'm sorry that you're not a good player and can't win a TvZ. Korean Terrans are having fewer and fewer problem against Zerg and the win rate is nearly at 50/50 over the past month or so. No, the patch won't make the Raven more viable, but in the current state of TvZ it doesn't really need to be. More practice and fewer walls of text might help fix your problems that others aren't having.
On August 19 2012 11:37 Mr Showtime wrote: I'm sorry that you're not a good player and can't win a TvZ. Korean Terrans are having fewer and fewer problem against Zerg and the win rate is nearly at 50/50 over the past month or so. No, the patch won't make the Raven more viable, but in the current state of TvZ it doesn't really need to be. More practice and fewer walls of text might help fix your problems that others aren't having.
On August 19 2012 11:39 Kaeru wrote: I've said this since the release.
Fungal Growth pinning down units is not a good solution. Fungal Growth should just like Ensnare from Brood War slow units by a high percentage like 80% or something. Why?
Because if you catch 20 Vikings in one Fungal, as it is now, you can chain Fungal them to death. While with a slow of 80% or whatever number - Vikings can slowly split and maybe half of them will survive with low health.
This wont only affect TvZ but also ZvZ where Mutas suddenly becomes a bit more interesting and less risky to make... What this WONT affect is ground to ground battles. Stalkers won't be able to Blink and their slowed movement wont be microable vs Lings or Roaches.
Marines and Hellions will still be slowed by Fungal and catching them with Lings/Banes will still be as viable as now - sure you can split a little more. But that's a good thing!
Zealots will be slightly more usefull in PvZ since they won't be pinned and totally wasted - for example if you warp in 8 Zealots with a Warp Prism and they all get Fungaled close to the mineral line. You might force the Zerg to move their Drones to avoid a few Zealot hits. ---------------------------------------------------------------
Why is Raven not viable now?
In my opinion, one big reason why Ravens are not viable is because none of the Terran builds actually have any goal to get Ravens. When do people get Ravens? In late, late game when you have banked up 1500 gas. BAM 3-4 Starports go down and Ravens are produced...
What if Terrans (like me) start making builds that are designed to incorporate Ravens at the 14 minute mark insted? This is at a timing where Terran has 3 bases and very high mineral income... A lot of that income is actually dumped into Scans for killing tumors. Some Ravens might give you 2-3 more Barracks worth of Marine production.
Actually (I am high master) I have tried to play a lot of games where I design the builds to incorporate Ravens, and it has been going really well.
I remember back then when they were deciding to buff fungal growth it was a projectile you could dodge, but did more damage than the fungal previous to it then decided to just keep it instant cast with the damage buff. I wonder how that would have turned out if it was still a projectile.
Obviously Air might be crop up to be a problem, but I just find it odd that the infestor is the answer to air.
On August 19 2012 11:37 Mr Showtime wrote: I'm sorry that you're not a good player and can't win a TvZ. Korean Terrans are having fewer and fewer problem against Zerg and the win rate is nearly at 50/50 over the past month or so. No, the patch won't make the Raven more viable, but in the current state of TvZ it doesn't really need to be. More practice and fewer walls of text might help fix your problems that others aren't having.
Taking 3 games to prove a statistic, gotta love math
Zergs are pointing "Taeja is doing well". I'm doing the same think. When a korean pro gamer is no match so easily by "post-patch" zergs I'm asking question.
I believe Avilo has some good points regarding the TvZ current balance. The Raven is imo completely useless against mass ultralisks + infestor combinations and really good vs most air compositions from zerg. What terran need is a unit which can deal better with the tech switches and soft-counter the T3 tech.
Earlier the ghost was the unit to go to "soft" counter the Zerg T3. Obviously blizzard didnt want terran to use snipe in the big amounts against broodlords and ultralisks but instead focused its fire vs infestor (50 damage vs psionic ) making terran able to 2 shot any infestor instead of they regenerating 1 hp as before 45 pure damage vs the 90 health infestor. This resulted in terran either have to make army[1] dedicated to only destroy air (Vikings,Ravens) but since the viking sucks on ground and raven not even close to strong enough to deal with both compositions it really makes them worthless against anything and will always lose against any ground unit composition resulting in we have to make army[2] (Mass MMM,Siege tanks,thors etc) that can challenge the ground army but lose almost always lose to high amounts of broodlords,infestor. You can test it yourself, go to any unit tester and try to make a simulation where a terran army is able to counter both ground and air vs broodlord,infestor,corruptor and mass ultralisk,infestor,ling,bling. Will be glad to see any results from this.
The marine is still a decent unit to deal with both of these but marines can NEVER do the job alone. In TvZ the terran is the player who always have to adapt and counter the zerg army instead of the other way around even though the zerg macro is alot stronger than terran. Since terran has maybe the easiest macro in the game its also the worst. The design is really weird since terran army should according to macro mechanics always be alot stronger but harder to replace. I believe it should be the other way around, zerg is the race supposed to make an army to counter the terran army.
I am currently one of 51 terrans in grandmaster on eu atm. Source http://www.sc2ranks.com This is just my thoughts and i am very biased with terran but maybe someone might find this interesting.
On August 19 2012 11:39 Kaeru wrote: I've said this since the release.
Fungal Growth pinning down units is not a good solution. Fungal Growth should just like Ensnare from Brood War slow units by a high percentage like 80% or something. Why?
Because if you catch 20 Vikings in one Fungal, as it is now, you can chain Fungal them to death. While with a slow of 80% or whatever number - Vikings can slowly split and maybe half of them will survive with low health. Or at least force the Zerg player to use MORE energy to kill everything off!
This wont only affect TvZ but also ZvZ where Mutas suddenly becomes a bit more interesting and less risky to make... What this WONT affect is ground to ground battles. Stalkers won't be able to Blink and their slowed movement wont be microable vs Lings or Roaches.
Marines and Hellions will still be slowed by Fungal and catching them with Lings/Banes will still be as viable as now - sure you can split a little more. But that's a good thing!
Zealots will be slightly more usefull in PvZ since they won't be pinned and totally wasted - for example if you warp in 8 Zealots with a Warp Prism and they all get Fungaled close to the mineral line. You might force the Zerg to move their Drones to avoid a few Zealot hits.
In my opinion, one big reason why Ravens are not viable is because none of the Terran builds actually have any goal to get Ravens. When do people get Ravens? In late, late game when you have banked up 1500 gas. BAM 3-4 Starports go down and Ravens are produced...
What if Terrans (like me) start making builds that are designed to incorporate Ravens at the 14 minute mark insted? This is at a timing where Terran has 3 bases and very high mineral income... A lot of that income is actually dumped into Scans for killing tumors. Some Ravens might give you 2-3 more Barracks worth of Marine production.
Actually (I am high master) I have tried to play a lot of games where I design the builds to incorporate Ravens, and it has been going really well...
Personally I like the Queen buff, I also love the new ideas of the new creep tumor range and Raven speed. But in the end - personally - I think that the problem lies in Fungal Growth pinning down units insted of slowing them by a lot...
Agreed the main problem is funguls rooting
if they made it a slowing spell it would make it balanced.
zergs AA would be weaker because of it..... so a buff to the hydralisk to compensate for it would be very good.
Why did a lot of the terrans stop getting ghosts for EMP and snipe vs infestors (I've seen a few like gumiho)? I know that protoss players try to actively feedback vs infestors or storm them.
I'm gonna post this ROOT.Minigun quote here because I think it applies. This was after he lost all his matches at IEM.
the difference between na ladder and these players is hilarious
no wonder na doesn't get better
impossible to improve playing na players
NA will always be behind the metagame and Taeja is not the only terran having success in TvZ. I can name a lot off the top of my head: Byun, MVP, Reality(went on record to say TvZ is easy for him), Kas, Lucifron, Major(beat Hyun in TSL) etc.
On August 19 2012 11:30 SniXSniPe wrote: I'll be happiest for any buff that increase the rate of creep removal after you kill overlord/structures/tumors. Creep is a big factor in the match up which is something indirectly affecting the match up after the queen buff (as Queens can ward off Hellions easier now with the increase ranged), thus letting creep be spread easier. As we all know, creep = increased mobility + secondary vision + delays any immediate Terran push. If creep was spread as quickly as it currently is I guarantee pushes would have a better chance at dealing more damage than vs less creep spread all over the map. This obviously affects the later game, where Terran needs to stall for time to use their Ravens against the GGLords.
The tumor creep radius area decrease is a start though.
The massive zerg eco from the passivity of the matchup + the creep at least at half way across the map when terran wants to push out lets zerg get out tons of units/morphbanelins because terran has to seige unseige across the creep or they just die. Making creep recede faster doesn't remove anything from the game it ADDS to it. Now instead of stupid games where terran does a 2-2 timing and then tries to counter zergs hive tech you have an early game with terran trying to clean up creep and snipe queens with a medivac of marines because it recedes fast enough for it to be worth it.
Although if zerg goes mutas this doesnt happen qqqqq.
- why 125 energy? mother of god we cant even launch 2 HSMs with a full energy raven.
- why turret so shit? StarCraft units are made to be fucking good in at least 1 (ONE) situation. Raven's autoturret is bad as fuck in every scenario of the game and it takes 50 energy to drop one. It is even worse than Thor's Strike Cannons. ROFL
I think avilo's points makes sense... what about increasing the range of HSM? so you can still use it while fungal'ed. I don't remember if its possible to cast HSM while fungal'ed... if not possible they should make it possible.
imo Terran has some fundamental problems... but not going to discuss it here lol
On a side note this is possibly the quickest mod note of any thread ever.
Raven's always look either completely useless or absolutely godlike, presumably the speed change will skew it so they'll look more useful, more of the time. I don't think Blizzard agree with the belief that TvZ has fundamental problems, they merely think Terran's need a slight poke in the right direction.
On August 19 2012 11:37 Mr Showtime wrote: I'm sorry that you're not a good player and can't win a TvZ. Korean Terrans are having fewer and fewer problem against Zerg and the win rate is nearly at 50/50 over the past month or so. No, the patch won't make the Raven more viable, but in the current state of TvZ it doesn't really need to be. More practice and fewer walls of text might help fix your problems that others aren't having.
On August 19 2012 11:43 Bobson wrote: I believe Avilo has some good points regarding the TvZ current balance. The Raven is imo completely useless against mass ultralisks + infestor combinations and really good vs most air compositions from zerg. What terran need is a unit which can deal better with the tech switches and soft-counter the T3 tech.
Earlier the ghost was the unit to go to "soft" counter the Zerg T3. Obviously blizzard didnt want terran to use snipe in the big amounts against broodlords and ultralisks but instead focused its fire vs infestor (50 damage vs psionic ) making terran able to 2 shot any infestor instead of they regenerating 1 hp as before 45 pure damage vs the 90 health infestor. This resulted in terran either have to make army[1] dedicated to only destroy air (Vikings,Ravens) but since the viking sucks on ground and raven not even close to strong enough to deal with both compositions it really makes them worthless against anything and will always lose against any ground unit composition resulting in we have to make army[2] (Mass MMM,Siege tanks,thors etc) that can challenge the ground army but lose almost always lose to high amounts of broodlords,infestor. You can test it yourself, go to any unit tester and try to make a simulation where a terran army is able to counter both ground and air vs broodlord,infestor,corruptor and mass ultralisk,infestor,ling,bling. Will be glad to see any results from this.
The marine is still a decent unit to deal with both of these but marines can NEVER do the job alone. In TvZ the terran is the player who always have to adapt and counter the zerg army instead of the other way around even though the zerg macro is alot stronger than terran. Since terran has maybe the easiest macro in the game its also the worst. The design is really weird since terran army should according to macro mechanics always be alot stronger but harder to replace. I believe it should be the other way around, zerg is the race supposed to make an army to counter the terran army.
I am currently one of 51 terrans in grandmaster on eu atm. Source http://www.sc2ranks.com This is just my thoughts and i am very biased with terran but maybe someone might find this interesting.
I find it rather strange (or sad) that they thought that ghosts would actually be used to deal with infestors. Besides, wasn't snipe supposed to be used to kill "high-priority targets"?
On August 19 2012 11:49 ilbh wrote: I think avilo's points makes sense... what about increasing the range of HSM? so you can still use it while fungal'ed. I don't remember if its possible to cast HSM while fungal'ed... if not possible they should make it possible.
imo Terran has some fundamental problems... but not going to discuss it here lol
I'm not 100% sure, but I remember people saying you can't siege while fungaled so I suppose you can't cast HSM while fungaled?
i feel bad for avilo that he has such a bad wrap that people discount these ideas just because he wrote them... what did you do man? i agree that the queen range didn't push the matchup out of whack its just that because of the queen buff more zergs get into late game so late game fundamental issues are being brought to the forefront of the discussion... i think the main problem is fungal... if you get one off, it immedialtey means anything that is caught will not escape when playing a good zerg. Even with for a viking spread, it means that there is no oppurtinity for VIking Micro or any option for Terran to retreat once fungaled. I think the best way for the infestor fungal to be used is some sort of slow on the units instead of a freeze so that that Terrans are still able to punish zergs who aren't cognicant of the infestor positioning post-fungal. It would allow vikings an option to retreat while still taking the normal amount of damage. Also in ZvP matchup it would allow good blink stalker micro to help aid Infestor/Corrupto/Blord late game more effectively because right now they are basicaly fodder until the vortex hits
Terran players really aren't doing so bad at the moment, and with this buffs it will be less of an issue. No reason for whatever changes the OP is suggesting, IMO at least. Raven will be improved with the changes(harder to get fungaled etc) , just wait and see how big of a change it is, and then re-discuss balance if it still doesn't solve anything.
On August 19 2012 11:45 .Sic. wrote: Why did a lot of the terrans stop getting ghosts for EMP and snipe vs infestors (I've seen a few like gumiho)? I know that protoss players try to actively feedback vs infestors or storm them.
I think one of the issues with ghosts vs infestors is that fungals can hit cloaked ghosts with fungals. So in big engagements, fungals is actually better due to the size of infestors. Even if infestors are clumped up, it takes quite a few EMPs to land while it takes 1-2 fungals to nap all the ghosts. Also, if enemy has overseers, your ghosts are just so much harder to retain while infestors can stay in the back and usually get away. zergs have been a lot better with their infestor control and retention.
"pro korean Terran players are suddenly being beaten handily by inferior Zergs, most often when the game goes to lategame." Inferior in what? skills in starcraft2? How do you define skills in starcraft2? if those pro korean terran lose to the cheese and all ins that were hidden perfectly and executed well, and it takes a lot effort in defending it than it is to execute it, maybe then you can make a case. But like you said shit went into late game, a macro game, a at least 20-30 minute long game, you can't make the claim about "inferior zergs" unless you are referring to the player's achievements, which are how much they won, past tense. Well these "inferior zergs" just beat which ever pro koreans terran with whatever achievement in a live event, which means thou they lack the achievement, their skills(however you define skills in sc2) are at least close enough for them to win in a good day.
agree with your point about ravens. It is a good call.
In your second point, you were doing so well until "The queen preventing hellions denying creep...allows more creep spread...allows denial of attacks...allow all larva to be used on drones until Zerg can power 100% units/tech...all of this snowballs to the point where Terran "has to do damage" but cannot due to the reaction time creep spread allows to deny attacks + the queens themselves. "
Your chains of logic breaks down at "allows denial of attacks" terran can still attack, it just means that they will have to fight on top of creeps. And since you posted this today, i couldn't help but think that pro korean terran you are referring to is supernova, and that infestor foreigner zerg is vortix. How can you put up such a strawman of an argument if that's the case? supernova fucking own the shit out of vortix in mid game by killing the 3rd hatchery game after game, every single game vortix had to play from behind during mid game and fought his way back. Supernova did exactly what I said. If the floor is cover with creeps, then terran should fight on the creeps, just like in 300 they said they will fight in the shades if arrow blocks out the sky.
your point number3 ignores feed back and snipe, both abilities can be use to fight that of fungal/infestor. Have you ever think for yourself for once? why are you so blind and give in to your pride? You are not winning because you are not skilled enough, it has nothing to do with the game. Stop looking for blizzard to balance the game when a trend is unfavorable toward your particular race. You as a pro gamer are suppose to be the ones who evolves the strategy through skill and not whine to blizzard.
This is why rekrul made so many foreigner sucks thread, stop whining, and practice harder without pride and prejudices.
something funny to think about is also how suddenly foreigners are doing well... vortix, jhonnyrecco, sortof, slivko etc. all came out of nowhere...what do they all have in common? ohh yea, right, they all paly zerg...before the patch jhnonnyrecco and sortof both were mid gms on eu servers at best, i played them all the time and they were very beatable, since the patch they jumped to top gmk beating koreans all of a sudden recco with a top tsl finish as the last foreigner already I find it very hard to believe that all the succes came out of sudden skill improvements...
I thought avilo made at least a little sense. I would love to see more ravens, and speed won't do it.
On August 19 2012 11:39 Kaeru wrote: I've said this since the release.
Fungal Growth pinning down units is not a good solution. Fungal Growth should just like Ensnare from Brood War slow units by a high percentage like 80% or something. Why?
Because if you catch 20 Vikings in one Fungal, as it is now, you can chain Fungal them to death. While with a slow of 80% or whatever number - Vikings can slowly split and maybe half of them will survive with low health. Or at least force the Zerg player to use MORE energy to kill everything off!
This wont only affect TvZ but also ZvZ where Mutas suddenly becomes a bit more interesting and less risky to make... What this WONT affect is ground to ground battles. Stalkers won't be able to Blink and their slowed movement wont be microable vs Lings or Roaches.
Marines and Hellions will still be slowed by Fungal and catching them with Lings/Banes will still be as viable as now - sure you can split a little more. But that's a good thing!
Zealots will be slightly more usefull in PvZ since they won't be pinned and totally wasted - for example if you warp in 8 Zealots with a Warp Prism and they all get Fungaled close to the mineral line. You might force the Zerg to move their Drones to avoid a few Zealot hits.
In my opinion, one big reason why Ravens are not viable is because none of the Terran builds actually have any goal to get Ravens. When do people get Ravens? In late, late game when you have banked up 1500 gas. BAM 3-4 Starports go down and Ravens are produced...
What if Terrans (like me) start making builds that are designed to incorporate Ravens at the 14 minute mark insted? This is at a timing where Terran has 3 bases and very high mineral income... A lot of that income is actually dumped into Scans for killing tumors. Some Ravens might give you 2-3 more Barracks worth of Marine production.
Actually (I am high master) I have tried to play a lot of games where I design the builds to incorporate Ravens, and it has been going really well...
Remember when Terrans had no idea of how to split units? 5 Banelings rolled in and killed 20 Marines. Then Terran players learned to split and BAAM! MarineKing shows us that 5 Banelings only need to kill 3-4 Marines !
So the HSM looks godlike from time to time... Sometimes it looks useless. I think that with time - Zerg will get more used to splitting their units, just like Terrans and HSM will just be good - insted of godlike. Now don't counter argument me with "Then why don't you split your Vikings?" Because Fungal is instant and you can chain it... There is 0 reaction time to split.
Personally I like the Queen buff, I also love the new ideas of the new creep tumor range and Raven speed. But in the end - personally - I think that the problem lies in Fungal Growth pinning down units insted of slowing them by a lot...
On August 19 2012 11:45 .Sic. wrote: Why did a lot of the terrans stop getting ghosts for EMP and snipe vs infestors (I've seen a few like gumiho)? I know that protoss players try to actively feedback vs infestors or storm them.
I think one of the issues with ghosts vs infestors is that fungals can hit cloaked ghosts with fungals. So in big engagements, fungals is actually better due to the size of infestors. Even if infestors are clumped up, it takes quite a few EMPs to land while it takes 1-2 fungals to nap all the ghosts. Also, if enemy has overseers, your ghosts are just so much harder to retain while infestors can stay in the back and usually get away. zergs have been a lot better with their infestor control and retention.
ive seen one EMP get majoritty of the infesters of a Zerg, infesters clump up pretty nicely and we need all th energy we can get so even removing 2/3rd of the infesters can pretty mcuh gurantee you win the next engagement if your smart at it
On August 19 2012 11:37 Mr Showtime wrote: I'm sorry that you're not a good player and can't win a TvZ. Korean Terrans are having fewer and fewer problem against Zerg and the win rate is nearly at 50/50 over the past month or so. No, the patch won't make the Raven more viable, but in the current state of TvZ it doesn't really need to be. More practice and fewer walls of text might help fix your problems that others aren't having.
Vortix is a good player, dont know about Bomber...
I kind of agree with the OP stated, in all seriousness what is a speed buff going to do to help Ravens The whole balance between TvZ is kind of in a reform right now, we have to wait a bit more and see how the metagame changes and if Terran will adapt. In my own opinion I agree that Queen Range was a wrong move, and the Raven is in the current state of how the Carrier is right now~
Edit: With the way HOTS is going, it wont be released officially anytime soon, the game is in desperate need of a "Start from scratch" phase as it is just starting to look worse and worse as the Battle Reports are released~
On August 19 2012 11:37 Mr Showtime wrote: I'm sorry that you're not a good player and can't win a TvZ. Korean Terrans are having fewer and fewer problem against Zerg and the win rate is nearly at 50/50 over the past month or so. No, the patch won't make the Raven more viable, but in the current state of TvZ it doesn't really need to be. More practice and fewer walls of text might help fix your problems that others aren't having.
Vortix is a good player, dont know about Bomber...
I kind of agree with the OP stated, in all seriousness what is a speed buff going to do to help Ravens The whole balance between TvZ is kind of in a reform right now, we have to wait a bit more and see how the metagame changes and if Terran will adapt. In my own opinion I agree that Queen Range was a wrong move, and the Raven is in the current state of how the Carrier is right now~
Edit: With the way HOTS is going, it wont be released officially anytime soon, the game is in desperate need of a "Start from scratch" phase as it is just starting to look worse and worse as the Battle Reports are released~
The obnoxious thing is that It's been almost four months. Terrans have tried just about everything.
On August 19 2012 11:56 rei wrote: "pro korean Terran players are suddenly being beaten handily by inferior Zergs, most often when the game goes to lategame." Inferior in what? skills in starcraft2? How do you define skills in starcraft2? if those pro korean terran lose to the cheese and all ins that were hidden perfectly and executed well, and it takes a lot effort in defending it than it is to execute it, maybe then you can make a case. But like you said shit went into late game, a macro game, a at least 20-30 minute long game, you can't make the claim about "inferior zergs" unless you are referring to the player's achievements, which are how much they won, past tense. Well these "inferior zergs" just beat which ever pro koreans terran with whatever achievement in a live event, which means thou they lack the achievement, their skills(however you define skills in sc2) are at least close enough for them to win in a good day.
agree with your point about ravens. It is a good call.
In your second point, you were doing so well until "The queen preventing hellions denying creep...allows more creep spread...allows denial of attacks...allow all larva to be used on drones until Zerg can power 100% units/tech...all of this snowballs to the point where Terran "has to do damage" but cannot due to the reaction time creep spread allows to deny attacks + the queens themselves. "
Your chains of logic breaks down at "allows denial of attacks" terran can still attack, it just means that they will have to fight on top of creeps. And since you posted this today, i couldn't help but think that pro korean terran you are referring to is supernova, and that infestor foreigner zerg is vortix. How can you put up such a strawman of an argument if that's the case? supernova fucking own the shit out of vortix in mid game by killing the 3rd hatchery game after game, every single game vortix had to play from behind during mid game and fought his way back. Supernova did exactly what I said. If the floor is cover with creeps, then terran should fight on the creeps, just like in 300 they said they will fight in the shades if arrow blocks out the sky.
your point number3 ignores feed back and snipe, both abilities can be use to fight that of fungal/infestor. Have you ever think for yourself for once? why are you so blind and give in to your pride? You are not winning because you are not skilled enough, it has nothing to do with the game. Stop looking for blizzard to balance the game when a trend is unfavorable toward your particular race. You as a pro gamer are suppose to be the ones who evolves the strategy through skill and not whine to blizzard.
This is why rekrul made so many foreigner sucks thread, stop whining, and practice harder without pride and prestigious.
Problem is that marine tanks trades pretty poorly on creep even against a comp they should hard counter (ling, bling). Add in infestors and it is a rout. If you look at Taeja, he will go pure bio a lot because with good pre splits, they actually do better. Tanks are just not good on crap since the lings can close so fast on creep and you end up shooting yourself.
On August 19 2012 11:57 mEtRoSG wrote: something funny to think about is also how suddenly foreigners are doing well... vortix, jhonnyrecco, sortof, slivko etc. all came out of nowhere...what do they all have in common? ohh yea, right, they all paly zerg...before the patch jhnonnyrecco and sortof both were mid gms on eu servers at best, i played them all the time and they were very beatable, since the patch they jumped to top gmk beating koreans all of a sudden recco with a top tsl finish as the last foreigner already I find it very hard to believe that all the succes came out of sudden skill improvements...
That's an exaggeration - some zergs like Vortix and Scarlet had results before the queen change. And it's not like the foreign scene had a lot of terrans to impede their progress.
I really don't see what this raven discussion is meant to accomplish. Blizzard decided to leave terran late-game in the current state long time ago. HotS changes (and the upcoming balance patch) should spell it out pretty clearly - there are no intentions to change/buff raven/ghosts/thor/battlecruiser to any significant degree.
On August 19 2012 11:37 Mr Showtime wrote: I'm sorry that you're not a good player and can't win a TvZ. Korean Terrans are having fewer and fewer problem against Zerg and the win rate is nearly at 50/50 over the past month or so. No, the patch won't make the Raven more viable, but in the current state of TvZ it doesn't really need to be. More practice and fewer walls of text might help fix your problems that others aren't having.
Vortix is a good player, dont know about Bomber...
I kind of agree with the OP stated, in all seriousness what is a speed buff going to do to help Ravens The whole balance between TvZ is kind of in a reform right now, we have to wait a bit more and see how the metagame changes and if Terran will adapt. In my own opinion I agree that Queen Range was a wrong move, and the Raven is in the current state of how the Carrier is right now~
Edit: With the way HOTS is going, it wont be released officially anytime soon, the game is in desperate need of a "Start from scratch" phase as it is just starting to look worse and worse as the Battle Reports are released~
The obnoxious thing is that It's been almost four months. Terrans have tried just about everything.
The thing is, it is not just terrans adapting. Zergs are also adapting to see how greedy they can get. When they lose the third, they just tech straight into Infestors and then BLs. They are starting to learn how they can defend and transition even when behind significantly. If terrans try to transition when significantly behind, they just get rolled. Zergs just seem to have a large margin for error now.
On August 19 2012 11:37 Mr Showtime wrote: I'm sorry that you're not a good player and can't win a TvZ. Korean Terrans are having fewer and fewer problem against Zerg and the win rate is nearly at 50/50 over the past month or so. No, the patch won't make the Raven more viable, but in the current state of TvZ it doesn't really need to be. More practice and fewer walls of text might help fix your problems that others aren't having.
Vortix is a good player, dont know about Bomber...
I kind of agree with the OP stated, in all seriousness what is a speed buff going to do to help Ravens The whole balance between TvZ is kind of in a reform right now, we have to wait a bit more and see how the metagame changes and if Terran will adapt. In my own opinion I agree that Queen Range was a wrong move, and the Raven is in the current state of how the Carrier is right now~
Edit: With the way HOTS is going, it wont be released officially anytime soon, the game is in desperate need of a "Start from scratch" phase as it is just starting to look worse and worse as the Battle Reports are released~
The obnoxious thing is that It's been almost four months. Terrans have tried just about everything.
If by Terrans you mean MVP and Taeja. Every other Terran I see play still does the exact same things they did pre-Queen buff, or plays excessively greedy early.
TvZ is fine right now in my opinion and this is coming from a masters terran. Terrans just need to learn to play more aggressive and cash in on the strengths of terrans early game capibilitys in how well their units are when microed and they need to go back to heavy aggression early openers that apply direct pressure vs this fast expand into fast third bullshit that terrans consider to be good.
Zergs role is to macro hard, terrans is polar opposite, to be aggressive. So if you see a zerg fast expanding like they typically do you should be planting down 4 rax's, applying direct pressure to force units or else the zerg risks losing right away, while expanding after 4 rax's try adding 6 more rax's while grabbing stim and cs. Try this build, I haven't lost a TvZ yet with it as it constantly forces units and with decent marine micro you can straight up kill zergs that go for a third before having a high infestor count.
Whoever posted about the increase in creep removal rate is someone that I really agree with. As it stands right now, creep removal in the earlygame from hellions is essentially useless thanks to the 6queen build. Hellions kill tumors, get chased off by queens, and the queens that have been stockpiling energy for a fairly long time since they are dedicated to just making a few tumors early and then blocking hellions put down new creep tumors 1-2 hexes back from the edge of the creep originally-about a 10-15 second delay on creep spread if you're lucky :|
Another time that this issue can be seen (although less critical) is using overlords to block expansions. Zerg sits an overlord there. poops creep out, and then is chased off when the non-zerg looks to plant an expo. However, even after the overlord is chased off, it takes ~30 seconds (guesstimation) before the nexus/cc can actually be planted because creep takes SO LONG to go away.
After seeing the first page of comments I am surprised that good players still take the time to offer their stance on such topics.
I think the fundamental problems in late game ravens are well outlined. I think if they made HSM weaker, but be available sooner (in terms of energy required), then it could be a more viable spell. Right now the ravens are very sluggish / short-ranged and HSM only works when the Zerg is not looking at their army. Also fungal is non-projectile (instant cast) so you can't split in response to being in fungal range, where as HSM leaves a lot more opportunity for a zerg to micro. I think blizzard does not want to make the HSM less energy because having 2 missiles per raven would be too powerful (even if the damage was nerfed somehow). Maybe if they made some sort of upgrade from the fusion core that allowed banshees and ravens to produce from reactor starports, then Terran could identify the requirement to respond to a zerg tech transition and react appropriately.
On August 19 2012 11:37 Mr Showtime wrote: I'm sorry that you're not a good player and can't win a TvZ. Korean Terrans are having fewer and fewer problem against Zerg and the win rate is nearly at 50/50 over the past month or so. No, the patch won't make the Raven more viable, but in the current state of TvZ it doesn't really need to be. More practice and fewer walls of text might help fix your problems that others aren't having.
Vortix is a good player, dont know about Bomber...
I kind of agree with the OP stated, in all seriousness what is a speed buff going to do to help Ravens The whole balance between TvZ is kind of in a reform right now, we have to wait a bit more and see how the metagame changes and if Terran will adapt. In my own opinion I agree that Queen Range was a wrong move, and the Raven is in the current state of how the Carrier is right now~
Edit: With the way HOTS is going, it wont be released officially anytime soon, the game is in desperate need of a "Start from scratch" phase as it is just starting to look worse and worse as the Battle Reports are released~
The obnoxious thing is that It's been almost four months. Terrans have tried just about everything.
no they havent Terrans are still using the exact same opening theve been using since.... basically since TvZ was invented
there still getting fast factory and getting 4 hellions and moving out already knowing that the Zerg already has 4+ queens and is using a build specifically tailored to stopping hellion harass
now if they used those resources to jsut take a safe 3rd and follow it up with good macro play and find a powerful timing to hit instead of throwing away 400+ resources every single game maybe Terran would start to innovate
No vthree, the problem is not what unit composition trades badly against another unit composition. The problem here is people who are suppose to be pros whine about balancing before they make any efforts in overcoming the obstacle. we hear this all the fucking time from foreigner pros. The only exception is stephano, he calls it like he sees it, he never dismiss other people's victories and success by calling imba, he's the real man who said zerg is a strong race for years when every foreigner zerg whines and whine. Is it not surprising that he's the only one doing so well for so long, his mindset allow him to see reality without pride getting in the way. When he types WP at the end of the game, he meant it, if someone were to beat him, it is never because the other guy is abusing a bad balancing aspect of the game, if someone were to beat him it's always they played well, and hence the the well deserve well play from stephano.
On August 19 2012 12:10 Sovern wrote: TvZ is fine right now in my opinion and this is coming from a masters terran. Terrans just need to learn to play more aggressive and cash in on the strengths of terrans early game capibilitys in how well their units are when microed and they need to go back to heavy aggression early openers that apply direct pressure vs this fast expand into fast third bullshit that terrans consider to be good.
Zergs role is to macro hard, terrans is polar opposite, to be aggressive. So if you see a zerg fast expanding like they typically do you should be planting down 4 rax's, applying direct pressure to force units or else the zerg risks losing right away, while expanding after 4 rax's try adding 6 more rax's while grabbing stim and cs. Try this build, I haven't lost a TvZ yet with it as it constantly forces units and with decent marine micro you can straight up kill zergs that go for a third before having a high infestor count.
On August 19 2012 12:10 Sovern wrote: TvZ is fine right now in my opinion and this is coming from a masters terran. Terrans just need to learn to play more aggressive and cash in on the strengths of terrans early game capibilitys in how well their units are when microed and they need to go back to heavy aggression early openers that apply direct pressure vs this fast expand into fast third bullshit that terrans consider to be good.
Zergs role is to macro hard, terrans is polar opposite, to be aggressive. So if you see a zerg fast expanding like they typically do you should be planting down 4 rax's, applying direct pressure to force units or else the zerg risks losing right away, while expanding after 4 rax's try adding 6 more rax's while grabbing stim and cs. Try this build, I haven't lost a TvZ yet with it as it constantly forces units and with decent marine micro you can straight up kill zergs that go for a third before having a high infestor count.
Isn't 4 rax pretty much an all-in?
yes its completely all-in if you manage to do enough damage you can expand behind it but you have to constantly pressure until one of you has to GG
On August 19 2012 11:45 .Sic. wrote: Why did a lot of the terrans stop getting ghosts for EMP and snipe vs infestors (I've seen a few like gumiho)? I know that protoss players try to actively feedback vs infestors or storm them.
I think one of the issues with ghosts vs infestors is that fungals can hit cloaked ghosts with fungals. So in big engagements, fungals is actually better due to the size of infestors. Even if infestors are clumped up, it takes quite a few EMPs to land while it takes 1-2 fungals to nap all the ghosts. Also, if enemy has overseers, your ghosts are just so much harder to retain while infestors can stay in the back and usually get away. zergs have been a lot better with their infestor control and retention.
ive seen one EMP get majoritty of the infesters of a Zerg, infesters clump up pretty nicely and we need all th energy we can get so even removing 2/3rd of the infesters can pretty mcuh gurantee you win the next engagement if your smart at it
It takes 2 EMPs to remove fungal. You only need about 3-4 fungals to adequately accentuate your force for the duration of an engagement; I'd be surprised if a battle lasted longer than that. Also with the lower EMP radius, you really can't hit 2/3 of the infestors if they are maxed and have the appropriate ratio in their composition.
On August 19 2012 11:45 .Sic. wrote: Why did a lot of the terrans stop getting ghosts for EMP and snipe vs infestors (I've seen a few like gumiho)? I know that protoss players try to actively feedback vs infestors or storm them.
I think one of the issues with ghosts vs infestors is that fungals can hit cloaked ghosts with fungals. So in big engagements, fungals is actually better due to the size of infestors. Even if infestors are clumped up, it takes quite a few EMPs to land while it takes 1-2 fungals to nap all the ghosts. Also, if enemy has overseers, your ghosts are just so much harder to retain while infestors can stay in the back and usually get away. zergs have been a lot better with their infestor control and retention.
ive seen one EMP get majoritty of the infesters of a Zerg, infesters clump up pretty nicely and we need all th energy we can get so even removing 2/3rd of the infesters can pretty mcuh gurantee you win the next engagement if your smart at it
It takes 2 EMPs to remove fungal. You only need about 3-4 fungals to adequately accentuate your force for the duration of an engagement; I'd be surprised if a battle lasted longer than that. Also with the lower EMP radius, you really can't hit 2/3 of the infestors if they are maxed and have the appropriate ratio in their composition.
3-4 fungals does not destroy an entire Terran army...
3-4 fungals barely kills 2 small clumps of marines
On August 19 2012 11:37 Mr Showtime wrote: I'm sorry that you're not a good player and can't win a TvZ. Korean Terrans are having fewer and fewer problem against Zerg and the win rate is nearly at 50/50 over the past month or so. No, the patch won't make the Raven more viable, but in the current state of TvZ it doesn't really need to be. More practice and fewer walls of text might help fix your problems that others aren't having.
Vortix is a good player, dont know about Bomber...
I kind of agree with the OP stated, in all seriousness what is a speed buff going to do to help Ravens The whole balance between TvZ is kind of in a reform right now, we have to wait a bit more and see how the metagame changes and if Terran will adapt. In my own opinion I agree that Queen Range was a wrong move, and the Raven is in the current state of how the Carrier is right now~
Edit: With the way HOTS is going, it wont be released officially anytime soon, the game is in desperate need of a "Start from scratch" phase as it is just starting to look worse and worse as the Battle Reports are released~
The obnoxious thing is that It's been almost four months. Terrans have tried just about everything.
no they havent Terrans are still using the exact same opening theve been using since.... basically since TvZ was invented
there still getting fast factory and getting 4 hellions and moving out already knowing that the Zerg already has 4+ queens and is using a build specifically tailored to stopping hellion harass
now if they used those resources to jsut take a safe 3rd and follow it up with good macro play and find a powerful timing to hit instead of throwing away 400+ resources every single game maybe Terran would start to innovate
Taking a fast safe 3rd with no hellion basically cede ALL map control once speedlings are out. Zergs then can try for a bust or take the 4th. The timing (2,2? I assume since you are on 3 bases) doesn't hit until Zerg is at 80ish drones and creep is past half way on the map make any push pretty dangerous. You just cannot allow zergs to macro up with no pressure.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
the game doesnt need a giant change doing small things like making ravens faster and creep slower is exactly what blizz needs to do
the game is so balanced right now that a careless nerf or buff just makes it more imbalanced they need small nerfs taht are carefully thought out and tested and watched religiously
people said the same thing about warp prisoms now warp prism harass is hugely hard to deal with as Zerg
The warp prism buff was not small; that buff was so big that the protoss pros on STOG said it was likely excessive such that more attention would be drawn to the unit, and the increase would likely be dimmed down a bit after testing.
Fungal Growth was a lot better when it slowed. Having it lock units in place is just too good.
I think if it locks units in place, it should not do damage. Just think: Locking Stalkers in place, allowing Brood Lords to kill them off... or locking Marines in place, locking Vikings in place, you name it. This is already insanely good.
On the other hand, if it does damage, it should slow units.
I feel like Fungal Growth punishes the mistakes of Terran too hard. It's like the Siege Tank... if you walk into a huge line of Siege Tanks, you'll pay the price for your mistake. However, Fungal Growth isn't just limited to the ground and the Infestor has mobility. If you fly your Vikings or blink your Stalkers or move your Mutas, Fungal Growth means that those units are basically dead.
Notice how I compared the Infestor to the Siege Tank in terms of punishing mistakes... Well, actually, the truth is that the Siege Tank should be compared to the Brood Lord. If your Marines go too far forward, Brood Lords will punish them. Basically, the Brood Lord AND the Infestor means that the Zerg has more ways to punish a Terran's mistake.
Also, Hunter Seeker Missle's problem is that it's use is limited to the air. That's about it... Fungal Growth is ideal for bio since they clump and they die easily, their DPS being their main good trait. However, Fungal Growth is also amazing vs. Vikings and Void Rays and any air pretty much.
On the other hand, Seeker Missle isn't very effective vs. Zerglings (they're too small/inexpensive so it's not worth it, especially in the stage of the game when you get HSM), it is mildly effective versus Roaches but Roaches are so mass-producable that you'll need LOTS of HSM. Plus, Roaches can split pretty well, especially with Roach speed. HSM isn't effective versus Ultralisks. It might be useful versus Banelings... HSM's main purpose is the air. Yet Zerg is so good at tech switching into ground at any moment.
I think it's sad that Zerg has the unit with the most flexibility (Infestor). On the other hand, Terran is the least flexible of the races... yet they have to face Zerg, who has the greatest ability to tech switch. Terran needs an all-purpose unit like the Infestor (Ghost was this unit before it got nerfed) to deal with all the tech switches. On the other hand, Zerg doesn't need a unit like that. If Terran uses Sky Terran, Zerg can make 20 Corrupters at once. If Sky Terran dies and Terran creates a large bio army, Zerg can make 100 lings and 30 banelings and 20 roaches. They can tech switch so fast it's not even funny.
Summary of my points: 1. If Fungal Growth locks units in place, it shouldn't do damage. 2. Since Fungal Growth locks units in place, it makes it too easy for Zerg to punish Terran's mistakes. One mistake and your entire army is dead since Fungal Growth has no micro potential. 3. HSM is only really good against Zerg Air, so it's not flexible enough when the Zerg switches to ground. 4. The Infestor is an all-around unit, but the Terran needs an all-around unit more because Terran is inflexible. On the other hand, Zerg doesn't need an all-purpose unit because they can tech switch really fast.
1) Maps are a huge issue in current TvZ. The ability for Z to park their OLs at the beginning of the game to spot any kind of move out is absolutely idiotic. The amount of dead air space in some maps is ridiculous too. Remove free OL parking spots from maps, Terran all-ins/timings become alot better, and all of a sudden Z's don't play as greedy.
2) Revert Queen buff. Right now, people are pointing out that Korean T's are doing fine, except most Korean T's are also 2 basing or doing very gimmicky timings off 1 base to beat their opponents. No one goes for a macro type of game. They all go for an all-in push at some point or another. Even those that play "macro" never try to go ultra late game; they simply just go 2-2 pre Hive tech push with an absolutely all-in push that is do or die. People who point out that the Terrans are doing fine are simply wrong. They are doing "fine" statistically because they just simply all-in. Period. That's stupid gameplay and everyone here knows it. Even if it was "balanced" it certainly isn't good gameplay. If you want every match-up to look like Korean PvZ be my guest.
3) Creep OR Larvae Inject needs to be touched if Queens are to remain Queendralysks as they are. Creep spread is way too strong in conjunction with the Queen buff. It's already difficult to move out because of OLs early on that can see any kind of early timing or any kind of all-in movement; it's even more difficult that Z's can literally almost take a free third unless you just full on commit to an all-in (and even then, as long as they didn't drone too hard they should be able to hold with 4+ Queen builds and Ling/Bling). The creep spread + current larvae inject is simply too strong together against T on conjunction with the new Queens. Larvae inject lets Z drone way too hard; if it was nerfed it would lead to a much more balanced and less volatile match-up. The issue is that Z's all point out they need every single larvae to defend against current P timings; so the only way to fix it is to reduce the creep spread, while also speeding up the rate creep recedes. It's really the only way I can see this working without hurting Z too badly.
4) Although HotS mechplay looks very strong, I seriously doubt that it will have much of an impact in TvZ. The problem is that Z players are rushing straight to Hive unhindered (11/12 minute Hives + 4 fully saturated bases basically unhindered if they scout properly and deflect pressures/all-ins and play safe with good creep spread). I doubt in a Terran player's ability to get to Hive that fast, UNLESS 3 attack upgrade Battle Helions burn right through Broodlings like Archons do. If they do, then we may actually have something that might work (a combination of Battle Helions/Thors/Vikings? Don't know).
TvZ is by far my worst match-up, and it has nothing to do with the fact that I'm "bad" at the game at all. I do perfectly fine in my mirrors and TvP. TvP in fact is by far my best match-up, and what I feel as a much more entertaining match-up, especially when I am finally able to pressure and keep the P down with drops and harass while I slowly transition into BC/Ghosts on larger maps. In TvZ, I feel like there's no option for me to "harass" turtle. I just get absolutely smashed because I simply cannot keep up economically; a Z can trade completely inefficiently and still kill me eventually because I just simply lack the production and resources to keep up. It's like every game I simply have to all-in and do massive damage or just be straight up behind and pray the Z does something completely dumb like run all his Infestors into my tanks or some dumb shit like that.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
to simply ignore avilos argument simply because of who he is makes you worse than what you make him out to be. read the text first, and then if you think it's appropriate you can bash it.
That being said, there are some good points and some bad points. Some of the bad points include stating things like "if raven gets fungaled it's basically dead paperweight of 200 gas". This is a ridiculous statement that makes way too many assumptions to be correct.
First, since we are discussing the "late game" of TvZ, we can assume that there are multiple ravens out on the map, let's say 5-10 which have stockpiled a reasonable amount of energy to be considered useful in a battle. Ravens being sniped before having enough energy is a different discussion. Anyways, if you have 5-10 ravens with a good amount of energy, you will ALWAYS have enough energy to put down a couple PDD's. What these PDD's do is completely negate 2-4 corruptor volleys from doing any damage to your ravens. Thus, even if your ravens get fungaled, they would have to be either chain fungaled to death (not energy efficient) or killed by corruptors in more volleys than usual. I believe I'm correct in saying that HSM range is the same if not longer than the range of the corruptor. Thus, to kill ravens after fungaling them with corruptors does not make them "paperweights" becuase HSM is always viable against corruptors should they try to engage.
In addition, you're assuming that once the raven is fungaled, no infestor will ever get in range to be HSM'd since fungal does in fact out range it I believe. However, that's assuming that the zerg player is fungaling PERFECTLY, as in they're holding position outside of HSM range, fungaling the ravens, and always keeping the infestors out of HSM range. This is something that no pro zerg player has the time for. Even at the highest level of play, zergs will always move click their infestors closer to fungal rather than utilizing the maximum range of fungal simply because it's quicker, less time-consuming, and easier to execute than using fungal's max range 100% of the time. Therefore, even when ravens do get fungaled and chained down in place, there will almost always be infestors in range of HSM.
So to say that once ravens are fungaled they are completely useless is just a stupid and lazy argument that undermines the rest of your points. Please don't make points like that in balance discussions
On August 19 2012 12:10 Sovern wrote: TvZ is fine right now in my opinion and this is coming from a masters terran. Terrans just need to learn to play more aggressive and cash in on the strengths of terrans early game capibilitys in how well their units are when microed and they need to go back to heavy aggression early openers that apply direct pressure vs this fast expand into fast third bullshit that terrans consider to be good.
Zergs role is to macro hard, terrans is polar opposite, to be aggressive. So if you see a zerg fast expanding like they typically do you should be planting down 4 rax's, applying direct pressure to force units or else the zerg risks losing right away, while expanding after 4 rax's try adding 6 more rax's while grabbing stim and cs. Try this build, I haven't lost a TvZ yet with it as it constantly forces units and with decent marine micro you can straight up kill zergs that go for a third before having a high infestor count.
Isn't 4 rax pretty much an all-in?
4 rax before CC is not all in, you force units from the zerg early on and can straight up kill a zerg that cant defend properly but the key thing to note is that you're applying a heavy amount of pressure as you grab your cc, much more pressure than a typical 2 rax expand. You open standard 2 rax and instead of making a cc you add 2 more rax and continue to deny creep spread and apply pressure.
After I make a CC I make 4 more rax, 1 gas geyser and research stim followed by cs and you can deny early thirds in the mean time, when cs and stim complete you can go to town and deny the third, clean up creep, or normally just straight up end the game since your marine count will be crazy high.
I'm sure that this build can be expanded into a macro build such as after having 8 rax grabbing a third and getting double ebay upgrades and medivacs but right now I've been playing a heavy aggressive all in or die style (i go in with the mindset that terrans late game is the early game) and it seems to be holding up extremely well since nearly every zerg just plays greedy and drones up.
On August 19 2012 11:45 .Sic. wrote: Why did a lot of the terrans stop getting ghosts for EMP and snipe vs infestors (I've seen a few like gumiho)? I know that protoss players try to actively feedback vs infestors or storm them.
I think one of the issues with ghosts vs infestors is that fungals can hit cloaked ghosts with fungals. So in big engagements, fungals is actually better due to the size of infestors. Even if infestors are clumped up, it takes quite a few EMPs to land while it takes 1-2 fungals to nap all the ghosts. Also, if enemy has overseers, your ghosts are just so much harder to retain while infestors can stay in the back and usually get away. zergs have been a lot better with their infestor control and retention.
ive seen one EMP get majoritty of the infesters of a Zerg, infesters clump up pretty nicely and we need all th energy we can get so even removing 2/3rd of the infesters can pretty mcuh gurantee you win the next engagement if your smart at it
It takes 2 EMPs to remove fungal. You only need about 3-4 fungals to adequately accentuate your force for the duration of an engagement; I'd be surprised if a battle lasted longer than that. Also with the lower EMP radius, you really can't hit 2/3 of the infestors if they are maxed and have the appropriate ratio in their composition.
3-4 fungals does not destroy an entire Terran army...
3-4 fungals barely kills 2 small clumps of marines
Yeah because "adequately accentuate" means destroy an entire army. ROFL if you have hive tech you probably don't have only infestors at your disposal to deal with the terran force. 3-4 are enough to cripple the viking count or lock units in place such that zerg melee can get up close to where they are effective without risk of being kited.
On August 19 2012 11:45 .Sic. wrote: Why did a lot of the terrans stop getting ghosts for EMP and snipe vs infestors (I've seen a few like gumiho)? I know that protoss players try to actively feedback vs infestors or storm them.
I think one of the issues with ghosts vs infestors is that fungals can hit cloaked ghosts with fungals. So in big engagements, fungals is actually better due to the size of infestors. Even if infestors are clumped up, it takes quite a few EMPs to land while it takes 1-2 fungals to nap all the ghosts. Also, if enemy has overseers, your ghosts are just so much harder to retain while infestors can stay in the back and usually get away. zergs have been a lot better with their infestor control and retention.
ive seen one EMP get majoritty of the infesters of a Zerg, infesters clump up pretty nicely and we need all th energy we can get so even removing 2/3rd of the infesters can pretty mcuh gurantee you win the next engagement if your smart at it
It takes 2 EMPs to remove fungal. You only need about 3-4 fungals to adequately accentuate your force for the duration of an engagement; I'd be surprised if a battle lasted longer than that. Also with the lower EMP radius, you really can't hit 2/3 of the infestors if they are maxed and have the appropriate ratio in their composition.
3-4 fungals does not destroy an entire Terran army...
3-4 fungals barely kills 2 small clumps of marines
He said 3-4 fungals to adequately accentuate your forces... In most engagements, zergs only need to land 3-4 to win.
On August 19 2012 11:45 .Sic. wrote: Why did a lot of the terrans stop getting ghosts for EMP and snipe vs infestors (I've seen a few like gumiho)? I know that protoss players try to actively feedback vs infestors or storm them.
I think one of the issues with ghosts vs infestors is that fungals can hit cloaked ghosts with fungals. So in big engagements, fungals is actually better due to the size of infestors. Even if infestors are clumped up, it takes quite a few EMPs to land while it takes 1-2 fungals to nap all the ghosts. Also, if enemy has overseers, your ghosts are just so much harder to retain while infestors can stay in the back and usually get away. zergs have been a lot better with their infestor control and retention.
ive seen one EMP get majoritty of the infesters of a Zerg, infesters clump up pretty nicely and we need all th energy we can get so even removing 2/3rd of the infesters can pretty mcuh gurantee you win the next engagement if your smart at it
It takes 2 EMPs to remove fungal. You only need about 3-4 fungals to adequately accentuate your force for the duration of an engagement; I'd be surprised if a battle lasted longer than that. Also with the lower EMP radius, you really can't hit 2/3 of the infestors if they are maxed and have the appropriate ratio in their composition.
3-4 fungals does not destroy an entire Terran army...
3-4 fungals barely kills 2 small clumps of marines
what? 3-4 fungals ALWAYS kills clumps of marines. I'm pretty sure it only takes 2 fungals to bring marines down to red and 3 to kil them
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
to simply ignore avilos argument simply because of who he is makes you worse than what you make him out to be. read the text first, and then if you think it's appropriate you can bash it.
That being said, there are some good points and some bad points. Some of the bad points include stating things like "if raven gets fungaled it's basically dead paperweight of 200 gas". This is a ridiculous statement that makes way too many assumptions to be correct.
First, since we are discussing the "late game" of TvZ, we can assume that there are multiple ravens out on the map, let's say 5-10 which have stockpiled a reasonable amount of energy to be considered useful in a battle. Ravens being sniped before having enough energy is a different discussion. Anyways, if you have 5-10 ravens with a good amount of energy, you will ALWAYS have enough energy to put down a couple PDD's. What these PDD's do is completely negate 2-4 corruptor volleys from doing any damage to your ravens. Thus, even if your ravens get fungaled, they would have to be either chain fungaled to death (not energy efficient) or killed by corruptors in more volleys than usual. I believe I'm correct in saying that HSM range is the same if not longer than the range of the corruptor. Thus, to kill ravens after fungaling them with corruptors does not make them "paperweights" becuase HSM is always viable against corruptors should they try to engage.
In addition, you're assuming that once the raven is fungaled, no infestor will ever get in range to be HSM'd since fungal does in fact out range it I believe. However, that's assuming that the zerg player is fungaling PERFECTLY, as in they're holding position outside of HSM range, fungaling the ravens, and always keeping the infestors out of HSM range. This is something that no pro zerg player has the time for. Even at the highest level of play, zergs will always move click their infestors closer to fungal rather than utilizing the maximum range of fungal simply because it's quicker, less time-consuming, and easier to execute than using fungal's max range 100% of the time. Therefore, even when ravens do get fungaled and chained down in place, there will almost always be infestors in range of HSM.
So to say that once ravens are fungaled they are completely useless is just a stupid and lazy argument that undermines the rest of your points. Please don't make points like that in balance discussions
So your whole argument is that if the Z is bad Seeker Missile is good? What? That's a shitty argument and you know it. Most Z's are completely lazy as hell with their Infestor control, much more than T and P players are with Ghosts and HT. They have no idea how to split them, no idea how to keep them out of trouble. This is even true among various pros, especially players like Nestea who have very subpar micro for a professional player, and succeeds simply because of the strength of his macro. Once Z players learn how to play against Raven based compositions, they will pretty much proceed as usual and just simply win.
If Z players want to keep their current Queen, they are going to have to give up something in return, because watching TvZ is the most boring shit ever. It's a race against the clock as to whether or not 1) The T does significant damage before the Z takes his 3rd or
2) The T kills the Z before he hits Hive Tech
or
3) The Z does something completely stupid and misplays the late game terribly and ends up losing because of it.
This is actually a great post avilo. I have had my mind into wanting to test HotS that I don't think as much about the current build and what can be changed, but I feel the creep change, another few raven tweaks and maybe just changing the queen to 4 range instead of 5 would be ideal for now since if it was 3 range it would be pre-patch with more zerg nerfs/terran buffs.
My ZvT is actually quite off and it makes me sad that it was once my best match up in tougher times and now I struggle in fortunate times, but that is because like all players we have weaknesses that can't be attributed to balance and I can acknowledge when Terran has it harder .
On August 19 2012 12:10 Sovern wrote: TvZ is fine right now in my opinion and this is coming from a masters terran. Terrans just need to learn to play more aggressive and cash in on the strengths of terrans early game capibilitys in how well their units are when microed and they need to go back to heavy aggression early openers that apply direct pressure vs this fast expand into fast third bullshit that terrans consider to be good.
Zergs role is to macro hard, terrans is polar opposite, to be aggressive. So if you see a zerg fast expanding like they typically do you should be planting down 4 rax's, applying direct pressure to force units or else the zerg risks losing right away, while expanding after 4 rax's try adding 6 more rax's while grabbing stim and cs. Try this build, I haven't lost a TvZ yet with it as it constantly forces units and with decent marine micro you can straight up kill zergs that go for a third before having a high infestor count.
Isn't 4 rax pretty much an all-in?
4 rax before CC is not all in, you force units from the zerg early on and can straight up kill a zerg that cant defend properly but the key thing to note is that you're applying a heavy amount of pressure as you grab your cc, much more pressure than a typical 2 rax expand. You open standard 2 rax and instead of making a cc you add 2 more rax and continue to deny creep spread and apply pressure.
After I make a CC I make 4 more rax, 1 gas geyser and research stim followed by cs and you can deny early thirds in the mean time, when cs and stim complete you can go to town and deny the third, clean up creep, or normally just straight up end the game since your marine count will be crazy high.
I'm sure that this build can be expanded into a macro build such as after having 8 rax grabbing a third and getting double ebay upgrades and medivacs but right now I've been playing a heavy aggressive all in or die style (i go in with the mindset that terrans late game is the early game) and it seems to be holding up extremely well since nearly every zerg just plays greedy and drones up.
That is like saying proxy 11/11 is not all-in since you force Zerg units early on and straight up kill a Zerg that can't defend properly. I am sure it works if the Zerg is not ready for it but it is an all-in.
TvZ in Korea is balanced. Internationally there are way more top teir zergs than terrans so it would be strange if terrans would have a much higher winrate. Oh wait, they have had the higher winrate over zergs in TvZ in almost every month in sc2's history.
Only like 4 months have zerg had the higher winrate. I think people need to just relax. Its only been a few months and players are still adjusting and already it seems then terrans are starting to do better and figuring stuff out.
On August 19 2012 12:10 Sovern wrote: TvZ is fine right now in my opinion and this is coming from a masters terran. Terrans just need to learn to play more aggressive and cash in on the strengths of terrans early game capibilitys in how well their units are when microed and they need to go back to heavy aggression early openers that apply direct pressure vs this fast expand into fast third bullshit that terrans consider to be good.
Zergs role is to macro hard, terrans is polar opposite, to be aggressive. So if you see a zerg fast expanding like they typically do you should be planting down 4 rax's, applying direct pressure to force units or else the zerg risks losing right away, while expanding after 4 rax's try adding 6 more rax's while grabbing stim and cs. Try this build, I haven't lost a TvZ yet with it as it constantly forces units and with decent marine micro you can straight up kill zergs that go for a third before having a high infestor count.
Isn't 4 rax pretty much an all-in?
4 rax before CC is not all in, you force units from the zerg early on and can straight up kill a zerg that cant defend properly but the key thing to note is that you're applying a heavy amount of pressure as you grab your cc, much more pressure than a typical 2 rax expand. You open standard 2 rax and instead of making a cc you add 2 more rax and continue to deny creep spread and apply pressure.
After I make a CC I make 4 more rax, 1 gas geyser and research stim followed by cs and you can deny early thirds in the mean time, when cs and stim complete you can go to town and deny the third, clean up creep, or normally just straight up end the game since your marine count will be crazy high.
I'm sure that this build can be expanded into a macro build such as after having 8 rax grabbing a third and getting double ebay upgrades and medivacs but right now I've been playing a heavy aggressive all in or die style (i go in with the mindset that terrans late game is the early game) and it seems to be holding up extremely well since nearly every zerg just plays greedy and drones up.
That is like saying proxy 11/11 is not all-in since you force Zerg units early on and straight up kill a Zerg that can't defend properly. I am sure it works if the Zerg is not ready for it but it is an all-in.
On certain maps the 4 Rax before CC is not viable, or even Bomber's 3 Rax after CC is not viable because the OL can be parked at the natural in such a way that you can see the Marines moving out of the natural if you are paying attention (not to mention you should have control of the watch towers with Lings). By the time they get to your 3rd you should be ready with 4 Queens + Lings and Blings if the attack comes that late.
TvZ in Korea is balanced. Internationally there are way more top teir zergs than terrans so it would be strange if terrans would have a much higher winrate. Oh wait, they have had the higher winrate over zergs in TvZ in almost every month in sc2's history.
Only like 4 months have zerg had the higher winrate. I think people need to just relax. Its only been a few months and players are still adjusting and already it seems then terrans are starting to do better and figuring stuff out.
A very large reason why Korean T players are successful is because they are just simply all-inning Z's in some form or fashion with a straight up attack rather than playing the macro / harass style that they used to. It's like watching PvZ all over again, and even though that is actually a balanced match-up, it is not what you want to watch. Not to mention, Terran has no all-in that is even remotely as threatening or as strong as +2 Blink Stalkers or 2 base Sentry/Immortal all-ins. A P can walk onto creep and not give a flying fuck as long as he is money on his FF's; a Terran has to split micro stutter step and macro behind his attack to ensure that he has a chance of just winning.
I think in about a month or two once Korean Z's start adapting to these all-ins and timing attacks (that are virtually all-in by nature of the fact that it is an all out engage where if the T wins, he wins the game, if he loses, he loses no matter what) the winrates will swing back in favor of Z heavily.
TvZ in Korea is balanced. Internationally there are way more top teir zergs than terrans so it would be strange if terrans would have a much higher winrate. Oh wait, they have had the higher winrate over zergs in TvZ in almost every month in sc2's history.
Only like 4 months have zerg had the higher winrate. I think people need to just relax. Its only been a few months and players are still adjusting and already it seems then terrans are starting to do better and figuring stuff out.
Zergs have had a much higher winrate for 4 months, but when did the patch hit? Four months ago. The matchup was more even and more entertaining before the queen buff AND the snipe nerf.
This game still has two more expansions so I'm really not sweating balance as long as the game is not completely broken.
However, I will say I hate any spells that prevent micro and movement. Both fungal and FF. I really wish the game wasn't balanced around those two spells.
If would be nice to see these issues brought up by someone else. It seems that no matter what Blizzard does some posters are never happy. The sad part is it keeps coming back to "queens too strong, two hellions can't contain Zerg anymore."
Even without these Raven changes, MVP just destroyed almost the entirety of NesTea's air army with 3 HSM's. Terran are winning games off of Zerg. They're not dominating them like they used to, which I think is Blizzard's intended results.
Did I miss in the text any suggestions on changes except for nerfing queens? The Raven speed helps you zip in, drop your AT/PDD/HSM and gtfo from the fungals. I also think Blizzard is wanting Terran to use Ghosts late game against both Protoss and Zerg. It seems that after the snipe nerf Terrans have decided that Ghosts aren't worth using/making anymore because you can't spam-snipe and decimate an entire flock of Broodlords. I am curious, OP, your thoughts on possible fixes to this without nerfing Zerg or buffing Terran to an unbalanced level.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
Nerchio 2-0 over Puma. Nerchio 2-0 over ForGG. Moonglade 2-0 over Bomber. Vortix 3-0 over ForGG. Vortix 3-2 over supernova.
Foreign zergs were never known to take out Code S Korean Terrans en masse before 1.5...
On August 19 2012 12:52 Lavit2099 wrote: If would be nice to see these issues brought up by someone else. It seems that no matter what Blizzard does some posters are never happy. The sad part is it keeps coming back to "queens too strong, two hellions can't contain Zerg anymore."
Even without these Raven changes, MVP just destroyed almost the entirety of NesTea's air army with 3 HSM's. Terran are winning games off of Zerg. They're not dominating them like they used to, which I think is Blizzard's intended results.
Did I miss in the text any suggestions on changes except for nerfing queens? The Raven speed helps you zip in, drop your AT/PDD/HSM and gtfo from the fungals. I also think Blizzard is wanting Terran to use Ghosts late game against both Protoss and Zerg. It seems that after the snipe nerf Terrans have decided that Ghosts aren't worth using/making anymore because you can't spam-snipe and decimate an entire flock of Broodlords. I am curious, OP, your thoughts on possible fixes to this without nerfing Zerg or buffing Terran to an unbalanced level.
If 1 fungal lands you are chain fungalled. There is no "escape" if you get fungalled by a good player. Speed does not matter vs a stun spell.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
Nerchio 2-0 over Puma. Nerchio 2-0 over ForGG. Moonglade 2-0 over Bomber. Vortix 3-0 over ForGG. Vortix 3-2 over supernova.
Foreign zergs were never known to take out Code S Korean Terrans en masse before 1.5...
You don't know Stephano, do you?
I think the Queen Range change went too far in buffing Zerg. The Queen used to be a good anti-air unit that could add a bit of ground firepower. Now in ZvT in particular she is a front line all purpose defensive unit. A walking Photon Cannon if you will.
Alot of people are doing well in tvz just watch iem ravens are destroying right now and they will do even better with the buff and there will even be slower creep spread abiltiys so terran is not that weak atm
On August 19 2012 12:10 Sovern wrote: TvZ is fine right now in my opinion and this is coming from a masters terran. Terrans just need to learn to play more aggressive and cash in on the strengths of terrans early game capibilitys in how well their units are when microed and they need to go back to heavy aggression early openers that apply direct pressure vs this fast expand into fast third bullshit that terrans consider to be good.
Zergs role is to macro hard, terrans is polar opposite, to be aggressive. So if you see a zerg fast expanding like they typically do you should be planting down 4 rax's, applying direct pressure to force units or else the zerg risks losing right away, while expanding after 4 rax's try adding 6 more rax's while grabbing stim and cs. Try this build, I haven't lost a TvZ yet with it as it constantly forces units and with decent marine micro you can straight up kill zergs that go for a third before having a high infestor count.
Isn't 4 rax pretty much an all-in?
4 rax before CC is not all in, you force units from the zerg early on and can straight up kill a zerg that cant defend properly but the key thing to note is that you're applying a heavy amount of pressure as you grab your cc, much more pressure than a typical 2 rax expand. You open standard 2 rax and instead of making a cc you add 2 more rax and continue to deny creep spread and apply pressure.
After I make a CC I make 4 more rax, 1 gas geyser and research stim followed by cs and you can deny early thirds in the mean time, when cs and stim complete you can go to town and deny the third, clean up creep, or normally just straight up end the game since your marine count will be crazy high.
I'm sure that this build can be expanded into a macro build such as after having 8 rax grabbing a third and getting double ebay upgrades and medivacs but right now I've been playing a heavy aggressive all in or die style (i go in with the mindset that terrans late game is the early game) and it seems to be holding up extremely well since nearly every zerg just plays greedy and drones up.
That is like saying proxy 11/11 is not all-in since you force Zerg units early on and straight up kill a Zerg that can't defend properly. I am sure it works if the Zerg is not ready for it but it is an all-in.
Even if the zerg is ready for 4 rax before CC you're slowing down the pace of the game and gaining control of the early to mid game as you will have way more units than him. Foreigners view heavily aggressive builds as all in too much and expect everyone to just go 1 rax fe.
I guess we should all call reactor factory all in too because if you don't kill drones or deny creep you pretty much die as the zerg will be ahead economically. Going 4 rax's even if the zerg knows it WILL force zerg to invest in a lot of defense and/or a lot of units and it forces zerg to delay their third significantly and prepare for your attack as you will have way more units than him.
I'd rather die in the early game from failed marine micro or decision making vs losing due to zerg having a better late game army composition. I'd rather lose early game any day of the week as you know its because you fucked up somehow vs losing due to imbalance.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
Nerchio 2-0 over Puma. Nerchio 2-0 over ForGG. Moonglade 2-0 over Bomber. Vortix 3-0 over ForGG. Vortix 3-2 over supernova.
Foreign zergs were never known to take out Code S Korean Terrans en masse before 1.5...
LOL so what zergs can never beat korean terrans is that what you are saying h ow about the Kas 2-0 Nestea how about the 82% winrate in tvz for taeja how about in the plast 3 tournys terrans have been doing really well what you said is stupid.
I am baffled at the responses towards the raven and its role, whats more alarming is that the general sentiment consists of how people naturally assume balance is content and there is no reason to introduce new balance changes.
But yet, here we have a unit which has a great investment attributed to it in order to function properly and it still falls short in situations which it theoretically would be the correct move. After all, 125 energy for the HSM is A LOT and forces the spell to be limited in use by once per 2/3 minutes. But in reality the damage it gives in exchange is rather pitiful - assuming the HSM lands. The reason the raven is shied away from and laughed at is because of its energy cost/damage output. There is just no logical reason to spend exorpandent amount of gas on a unit that can’t deliver. Then when you factor in the resource cost to acquire the unit it becomes rather ludicrous. For every raven there could of potentially of been 2 medivas, 1 thor or 1.5 tanks. In fact the only reliable and approvable use for the Raven in tvz would be auto turret harass, and even then thats usually thwarted rather quickly, which would make banshees a far more appealing choice.
The real problem with every vZ matchup isn't Terran or Protoss. The problem is Zerg. Starcraft 2 has evolved to the point where Zerg basically starts the game with 3 bases, and can't be properly punished for playing so greedy except by another Zerg. Sure, Terran and Protoss can all-in every game against Zerg, but that's still a coinflip because creep allows Zerg to react easily, and what fun is a game where you have to use one strategy against one race all the time?
This is one part the mapmakers fault, one part unit/race design, and one part direct nerfs/buffs. At launch, the maps were much smaller, allowing Terran and Protoss to relatively easily and safely keep the exponential growth of Zerg at bay. But the community dictated that maps should be bigger so we can see macro games. Zerg became safer, but Terran and Protoss were still able to keep them honest. That didn't last long, the commonunity didn't want to see all-ins all the time, Zergs cried the hardest, and Blizzard listened.
Secondly, Infestors went from being never used, to being able to counter every unit in the game. Fungal Growth went from an 8 second duration and a fair amount of damage, to a 4 second duration with bonus to armored, and finally to a 4 second duration with a buffed damage increase against all units. It's also instant and unescapable unlike EMP which you can spread in reaction to, and Psionic Storm which you can move out of. Pretend for a minute that Psi Storm stunned whatever you hit for the duration its on the ground. Does that sound fair? Not really. Luckily it doesn't stun, and High Templar are slow as molasses and can't go invisible. Infestors on the other hand serve as a "catch all" unit against everything in the game. Sure you can build Mutalisks, but if they don't win you the game, some combination with Infestors is your follow up. Ghosts played a similar role, giving Terran the fire power they needed to deal with Zerg fast tech changes while Terran build appropriate counter units, but Ghosts were nerfed to the ground, leaving Terran with their horrible rate of production vs an ever changing Zerg composition backboned by the Infestor. This is I feel is the problem with Zerg and why ZvP and ZvT are mostly uninteresting, but for the sake of investigation, lets examine some other Zerg units.
I would like to address the Brood Lord. It is a flying siege unit that fires surrogate units to do damage, very much similar in thought to Carriers. However, Brood Lords don't take three and a half in game minutes to build, their surrogate units stay out and attack when you move them away from danger, (unlike the Carrier), their surrogate units benefit from ground melee upgrades, and they handily follow along Zergs linear tech tree, and the units you get from the Spire tech are all applicable, whereas Stargate tech is extremely situational.
Broodlings do an initial amount of damage based upon the level of air attack the Brood Lord is currently at. However, while they are on the ground, they benefit from Zergs current level of melee attack upgrades. The Zergling is the most produced Zerg unit in any match up that isn't ZvZ, so you are obviously getting upgrades for them. So what this means, is that your your +2 melee attack benefits Zerglings, Banelings, Broodlings, and if your Brood Lords fail, Ultralisks also benefit from it. Carriers and Interceptors on the other hand, only benefit from air attack upgrades with interceptors being recalled if you move the Carrier. I'm sure if Broodlings didn't benefit from double upgrades, didn't clutter ground space, and returned to the Brood Lord when you used them, people would laugh at the Brood Lord.
And finally I want to talk about Corruptors. Corruptors are very much in the same vein as Vikings. You build them to kill things in the air. And while Vikings do a good job with their wonderful kiting, Corruptors have a base of 2 armor, bonus vs massive units, an ability that causes them to do extra damage to targets of their choosing, and can morph into more Brood Lords. That's the same amount of armor a Carrier starts with, (for half the cost/build time) a self damage increasing ability that doesn't need to be researched, and the ability to turn into a useful unit when they are no longer needed. The only downside of a Corruptor is that it cannot attack ground units. It can't even be kited when paired with Fungal Growth. Corruptors are beating everything else in the air except maybe fully charged Void Rays. Corruptors are just too good for their cost.
This is way I feel Zerg is too good right now.
TL;DR - Being unable to punish Zergs for quick 3 hatches is bad. Fungal Growth does too much damage for a spell that can be chained into itself. It either chains, or does a lot of damage, but should not do both. Broodlings benefiting both ground and air attack ugrades is too powerful. The linearity of the Zerg tech tree only encourages this. Broodlings cluttering up ground space and not returning like Interceptors is too powerful. Corruptors shit on every other air unit, especially when paired with Fungal Growth.
On August 19 2012 12:52 Lavit2099 wrote: If would be nice to see these issues brought up by someone else. It seems that no matter what Blizzard does some posters are never happy. The sad part is it keeps coming back to "queens too strong, two hellions can't contain Zerg anymore."
Even without these Raven changes, MVP just destroyed almost the entirety of NesTea's air army with 3 HSM's. Terran are winning games off of Zerg. They're not dominating them like they used to, which I think is Blizzard's intended results.
Did I miss in the text any suggestions on changes except for nerfing queens? The Raven speed helps you zip in, drop your AT/PDD/HSM and gtfo from the fungals. I also think Blizzard is wanting Terran to use Ghosts late game against both Protoss and Zerg. It seems that after the snipe nerf Terrans have decided that Ghosts aren't worth using/making anymore because you can't spam-snipe and decimate an entire flock of Broodlords. I am curious, OP, your thoughts on possible fixes to this without nerfing Zerg or buffing Terran to an unbalanced level.
If 1 fungal lands you are chain fungalled. There is no "escape" if you get fungalled by a good player. Speed does not matter vs a stun spell.
Are you putting your entire army on one hotkey? You should be able to swing in with your Marines, send your Vikings in to attack the Corruptors before you send in the Ravens on their own group. 99% of Zergs will Fungal the first two groups and not wait just in case there might be a Raven sitting nearby. With the increased speed you could swing around from the rear better to pepper the Infestors with the HSM's. Not saying you'll get away without any losses but they'll get their job done before they die.
You might enjoy the game more if you can try to think of ways to adapt to the rules as compared to trying to fight against them. Blizzard will look at ladder and tournament results for any possible changes.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
Nerchio 2-0 over Puma. Nerchio 2-0 over ForGG. Moonglade 2-0 over Bomber. Vortix 3-0 over ForGG. Vortix 3-2 over supernova.
Foreign zergs were never known to take out Code S Korean Terrans en masse before 1.5...
Moonglade 2-0 over Bomber is actually ridiculous when you think about it. Moonglade is a solid Z player but he was never known to have the capabilities to take on top level foreign Terrans let alone a Code-S level Terran like Bomber who is macro oriented. And yet he 2-0'd Bomber quite easily.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
Nerchio 2-0 over Puma. Nerchio 2-0 over ForGG. Moonglade 2-0 over Bomber. Vortix 3-0 over ForGG. Vortix 3-2 over supernova.
Foreign zergs were never known to take out Code S Korean Terrans en masse before 1.5...
LOL so what zergs can never beat korean terrans is that what you are saying h ow about the Kas 2-0 Nestea how about the 82% winrate in tvz for taeja how about in the plast 3 tournys terrans have been doing really well what you said is stupid.
TvZ is Nestea's weakest match-up by far (he's lost to quite a few subpar Terran pros before) and he played that match against Kas really bad.
Nerchio 2-0 over Puma. Nerchio 2-0 over ForGG. Moonglade 2-0 over Bomber. Vortix 3-0 over ForGG. Vortix 3-2 over supernova.
Foreign zergs were never known to take out Code S Korean Terrans en masse before 1.5...
Lets go with this, Nerchio is a wild card and alot of koreans are not use to his play style on top of the fact that he is extremely talented. He only beat Puma / ForGG which is not as big of a feat as the upper class terrans such as Taeja, MKP, MVP and so forth in Korea. Moonglade is moonglade, just a beast. Again Vortix is a relative unknown I personally had never even seen him play till IEM and he beat ForGG he basically threw all 3 games with his mass CC builds ( 5 command centres before you land your third is ubsurd ). He took out supernova 3-2 that seems pretty close, however I did not see the games so I do not know what took place.
Using IEM as your soul basis of criteria is ignorant is basically the point. Especially when the sample size of Zerg skill to Terran skill already favours the Zergs.
Apparently Avilo didn't watch MVP making lategame Ravens just fine and absolutely crushing entire maxed zerg armies with 10 HSM's. I swear, [D] bullshit threads should get knocked down when they're created, they're just asking for Blizzard to make the game balanced at their level.
Nerchio 2-0 over Puma. Nerchio 2-0 over ForGG. Moonglade 2-0 over Bomber. Vortix 3-0 over ForGG. Vortix 3-2 over supernova.
Foreign zergs were never known to take out Code S Korean Terrans en masse before 1.5...
Lets go with this, Nerchio is a wild card and alot of koreans are not use to his play style on top of the fact that he is extremely talented. He only beat Puma / ForGG which is not as big of a feat as the upper class terrans such as Taeja, MKP, MVP and so forth in Korea. Moonglade is moonglade, just a beast. Again Vortix is a relative unknown I personally had never even seen him play till IEM and he beat ForGG he basically threw all 3 games with his mass CC builds ( 5 command centres before you land your third is ubsurd ). He took out supernova 3-2 that seems pretty close, however I did not see the games so I do not know what took place.
Using IEM as your soul basis of criteria is ignorant is basically the point. Especially when the sample size of Zerg skill to Terran skill already favours the Zergs.
He also didn't happen to mention that Supernova 2-1'd Vortix, ForGG is actually not a good Terran anymore and that Nerchio is insanely strong. What about MVP or Kas? etc etc etc, this is really biased information.
Very good post by Avilo I agree completely about queen and fungal parts.I think fungal growth makes game less interesting.A unit that shut downs other players micro abilities is a bad unit imo.I hope blizzard makes Sc2 a better game in Hots.
Nerchio 2-0 over Puma. Nerchio 2-0 over ForGG. Moonglade 2-0 over Bomber. Vortix 3-0 over ForGG. Vortix 3-2 over supernova.
Foreign zergs were never known to take out Code S Korean Terrans en masse before 1.5...
Lets go with this, Nerchio is a wild card and alot of koreans are not use to his play style on top of the fact that he is extremely talented. He only beat Puma / ForGG which is not as big of a feat as the upper class terrans such as Taeja, MKP, MVP and so forth in Korea. Moonglade is moonglade, just a beast. Again Vortix is a relative unknown I personally had never even seen him play till IEM and he beat ForGG he basically threw all 3 games with his mass CC builds ( 5 command centres before you land your third is ubsurd ). He took out supernova 3-2 that seems pretty close, however I did not see the games so I do not know what took place.
Using IEM as your soul basis of criteria is ignorant is basically the point. Especially when the sample size of Zerg skill to Terran skill already favours the Zergs.
Puma/ForGG are both extremely good players. And ForGG played super greedy because he had to; otherwise there's no keeping up with a Z player.
And Moonglade is good, but he is not a beast. Far from it. Certainly not capable of 2-0ing Bomber who used to have one of the strongest late game TvZ/TvP's out of all the Terran players.
QUOTE]On August 19 2012 13:09 NeMeSiS3 wrote: Apparently Avilo didn't watch MVP making lategame Ravens just fine and absolutely crushing entire maxed zerg armies with 10 HSM's. I swear, [D] bullshit threads should get knocked down when they're created, they're just asking for Blizzard to make the game balanced at their level.
Nerchio 2-0 over Puma. Nerchio 2-0 over ForGG. Moonglade 2-0 over Bomber. Vortix 3-0 over ForGG. Vortix 3-2 over supernova.
Foreign zergs were never known to take out Code S Korean Terrans en masse before 1.5...
Lets go with this, Nerchio is a wild card and alot of koreans are not use to his play style on top of the fact that he is extremely talented. He only beat Puma / ForGG which is not as big of a feat as the upper class terrans such as Taeja, MKP, MVP and so forth in Korea. Moonglade is moonglade, just a beast. Again Vortix is a relative unknown I personally had never even seen him play till IEM and he beat ForGG he basically threw all 3 games with his mass CC builds ( 5 command centres before you land your third is ubsurd ). He took out supernova 3-2 that seems pretty close, however I did not see the games so I do not know what took place.
Using IEM as your soul basis of criteria is ignorant is basically the point. Especially when the sample size of Zerg skill to Terran skill already favours the Zergs.
He also didn't happen to mention that Supernova 2-1'd Vortix, ForGG is actually not a good Terran anymore and that Nerchio is insanely strong. What about MVP or Kas? etc etc etc, this is really biased information.[/QUOTE]
MVP and Kas both beat Nestea in long drawn out matches where Nestea had ample time to win, and also could have won easily. He played both Metro maps terribly, and he is known to play stalemate situations/split map situations very poorly.
People say that TvZ is balanced only because they see REALLY high level Korean pros winning vs zerg (i.e Taeja, MVP, etc...). The reason they win is simply because they force the zerg to make mistakes by utilizing a multitasking ability that not everyone has. I watched SuperNova literally get fucked this morning because he was not able to force Vortix to make any mistakes. The result from that was Vortix ended up with a super army consisting of about 15 BroodLords, 10 infestors, banelings, and lings. The only way to win TvZ currently is just by being better mechanically.
Zerg is not overpowered by anymeans, its just that Terran has always been balanced based off of the Highest level of play from High level Popular Korean Terran players. Now that everything has been nerfed into the ground for terran, only the players with the best mechanics will win. I know that the only way I win games now is simply by having better mechanics and making less mistakes (in TvZ). Hell, there are games in which Terran players (even Code S koreans) have lost games to zerg players even though they clearly have better mechanics.
Mvp does the Ghost Snipe Trick... After only a few games, Snipe is nerfed. Then Blizzard does this Queen buff... now Terrans have trouble with Brood Lord/Corrupter/Infestor. Despite an immediate drop in winrates and persisting lowered winrates, Terrans are told to innovate and nothing changes for months.
Now, I'm not saying that's bad... Terrans should innovate, innovation is always good and Terran might find a way to balance TvZ once more. However, Zerg never really got a change to innovate... I want to see the Snipe nerf reverted, just to see how the metagame plays out. Maybe it'll be horribly imbalanced, maybe Zerg will find a way to overcome it. Either way, I'd just like to see how it develops because I'm sure that a lot of people felt like the nerf was too soon.
Nerchio 2-0 over Puma. Nerchio 2-0 over ForGG. Moonglade 2-0 over Bomber. Vortix 3-0 over ForGG. Vortix 3-2 over supernova.
Foreign zergs were never known to take out Code S Korean Terrans en masse before 1.5...
Lets go with this, Nerchio is a wild card and alot of koreans are not use to his play style on top of the fact that he is extremely talented. He only beat Puma / ForGG which is not as big of a feat as the upper class terrans such as Taeja, MKP, MVP and so forth in Korea. Moonglade is moonglade, just a beast. Again Vortix is a relative unknown I personally had never even seen him play till IEM and he beat ForGG he basically threw all 3 games with his mass CC builds ( 5 command centres before you land your third is ubsurd ). He took out supernova 3-2 that seems pretty close, however I did not see the games so I do not know what took place.
Using IEM as your soul basis of criteria is ignorant is basically the point. Especially when the sample size of Zerg skill to Terran skill already favours the Zergs.
Puma/ForGG are both extremely good players. And ForGG played super greedy because he had to; otherwise there's no keeping up with a Z player.
And Moonglade is good, but he is not a beast. Far from it.
Completely untrue, Puma has been slumping for the past year (along with EG) so it's no surprise Nerchio made quick work of him seeing as Nerchio has been shredding in 2012 and ForGG has always been bad, he's a Code A terran that fumbles hard at live events... What has he done in SC2 thus far?
Terrans don't "have to play greedy" hell MVP opened reactor hellion and won easy pzy in the quarter finals. This is just giving Terrans another reason to bitch.
BTW, since he asked in post, I am masters 1.1k pt Terran. The game's fine.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
Nerchio 2-0 over Puma. Nerchio 2-0 over ForGG. Moonglade 2-0 over Bomber. Vortix 3-0 over ForGG. Vortix 3-2 over supernova.
Foreign zergs were never known to take out Code S Korean Terrans en masse before 1.5...
You don't know Stephano, do you?
I think the Queen Range change went too far in buffing Zerg. The Queen used to be a good anti-air unit that could add a bit of ground firepower. Now in ZvT in particular she is a front line all purpose defensive unit. A walking Photon Cannon if you will.
At IPL 3 he only beat Boxer and TheSTC. Boxer had long fallen from code S and thestc hadn't made it in yet. Then he was beaten by Boxer at Orlando. Then he lost to Puma at Cologne 2011. In Blizzard cup he lost to MVP. At ESWC he did beat Marineking. But at Homestory cup 4 he was 2-0d by code a Sound, Then 2-0d by Marineking. At IPL 4 he beat bomber, but then lost 0-2 to Marineking and MMA. At MLG Winter championship, his run was ended by Polt, who has an about even record against.
Going by TLPD International: He is 47-47 against Korean Terrans and then if you put in his best of 1 vs MVP at Blizzard cup he's below 50%.
On August 19 2012 13:12 Entirety wrote: This is what I don't understand.
Mvp does the Ghost Snipe Trick... After only a few games, Snipe is nerfed. Then Blizzard does this Queen buff... now Terrans have trouble with Brood Lord/Corrupter/Infestor. Despite an immediate drop in winrates and persisting lowered winrates, Terrans are told to innovate and nothing changes for months.
Now, I'm not saying that's bad... Terrans should innovate, innovation is always good and Terran might find a way to balance TvZ once more. However, Zerg never really got a change to innovate... I want to see the Snipe nerf reverted, just to see how the metagame plays out. Maybe it'll be horribly imbalanced, maybe Zerg will find a way to overcome it. Either way, I'd just like to see how it develops because I'm sure that a lot of people felt like the nerf was too soon.
At Masters level and up, the only way for Terran to win is to force Z's to make a bad mistake by severely misplaying or overreacting. That's the only way. There is no magic pill, there is no build order wins (you have none; if you properly play a 11 minute +2 Blink, or a 2 base 1/1 Immortal all-in, the Z is really, really, really fucked unless he plays absolutely perfectly and hits every inject AND the P messes up on his FFs).
Terran not having any kind of soft/hard counter builds against Z is the reason why most people perceive T to be struggling, while Z has plenty of virtual auto-win builds against T depending on what the T does (all on reaction too).
Nerchio 2-0 over Puma. Nerchio 2-0 over ForGG. Moonglade 2-0 over Bomber. Vortix 3-0 over ForGG. Vortix 3-2 over supernova.
Foreign zergs were never known to take out Code S Korean Terrans en masse before 1.5...
Lets go with this, Nerchio is a wild card and alot of koreans are not use to his play style on top of the fact that he is extremely talented. He only beat Puma / ForGG which is not as big of a feat as the upper class terrans such as Taeja, MKP, MVP and so forth in Korea. Moonglade is moonglade, just a beast. Again Vortix is a relative unknown I personally had never even seen him play till IEM and he beat ForGG he basically threw all 3 games with his mass CC builds ( 5 command centres before you land your third is ubsurd ). He took out supernova 3-2 that seems pretty close, however I did not see the games so I do not know what took place.
Using IEM as your soul basis of criteria is ignorant is basically the point. Especially when the sample size of Zerg skill to Terran skill already favours the Zergs.
Puma/ForGG are both extremely good players. And ForGG played super greedy because he had to; otherwise there's no keeping up with a Z player.
And Moonglade is good, but he is not a beast. Far from it.
Completely untrue, Puma has been slumping for the past year (along with EG) so it's no surprise Nerchio made quick work of him seeing as Nerchio has been shredding in 2012 and ForGG has always been bad, he's a Code A terran that fumbles hard at live events... What has he done in SC2 thus far?
Terrans don't "have to play greedy" hell MVP opened reactor hellion and won easy pzy in the quarter finals. This is just giving Terrans another reason to bitch.
BTW, since he asked in post, I am masters 1.1k pt Terran. The game's fine.
MarineKing mostly won on timings where he simply outmicroed his opponent into the ground or his opponent simply didn't scout the timing attack properly. MKP if he faced a Korean caliber Z that played the match-up at about 85-95% efficiency would lose quite badly.
It's like people forget that a Z has to do really dumb shit for them to lose. Symbol lost to Reality in the WCS Korean tournament because he played the 2nd game absolutely stupid, getting completely out controlled and fumbling his macro badly, and he is supposed to be one of the top Z's in the game (along with DRG), and Reality is a complete nobody in the SC2 world up until that point. And really, I don't even think Reality is that good; he's just simply solid and punishes Z's for playing bad.
I haven't seen a single Z pro even play Z even close to maximum potential (except DRG); they just play solid most of the time and just stomp their way to victory. The game isn't fine by any stretch of the imagination at all. When a Z player is putting almost no effort and literally raping everyone, there's something wrong with the game. Even if there's nothing wrong "balance" wise, no one wants to watch a fucking 2 base all-in every fucking game.
Avilo is right, the Raven buff isn't going to do jack shit. They need to do something more drastic, but every Z on the planet thinks that the game is fine right now and T should just innovate. Innovate with what? The game has been figured out.PvZ has been literally the same timing attack for close to 8 months now. One of them, +2 Blink Stalkers off a Forge FE was utilized like WELL over a year ago.
@BanditX Correct me if I'm wrong but storm does twice as much damage as fungal growth does, and you think 1 unit should counter zerg's strongest ground and air unit? Also I heard that Point Defense Drones stop all corruptor attacks, again correct me if this information is incorrect.
All I'm reading is that infestors are way too strong but every terran player refuses to build the unit that counters them. Ghost! It works the same as it does with high templar. 2 snipes Infestor = Dead. 2-3 emps on target = no fungals. Problem Solved?
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
the game doesnt need a giant change doing small things like making ravens faster and creep slower is exactly what blizz needs to do
the game is so balanced right now that a careless nerf or buff just makes it more imbalanced they need small nerfs taht are carefully thought out and tested and watched religiously
people said the same thing about warp prisoms now warp prism harass is hugely hard to deal with as Zerg
You mean no careless unnecessary giant changes like giving the queen an extra two range in an already close to 50-50 balanced match-up...right?
As for blizzard going slow with changes, that is great, but changing raven speed does nothing to address any of the balance issues for the TvZ match-up that occurred after the queen buff patch.
The creep spread nerf I'm sure most players agree blizzard needs to do.
And I guess it was close to 50-50 when ghost were way more powerful? Tanks would hit at 50 on bio and we played on Steppes of War in GSL and ladder right? Plus speed reapers and faster raxx & bunkers, I guess you didnt complain back then... funny. Hilarious how people cant understand that it takes time, and yes the queen buff was necessary, harsh for the terran metagame clearly, but a simple helion build requiring a mass zergling production / roaches so the zerg could at least get out of his base, was too strong, and it has been too strong for way too long without people realizing it. You never asked yourself, why, out of all match ups in SC2, the helion opening was the most used? I mean, easily, 80% of TvZ were opened with helions. So yeah, you guys are lost because you lost a lot on practice and habits on a build that isnt that useful anymore, deal with it
I am a Top 8 Masters Terran from NA server. From my personal experiences and everything i have gathered. I highgly agree here with Avilo.
"Templar/infestors are able to become useful 100% right when they pop out in the form of either feedbacks, archons, fungal, or IT. Ravens are a gamble and incredible risk because of the time necessary to make them pay off with HSMs, and even in the case you do get an HSM, if your raven is fungalled you suddenly have a paper weight in terms of an investment. Then the ravens die, that's -200 gas for TErran and the infestors are able to burrow and get away. "
This really hits it on the head the balance of magic units within the races. And magic seems to always be the strongest in RTS.
Anyways to get to the point. Its not a fair game to put the skill it takes to play Terran so high and Zerg so low.
I greatly understand that its pretty impossible to balance a 3 raced game perfectly 50/50 each match up. But the TvZ match up is more then 70/30 imbalanced. As we can see Terran especially at the pro level have no shot vs even inferior zergs.
The Zerg race seriosuly feels like a Handicap. I believe its funny how other zergs will say "deal with it". Why not put the game in Terrans favor and say "good luck zergs! Deal with this!!".
I can somewhat agree that speed does not address the issue maybe fully, but that patch gives less time for zerg to react so after spreading ravens there is smaller chance that zerg will be able to fungle all ravens incoming but that's more skill baced than balance wise. Range of the spell could fix that. TvZ is fairly balanced still in my opinion, mech works exceptionally well as Mvp showed, plus use of ravens and vikings still works, just takes more brain and skill to use.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
the game doesnt need a giant change doing small things like making ravens faster and creep slower is exactly what blizz needs to do
the game is so balanced right now that a careless nerf or buff just makes it more imbalanced they need small nerfs taht are carefully thought out and tested and watched religiously
people said the same thing about warp prisoms now warp prism harass is hugely hard to deal with as Zerg
You mean no careless unnecessary giant changes like giving the queen an extra two range in an already close to 50-50 balanced match-up...right?
As for blizzard going slow with changes, that is great, but changing raven speed does nothing to address any of the balance issues for the TvZ match-up that occurred after the queen buff patch.
The creep spread nerf I'm sure most players agree blizzard needs to do.
And I guess it was close to 50-50 when ghost were way more powerful? Tanks would hit at 50 on bio and we played on Steppes of War in GSL and ladder right? Plus speed reapers and faster raxx & bunkers, I guess you didnt complain back then... funny. Hilarious how people cant understand that it takes time, and yes the queen buff was necessary, harsh for the terran metagame clearly, but a simple helion build requiring a mass zergling production / roaches so the zerg could at least get out of his base, was too strong, and it has been too strong for way too long without people realizing it. You never asked yourself, why, out of all match ups in SC2, the helion opening was the most used? I mean, easily, 80% of TvZ were opened with helions. So yeah, you guys are lost because you lost a lot on practice and habits on a build that isnt that useful anymore, deal with it
"Game isn't broken, I just have free scouting, free defense, and complete map control with exponential economic growth."
This is almost as bad as Terran players saying the game was fine before. It wasn't; what needed to change was the maps. Blizzard shouldn't have touched the game at all, but they did, and people began to change maps also on top of that which has resulted in the bullshit game we have today.
And after the Ghost nerf, the game was 50/50. Even when Ghosts were being utilized in a HANDFUL of games, the match-up wasn't anywhere near broken. It was like 55/45 IIRC.
On August 19 2012 13:20 Ouija wrote: @BanditX Correct me if I'm wrong but storm does twice as much damage as fungal growth does, and you think 1 unit should counter zerg's strongest ground and air unit? Also I heard that Point Defense Drones stop all corruptor attacks, again correct me if this information is incorrect.
All I'm reading is that infestors are way too strong but every terran player refuses to build the unit that counters them. Ghost! It works the same as it does with high templar. 2 snipes Infestor = Dead. 2-3 emps on target = no fungals. Problem Solved?
You don't understand his point, Fungal growth by itself does an immense amount of damage and you can't "dodge" that dmg, even if you could move it is 100% dmg spell where as Storm can be dodged. In fact, storm can wield upwards of 100% damage to 10% dmg, that is why it does so much whereas fungal not only does 100% dmg each time it hits, it also removes all micro from your opponents hands and allows that opponent to continue "chaining" the effect. Not saying I agree or disagree, but you obviously had an issue understanding what he meant.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
Nerchio 2-0 over Puma. Nerchio 2-0 over ForGG. Moonglade 2-0 over Bomber. Vortix 3-0 over ForGG. Vortix 3-2 over supernova.
Foreign zergs were never known to take out Code S Korean Terrans en masse before 1.5...
Vortix lost in TSL 4 recently to MVPKeen, he also lost to Supernova in that same fucking tourney 2-1 in group stages. Every game against supernova was really tense and could of gone either way. Stop fucking talking about Vortix. He's really fucking good but he's not the reason ZvT is imbalanced or anything and the fact we think he's capable of occasionally beating Korean terrans on occasion somehow means ZvT is imbalanced doesn't make it true at all. It's actually just shitting on a really really really fucking good zerg's achievement. If he wins imba, if he loses then all is well. Fucking atrocious.
Ditto Nerchio too.
As for the OP...
1) Raven's are... difficult to use and I wouldn't personally mind a buff to them but nothing huge. The speed buff doesn't seem particularly relevant towards anything but even so sometimes ravens work and sometimes they don't and the trick is to fully figure out why and how we can use ravens most effectively. I don't think this is a fully explored avenue of Terran theory.
2) Queen range is healthy for the matchup and reversing it would fuck the TvZ metagame in an unhealthy way. Keep queens as is, change a different part. I think reversing a change or just straight up nerfing/removing something as an option is a bad way to change starcraft. Players should be encouraged to try new shiny things to fix problems, not have their shiny new thing just taken away (admittedly some exceptions apply, particularly those concerning certain High Templar's neckwear...)
3) Fungal growth is a very severe spell but it is possible to play around it with vikings. If you spread your vikings out across multiple screen lengths (which KR terrans do quite a bit, I remember seeing Gumiho do it most recently against one of hte SlayerS zergs in GSTL finals) then they cannot be fungalled that efficiently. Yeah infestors are really good. Wouldn't mind a nerf tbh but it's probably not going to happen. Combined with PDD vikings can actually dominate the air war against corrupters and if Zerg don't have air control they have trouble keeping broodlords alive.
Just how I see's it currently, a random NA GM's Terran.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
the game doesnt need a giant change doing small things like making ravens faster and creep slower is exactly what blizz needs to do
the game is so balanced right now that a careless nerf or buff just makes it more imbalanced they need small nerfs taht are carefully thought out and tested and watched religiously
people said the same thing about warp prisoms now warp prism harass is hugely hard to deal with as Zerg
You mean no careless unnecessary giant changes like giving the queen an extra two range in an already close to 50-50 balanced match-up...right?
As for blizzard going slow with changes, that is great, but changing raven speed does nothing to address any of the balance issues for the TvZ match-up that occurred after the queen buff patch.
The creep spread nerf I'm sure most players agree blizzard needs to do.
And I guess it was close to 50-50 when ghost were way more powerful? Tanks would hit at 50 on bio and we played on Steppes of War in GSL and ladder right? Plus speed reapers and faster raxx & bunkers, I guess you didnt complain back then... funny. Hilarious how people cant understand that it takes time, and yes the queen buff was necessary, harsh for the terran metagame clearly, but a simple helion build requiring a mass zergling production / roaches so the zerg could at least get out of his base, was too strong, and it has been too strong for way too long without people realizing it. You never asked yourself, why, out of all match ups in SC2, the helion opening was the most used? I mean, easily, 80% of TvZ were opened with helions. So yeah, you guys are lost because you lost a lot on practice and habits on a build that isnt that useful anymore, deal with it
The thing is, there is no valid opening now that can stop a zerg from droning. You cant open banshees because they are hard countered by these absurd mass queen builds, you cant open hellions because of mass queens (the range REALLY makes them a little silly), you cant do a bio push because of mass queens AND lings AND banelings... so what do you want us to do? Rush ravens with their new "speed buff" and drop a ton of auto-turrets? Once we drop the turrets, then what? Watch our base get ravaged by lings, blings, and roaches?
Avilo gets some flak but this is a pretty good write-up. Though to me it's clear the Raven buff isn't intended to fix any current problems. Blizzard wants to give the community a lot of time to try and figure things out. The Raven buff is just intended to be a small nudge before Blizzard decides whether there actually is a problem or not.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
the game doesnt need a giant change doing small things like making ravens faster and creep slower is exactly what blizz needs to do
the game is so balanced right now that a careless nerf or buff just makes it more imbalanced they need small nerfs taht are carefully thought out and tested and watched religiously
people said the same thing about warp prisoms now warp prism harass is hugely hard to deal with as Zerg
You mean no careless unnecessary giant changes like giving the queen an extra two range in an already close to 50-50 balanced match-up...right?
As for blizzard going slow with changes, that is great, but changing raven speed does nothing to address any of the balance issues for the TvZ match-up that occurred after the queen buff patch.
The creep spread nerf I'm sure most players agree blizzard needs to do.
And I guess it was close to 50-50 when ghost were way more powerful?
Nerchio 2-0 over Puma. Nerchio 2-0 over ForGG. Moonglade 2-0 over Bomber. Vortix 3-0 over ForGG. Vortix 3-2 over supernova.
Foreign zergs were never known to take out Code S Korean Terrans en masse before 1.5...
Lets go with this, Nerchio is a wild card and alot of koreans are not use to his play style on top of the fact that he is extremely talented. He only beat Puma / ForGG which is not as big of a feat as the upper class terrans such as Taeja, MKP, MVP and so forth in Korea. Moonglade is moonglade, just a beast. Again Vortix is a relative unknown I personally had never even seen him play till IEM and he beat ForGG he basically threw all 3 games with his mass CC builds ( 5 command centres before you land your third is ubsurd ). He took out supernova 3-2 that seems pretty close, however I did not see the games so I do not know what took place.
Using IEM as your soul basis of criteria is ignorant is basically the point. Especially when the sample size of Zerg skill to Terran skill already favours the Zergs.
Puma/ForGG are both extremely good players. And ForGG played super greedy because he had to; otherwise there's no keeping up with a Z player.
And Moonglade is good, but he is not a beast. Far from it.
Completely untrue, Puma has been slumping for the past year (along with EG) so it's no surprise Nerchio made quick work of him seeing as Nerchio has been shredding in 2012 and ForGG has always been bad, he's a Code A terran that fumbles hard at live events... What has he done in SC2 thus far?
Terrans don't "have to play greedy" hell MVP opened reactor hellion and won easy pzy in the quarter finals. This is just giving Terrans another reason to bitch.
BTW, since he asked in post, I am masters 1.1k pt Terran. The game's fine.
i'm also 1.1k terran. game isn't fine, zerg is ridiculous and you need to do a lot of blind metagaming to win with the current queens, plus get lucky with overdroning.
Nerchio 2-0 over Puma. Nerchio 2-0 over ForGG. Moonglade 2-0 over Bomber. Vortix 3-0 over ForGG. Vortix 3-2 over supernova.
Foreign zergs were never known to take out Code S Korean Terrans en masse before 1.5...
Lets go with this, Nerchio is a wild card and alot of koreans are not use to his play style on top of the fact that he is extremely talented. He only beat Puma / ForGG which is not as big of a feat as the upper class terrans such as Taeja, MKP, MVP and so forth in Korea. Moonglade is moonglade, just a beast. Again Vortix is a relative unknown I personally had never even seen him play till IEM and he beat ForGG he basically threw all 3 games with his mass CC builds ( 5 command centres before you land your third is ubsurd ). He took out supernova 3-2 that seems pretty close, however I did not see the games so I do not know what took place.
Using IEM as your soul basis of criteria is ignorant is basically the point. Especially when the sample size of Zerg skill to Terran skill already favours the Zergs.
Puma/ForGG are both extremely good players. And ForGG played super greedy because he had to; otherwise there's no keeping up with a Z player.
And Moonglade is good, but he is not a beast. Far from it.
Completely untrue, Puma has been slumping for the past year (along with EG) so it's no surprise Nerchio made quick work of him seeing as Nerchio has been shredding in 2012 and ForGG has always been bad, he's a Code A terran that fumbles hard at live events... What has he done in SC2 thus far?
Terrans don't "have to play greedy" hell MVP opened reactor hellion and won easy pzy in the quarter finals. This is just giving Terrans another reason to bitch.
BTW, since he asked in post, I am masters 1.1k pt Terran. The game's fine.
i'm also 1.1k terran. game isn't fine, zerg is ridiculous and you need to do a lot of blind metagaming to win with the current queens, plus get lucky with overdroning.
^^ and hope that the zerg is bad at creep spread as well (which isnt too hard with the 2-4 extra queens they make no anyway...). I agree with you.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
the game doesnt need a giant change doing small things like making ravens faster and creep slower is exactly what blizz needs to do
the game is so balanced right now that a careless nerf or buff just makes it more imbalanced they need small nerfs taht are carefully thought out and tested and watched religiously
people said the same thing about warp prisoms now warp prism harass is hugely hard to deal with as Zerg
You mean no careless unnecessary giant changes like giving the queen an extra two range in an already close to 50-50 balanced match-up...right?
As for blizzard going slow with changes, that is great, but changing raven speed does nothing to address any of the balance issues for the TvZ match-up that occurred after the queen buff patch.
The creep spread nerf I'm sure most players agree blizzard needs to do.
And I guess it was close to 50-50 when ghost were way more powerful? Tanks would hit at 50 on bio and we played on Steppes of War in GSL and ladder right? Plus speed reapers and faster raxx & bunkers, I guess you didnt complain back then... funny. Hilarious how people cant understand that it takes time, and yes the queen buff was necessary, harsh for the terran metagame clearly, but a simple helion build requiring a mass zergling production / roaches so the zerg could at least get out of his base, was too strong, and it has been too strong for way too long without people realizing it. You never asked yourself, why, out of all match ups in SC2, the helion opening was the most used? I mean, easily, 80% of TvZ were opened with helions. So yeah, you guys are lost because you lost a lot on practice and habits on a build that isnt that useful anymore, deal with it
The thing is, there is no valid opening now that can stop a zerg from droning. You cant open banshees because they are hard countered by these absurd mass queen builds, you cant open hellions because of mass queens (the range REALLY makes them a little silly), you cant do a bio push because of mass queens AND lings AND banelings... so what do you want us to do? Rush ravens with their new "speed buff" and drop a ton of auto-turrets? Once we drop the turrets, then what? Watch our base get ravaged by lings, blings, and roaches?
I see two choices. Macro up like a beast, getting 3 CC's before Fact/Port (if they're mass droning they can't do that and attack at the same time). Or plan a two base all-in with either Marine/Tank or Marauder/Hellion.
On August 19 2012 13:09 NeMeSiS3 wrote: Apparently Avilo didn't watch MVP making lategame Ravens just fine and absolutely crushing entire maxed zerg armies with 10 HSM's. I swear, [D] bullshit threads should get knocked down when they're created, they're just asking for Blizzard to make the game balanced at their level.
Nerchio 2-0 over Puma. Nerchio 2-0 over ForGG. Moonglade 2-0 over Bomber. Vortix 3-0 over ForGG. Vortix 3-2 over supernova.
Foreign zergs were never known to take out Code S Korean Terrans en masse before 1.5...
Lets go with this, Nerchio is a wild card and alot of koreans are not use to his play style on top of the fact that he is extremely talented. He only beat Puma / ForGG which is not as big of a feat as the upper class terrans such as Taeja, MKP, MVP and so forth in Korea. Moonglade is moonglade, just a beast. Again Vortix is a relative unknown I personally had never even seen him play till IEM and he beat ForGG he basically threw all 3 games with his mass CC builds ( 5 command centres before you land your third is ubsurd ). He took out supernova 3-2 that seems pretty close, however I did not see the games so I do not know what took place.
Using IEM as your soul basis of criteria is ignorant is basically the point. Especially when the sample size of Zerg skill to Terran skill already favours the Zergs.
He also didn't happen to mention that Supernova 2-1'd Vortix, ForGG is actually not a good Terran anymore and that Nerchio is insanely strong. What about MVP or Kas? etc etc etc, this is really biased information.
The problem with ravens is that the only scenario where you can get HSMs off is when the zerg flubs his control and doesnt fungal them. In most of the IEM games ive been seeing terrans dont get a single HSM off because the ravens get chain fungaled.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
the game doesnt need a giant change doing small things like making ravens faster and creep slower is exactly what blizz needs to do
the game is so balanced right now that a careless nerf or buff just makes it more imbalanced they need small nerfs taht are carefully thought out and tested and watched religiously
people said the same thing about warp prisoms now warp prism harass is hugely hard to deal with as Zerg
You mean no careless unnecessary giant changes like giving the queen an extra two range in an already close to 50-50 balanced match-up...right?
As for blizzard going slow with changes, that is great, but changing raven speed does nothing to address any of the balance issues for the TvZ match-up that occurred after the queen buff patch.
The creep spread nerf I'm sure most players agree blizzard needs to do.
And I guess it was close to 50-50 when ghost were way more powerful? Tanks would hit at 50 on bio and we played on Steppes of War in GSL and ladder right? Plus speed reapers and faster raxx & bunkers, I guess you didnt complain back then... funny. Hilarious how people cant understand that it takes time, and yes the queen buff was necessary, harsh for the terran metagame clearly, but a simple helion build requiring a mass zergling production / roaches so the zerg could at least get out of his base, was too strong, and it has been too strong for way too long without people realizing it. You never asked yourself, why, out of all match ups in SC2, the helion opening was the most used? I mean, easily, 80% of TvZ were opened with helions. So yeah, you guys are lost because you lost a lot on practice and habits on a build that isnt that useful anymore, deal with it
I find it bizarre that people believe ghosts were some tyrannical unit in the history of TvZ when they were only used for a tiny window. You'd be laughed at for suggesting it (I think IdrA was multiple times directly after the Infestor buff that he thought was a nerf). The history of TvZ is the history of early aggression being tested against defensive skills, not super late game ghost armies beating maxed brood lords. At some point they just tilted it farther in the direction of the defender than many Ts are comfortable with, and I agree with them.
When one race has a superior late game, maps give three bases, and they have good scouting and defense against harassment, it's not hard to see why some Ts feel annoyed. It's exactly how Zs felt against mass reapers or 2rax or even that hellion build, all of which got nerfed fairly quickly, and Ts feel annoyed that Blizzard doesn't seem to be doing anything as substantial as the queen range buff was. Of course, Blizzard doesn't really care that much because they'd rather roll out HotS.
Edit: I mean think of it this way. TvZ used to be the most exciting matchup to watch as a random player. When you sit down to watch a TvZ today, is it as interesting as a year ago? Not so much.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
the game doesnt need a giant change doing small things like making ravens faster and creep slower is exactly what blizz needs to do
the game is so balanced right now that a careless nerf or buff just makes it more imbalanced they need small nerfs taht are carefully thought out and tested and watched religiously
people said the same thing about warp prisoms now warp prism harass is hugely hard to deal with as Zerg
You mean no careless unnecessary giant changes like giving the queen an extra two range in an already close to 50-50 balanced match-up...right?
As for blizzard going slow with changes, that is great, but changing raven speed does nothing to address any of the balance issues for the TvZ match-up that occurred after the queen buff patch.
The creep spread nerf I'm sure most players agree blizzard needs to do.
And I guess it was close to 50-50 when ghost were way more powerful? Tanks would hit at 50 on bio and we played on Steppes of War in GSL and ladder right? Plus speed reapers and faster raxx & bunkers, I guess you didnt complain back then... funny. Hilarious how people cant understand that it takes time, and yes the queen buff was necessary, harsh for the terran metagame clearly, but a simple helion build requiring a mass zergling production / roaches so the zerg could at least get out of his base, was too strong, and it has been too strong for way too long without people realizing it. You never asked yourself, why, out of all match ups in SC2, the helion opening was the most used? I mean, easily, 80% of TvZ were opened with helions. So yeah, you guys are lost because you lost a lot on practice and habits on a build that isnt that useful anymore, deal with it
The thing is, there is no valid opening now that can stop a zerg from droning. You cant open banshees because they are hard countered by these absurd mass queen builds, you cant open hellions because of mass queens (the range REALLY makes them a little silly), you cant do a bio push because of mass queens AND lings AND banelings... so what do you want us to do? Rush ravens with their new "speed buff" and drop a ton of auto-turrets? Once we drop the turrets, then what? Watch our base get ravaged by lings, blings, and roaches?
I see two choices. Macro up like a beast, getting 3 CC's before Fact/Port (if they're mass droning they can't do that and attack at the same time). Or plan a two base all-in with either Marine/Tank or Marauder/Hellion.
Those arent options as they are easily scoutable and the amount of punishment that you can recieve for those being scouted are not worth it anymore. Overlords are fast enough now where they can poke in and out or even just suicide in and get all the info needed for zerg to defend it. Plus by the time we move across the battlefield cleaning up the creep, there will already be an answer to whatever all in terrans decide to do.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
the game doesnt need a giant change doing small things like making ravens faster and creep slower is exactly what blizz needs to do
the game is so balanced right now that a careless nerf or buff just makes it more imbalanced they need small nerfs taht are carefully thought out and tested and watched religiously
people said the same thing about warp prisoms now warp prism harass is hugely hard to deal with as Zerg
You mean no careless unnecessary giant changes like giving the queen an extra two range in an already close to 50-50 balanced match-up...right?
As for blizzard going slow with changes, that is great, but changing raven speed does nothing to address any of the balance issues for the TvZ match-up that occurred after the queen buff patch.
The creep spread nerf I'm sure most players agree blizzard needs to do.
And I guess it was close to 50-50 when ghost were way more powerful? Tanks would hit at 50 on bio and we played on Steppes of War in GSL and ladder right? Plus speed reapers and faster raxx & bunkers, I guess you didnt complain back then... funny. Hilarious how people cant understand that it takes time, and yes the queen buff was necessary, harsh for the terran metagame clearly, but a simple helion build requiring a mass zergling production / roaches so the zerg could at least get out of his base, was too strong, and it has been too strong for way too long without people realizing it. You never asked yourself, why, out of all match ups in SC2, the helion opening was the most used? I mean, easily, 80% of TvZ were opened with helions. So yeah, you guys are lost because you lost a lot on practice and habits on a build that isnt that useful anymore, deal with it
I find it bizarre that people believe ghosts were some tyrannical unit in the history of TvZ when they were only used for a tiny window. You'd be laughed at for suggesting it (I think IdrA was multiple times directly after the Infestor buff that he thought was a nerf). The history of TvZ is the history of early aggression being tested against defensive skills, not super late game ghost armies beating maxed brood lords. At some point they just tilted it farther in the direction of the defender than many Ts are comfortable with, and I agree with them.
When one race has a superior late game, maps give three bases, and they have good scouting and defense against harassment, it's not hard to see why some Ts feel annoyed. It's exactly how Zs felt against mass reapers or 2rax or even that hellion build, all of which got nerfed fairly quickly, and Ts feel annoyed that Blizzard doesn't seem to be doing anything as substantial as the queen range buff was. Of course, Blizzard doesn't really care that much because they'd rather roll out HotS.
On August 19 2012 13:27 ZAiNs wrote: it's clear the Raven buff isn't intended to fix any current problems. Blizzard wants to give the community a lot of time to try and figure things out. The Raven buff is just intended to be a small nudge before Blizzard decides whether there actually is a problem or not.
On August 19 2012 13:27 ZAiNs wrote: Avilo gets some flak but this is a pretty good write-up. Though to me it's clear the Raven buff isn't intended to fix any current problems. Blizzard wants to give the community a lot of time to try and figure things out. The Raven buff is just intended to be a small nudge before Blizzard decides whether there actually is a problem or not.
I agree with your points and im a zerg player. I especially like how you discuss the overlord change as being necessary. It's hard to say how the game will turn out though because sc2 is still only 1/3 complete. It would be interesting to see some sort of upgrade involving raven energy.
Yes well I guess there is no end to Terran whining, unless of course they get back the OP status they held for two years then everything will be okay when all they have to do is faceroll on their keyboard to win just like they used to. How about you guys just attempt to figure out new strategies that will work with the current meta game rather then just the same old strats that are now bum like ohhhh Marine Tank cause just like the other two races you actually have to stay current with the meta or you fall behind which is the case. Terran didn't have to change for two fucking years cause they were so clearly the most powerful of the three races far and away it wasn't even close but now cause they've been brought down to a mortal level like Zerg and Protoss they have to actually start formulating new strategies, not something Terrans had to do before hence why they refuse to now.
On August 19 2012 13:27 ZAiNs wrote: Avilo gets some flak but this is a pretty good write-up. Though to me it's clear the Raven buff isn't intended to fix any current problems. Blizzard wants to give the community a lot of time to try and figure things out. The Raven buff is just intended to be a small nudge before Blizzard decides whether there actually is a problem or not.
pretty much agree here. I think (only diamond league here so take it with a grain of salt) that maybe reducing the energy cost for hsm a little would be a big help. Or make the corvid reactor add just a little bit more starting energy. But I agree that any changes like that outta be down the road.
IdrA said something like this (Sotg episode 37, at 45"45'): ~zerg either need better scouting OR a build that can defend most of the aggressions thrown at the zergs. Blizzard gave both of those to zerg wich is in my opinion too much. The queen change allow a state of 15 min NR ( as a spectator standpoints it's quite boring ).
Another thing to put in the balance is the maps. They allow almost a guaranteed third base with few attack points and easely defend.
Also using the Korean win ratio doesn't work because koreans have lots of time to prepare for each opponent.
In my opinion the game should be balanced in priority for Progaming level but also a little bit bellow to keep people playing or at least not make everybody wich they played zerg.
On August 19 2012 14:10 Catatonic wrote: Yes well I guess there is no end to Terran whining, unless of course they get back the OP status they held for two years then everything will be okay when all they have to do is faceroll on their keyboard to win just like they used to. How about you guys just attempt to figure out new strategies that will work with the current meta game rather then just the same old strats that are now bum like ohhhh Marine Tank cause just like the other two races you actually have to stay current with the meta or you fall behind which is the case. Terran didn't have to change for two fucking years cause they were so clearly the most powerful of the three races far and away it wasn't even close but now cause they've been brought down to a mortal level like Zerg and Protoss they have to actually start formulating new strategies, not something Terrans had to do before hence why they refuse to now.
Terrans actually did come up with new strategies. But Zergs didn't want to adapt and so each one was nerfed within a month of it being a "problem".
On August 19 2012 14:10 Catatonic wrote: Yes well I guess there is no end to Terran whining, unless of course they get back the OP status they held for two years then everything will be okay when all they have to do is faceroll on their keyboard to win just like they used to. How about you guys just attempt to figure out new strategies that will work with the current meta game rather then just the same old strats that are now bum like ohhhh Marine Tank cause just like the other two races you actually have to stay current with the meta or you fall behind which is the case. Terran didn't have to change for two fucking years cause they were so clearly the most powerful of the three races far and away it wasn't even close but now cause they've been brought down to a mortal level like Zerg and Protoss they have to actually start formulating new strategies, not something Terrans had to do before hence why they refuse to now.
You, my friend, are quite ignorant. As I said in one of my previous posts, Terrans (High Level Terrans) in most cases have better overall mechanics than most of the other races considering how everything works with terran. No one uses marine tank no more because no one is stupid. Once zerg player got off their whinny asses and started using infestors, then terran players had to either get a ton of tanks (which was hard countered by broodlords which were a common follow up), or just not use tanks at all and go pure bio (which is terrible to use unless you have amazing macro and micro).
I agree, while buffing raven speed may help, it is not addressing the bigger issues here.
Also I'll leave a little comment on how I don't exactly like the design of being able to chain fungals together, it's just something I feel is "too extreme", if you will (though there are other things, intense to watch or not, like NP'ing a mothership and etc.)
But anyways, I think reverting the old old nerf of Seeker Missile from range 9 to 6 may help the problem. Actually, I'm not sure why they nerfed the range actually. Did they nerf it overall because, since the game did not develop much yet (since it was so long ago), so instead of nerfing something specific they nerfed both the range and the splash? Or did they nerf it because they did not like the idea of Infestors not being able to counter Ravens?
Is it perhaps time that they may need to revert what could be decided to be a mistake of a change? I think so. (Just found out, NP used to be range 7 from beta, this was changed to 9 as we know and then reverted again. So there's quite a lot of reverting).
(Also interesting to note I think, is that the seeker missile was nerfed back when you could still cast abilities while being fungal'd. Did they perhaps simply not spend enough time thinking about how this change would effect the Infestor vs Raven dynamic when they patched fungal to disallow you from using abilities?)
Another thing: If you look at the patch changes for the seeker missile, when the range and radius were nerfed, it was buffed in one way -- it didn't need Fusion Core anymore. So obviously, they were probably thinking "Ok, you need to spend way too much money/time to make Ravens worth it and usable at their full power, so let's scale down the power of the seeker missile, but to compensate, you don't need so much tech anymore). Perhaps they may decide that they need to changing the scaling (AKA, not just change Raven speed).
On August 19 2012 14:10 Catatonic wrote: Yes well I guess there is no end to Terran whining, unless of course they get back the OP status they held for two years then everything will be okay when all they have to do is faceroll on their keyboard to win just like they used to. How about you guys just attempt to figure out new strategies that will work with the current meta game rather then just the same old strats that are now bum like ohhhh Marine Tank cause just like the other two races you actually have to stay current with the meta or you fall behind which is the case. Terran didn't have to change for two fucking years cause they were so clearly the most powerful of the three races far and away it wasn't even close but now cause they've been brought down to a mortal level like Zerg and Protoss they have to actually start formulating new strategies, not something Terrans had to do before hence why they refuse to now.
You, my friend, are quite ignorant. As I said in one of my previous posts, Terrans (High Level Terrans) in most cases have better overall mechanics than most of the other races considering how everything works with terran. No one uses marine tank no more because no one is stupid. Once zerg player got off their whinny asses and started using infestors, then terran players had to either get a ton of tanks (which was hard countered by broodlords which were a common follow up), or just not use tanks at all and go pure bio (which is terrible to use unless you have amazing macro and micro).
Marine tank medivac is the best unit combination against a zerg who doesn't have hive tech units. Maybe add a whiff of thors vs muta (particularly if the flock is getting huge) and maybe some marauders vs infestor tech to lead the charge and pre-empt Ultralisks but the main thing is Marine tank medivac > Zerg pre-hive. If he has no mutalisks you can drop effectively. If he has no creep then tanks are going to hurt. If he has no banelings then marines will make a horrible mess of everything. If he has a good spread of tanks in range of a hatchery then zerg are gonna have a really fun time removing that army.
Once they start adding hive tech the composition looks a bit shitty but until then it's the strongest thing Terran can do in the mu imo.
On August 19 2012 14:24 iaguz wrote: Marine tank medivac is the best unit combination against a zerg who doesn't have hive tech units. Maybe add a whiff of thors vs muta (particularly if the flock is getting huge) and maybe some marauders vs infestor tech to lead the charge and pre-empt Ultralisks but the main thing is Marine tank medivac > Zerg pre-hive. If he has no mutalisks you can drop effectively. If he has no creep then tanks are going to hurt. If he has no banelings then marines will make a horrible mess of everything. If he has a good spread of tanks in range of a hatchery then zerg are gonna have a really fun time removing that army.
Once they start adding hive tech the composition looks a bit shitty but until then it's the strongest thing Terran can do in the mu imo.
The problem is that there is only 1 possible timing attack with it that hits in like a 1-2 minute window before hive units are out. Oh and the creep is halfway across the map so your push gets very slowed down.
Your push only has to reach his 4th. If you can kill his 4th and get a 4th going yourself simultaneously, it does make late game a lot easier because you can transition to counter whatever he is doing and without a 4th he can't do a lot of it. This is what Taeja does every TvZ and it does tend to work out quite nicely for him.
If he has creeped up that far then you've fucked something up.
Decent writeup, i dont understand why people didnt actually read it before giving him shit. Part of the reason is the queen range as stated, yes, but creep change does not address the real problem in the form of the recede speed for creep. One slip up and forgetting to check an expansion for roughly 30 seconds results in it being untakeable for a in game minute, for only the investment of one overlord. And even with a maxed army there's absolutely nothing you can do about him slowing your economy down while keeping his up. What i dont understand is the amount of unforgiving demand of good play from the terran side, (I.E not being able to do anything about creep blocking once you forget to check for the overlord one time, fungal hitting your units and absolutely nothing you can do about chain fungal/baneling hits, micro missteps resulting in entire army losses) while most of the zerg's(even the some of the pro players) are free to put everything in one control group(including infestors) and move it all forward.
On August 19 2012 14:10 Catatonic wrote: Yes well I guess there is no end to Terran whining, unless of course they get back the OP status they held for two years then everything will be okay when all they have to do is faceroll on their keyboard to win just like they used to. How about you guys just attempt to figure out new strategies that will work with the current meta game rather then just the same old strats that are now bum like ohhhh Marine Tank cause just like the other two races you actually have to stay current with the meta or you fall behind which is the case. Terran didn't have to change for two fucking years cause they were so clearly the most powerful of the three races far and away it wasn't even close but now cause they've been brought down to a mortal level like Zerg and Protoss they have to actually start formulating new strategies, not something Terrans had to do before hence why they refuse to now.
You, my friend, are quite ignorant. As I said in one of my previous posts, Terrans (High Level Terrans) in most cases have better overall mechanics than most of the other races considering how everything works with terran. No one uses marine tank no more because no one is stupid. Once zerg player got off their whinny asses and started using infestors, then terran players had to either get a ton of tanks (which was hard countered by broodlords which were a common follow up), or just not use tanks at all and go pure bio (which is terrible to use unless you have amazing macro and micro).
Marine tank medivac is the best unit combination against a zerg who doesn't have hive tech units. Maybe add a whiff of thors vs muta (particularly if the flock is getting huge) and maybe some marauders vs infestor tech to lead the charge and pre-empt Ultralisks but the main thing is Marine tank medivac > Zerg pre-hive. If he has no mutalisks you can drop effectively. If he has no creep then tanks are going to hurt. If he has no banelings then marines will make a horrible mess of everything. If he has a good spread of tanks in range of a hatchery then zerg are gonna have a really fun time removing that army.
Once they start adding hive tech the composition looks a bit shitty but until then it's the strongest thing Terran can do in the mu imo.
You are right about the Marine-Tank before hive thing but its like, if you are going vs muta-ling-bling, marine tank is sooooooo good. If you're going against mass ling infestor and you go marine tank, creep will be so far across the map that by the time you get out of your base and start killing it, you will be facing 2/2 lings and about 8-10 infestors who dont care much for armor. Plus if the zerg is already on 3+ bases, they can afford to trade x amount of lings for big portions of you army because when hive tech comes, you will have y amount of units which will probably be less than the x amount that you already lost to the low for the low cost of about 30-40 supply of lings (which is nothing btw to a zerg thats on 3 or more bases).
On August 19 2012 14:32 DougJDempsey wrote: Decent writeup, i dont understand why people didnt actually read it before giving him shit. Part of the reason is the queen range as stated, yes, but creep change does not address the real problem in the form of the recede speed for creep. One slip up and forgetting to check an expansion for roughly 30 seconds results in it being untakeable for a in game minute, for only the investment of one overlord. And even with a maxed army there's absolutely nothing you can do about him slowing your economy down while keeping his up. What i dont understand is the amount of unforgiving demand of good play from the terran side, (I.E not being able to do anything about creep blocking once you forget to check for the overlord one time, fungal hitting your units and absolutely nothing you can do about chain fungal/baneling hits, micro missteps resulting in entire army losses) while most of the zerg's(even the some of the pro players) are free to put everything in one control group(including infestors) and move it all forward.
A zerg going ling/festor has no drop protection. Load up a medivac or two and drop them somewhere right as you're pushing. The zerg will inevitably pull everything back to answer this huge threat. Use this time to move your army right up to a hatchery. He won't fungal it because he cannot engage it with infestors he cannot go near it. Scan ahead as you're doing this and even stim a few marines in front of the main army if you're still worried. This is how you get position on an infestor player.
If his upgrades are really that far ahead of yours it's quite possible your build sucks. Either that or he's skipping banes and you're just going to have to deal with it.
On August 19 2012 14:39 iaguz wrote: A zerg going ling/festor has no drop protection. Load up a medivac or two and drop them somewhere right as you're pushing. The zerg will inevitably pull everything back to answer this huge threat. Use this time to move your army right up to a hatchery. He won't fungal it because he cannot engage it with infestors he cannot go near it. Scan ahead as you're doing this and even stim a few marines in front of the main army if you're still worried. This is how you get position on an infestor player.
If his upgrades are really that far ahead of yours it's quite possible your build sucks. Either that or he's skipping banes and you're just going to have to deal with it.
You do realize that whenever a zerg player goes for ling infestor, they tend to get a ton of static defense at all of their bases right?
Yes. But they cannot cover their entire 3 bases with it, there is always somewhere you can put medivacs at that stage unless he's insanely ahead of you and you're probably just fucked anyway. It takes a lot of spines to stop 2 full medivacs, he'll have to pull his army back eventually.
I think Blizzard knows how much bad design it is fungal vs air units. They even tested a no air fungal long time ago, but in WoL looked it simply was too much. I foresee a no fungal vs air in hots with the hydra buff and hydra support buff (ya that doesn't help the current game). Talkin' about PvT, even just as a spectator (yup i'm Z), i noticed how HT's Feedback shutdown any attempt for the terran to go T3 Air, since both BC's and Ravens suffer immensely vs feedback, which the protoss always have in play late game. Maybe we should have Storm and Feedback on 2 different units (new Archon)? I don't know and it is not my job to find a solution, but i believe there might be an issue here too.
It has been pointed out many times, that the problem of Raven is not that Raven is not powerful enough, but the transition to raven is extremely difficult.
To address this problem, the following buffs are needed:
1. Durability material upgrade is removed. But its effects become default.
2. Raven energy research time reduced to 80, down from 110. (Infestor's energy research time is 80). The cost of the research reduced to 100/100, down from 150/150
3. Seeker missile research time reduced to 80, down from 110. The cost of the research reduced to 100/100, down from 150/150.
Raven/bc/viking is insanely good combo, I probably never lost with it if I managed to get to it..problem is you cant get it because both ravens and bc's cost way too much.
You upgrade infestor energy thing, make them and they are ready to fungal. You need to upgrade 3 things for raven AND +1 range +armor for buildings (5 upgrades that cost way too much) and even after that you have to wait long time before actually using HSM. Even when you have energy to do it you get fungaled and cant get HSM off because its range is crap.
Also why do ravens cost 100-200? HT is way more cost effective for its cost.
On August 19 2012 14:55 Empire.Beastyqt wrote: Raven/bc/viking is insanely good combo, I probably never lost with it if I managed to get to it..problem is you cant get it because both ravens and bc's cost way too much.
You upgrade infestor energy thing, make them and they are ready to fungal. You need to upgrade 3 things for raven AND +1 range +armor for buildings (5 upgrades that cost way too much) and even after that you have to wait long time before actually using HSM. Even when you have energy to do it you get fungaled and cant get HSM off because its range is crap.
Also why do ravens cost 100-200? HT is way more cost effective for its cost.
Yea beasty is right. Its one of those "unbeatable" compos similar to how toss goes super sky toss mode against zerg... but more costly and time consuming.
What has to be worked is a much easier way to transition into that without sacrificing everything into it.
As for avilo's thing, mass raven in his eyes are like the ultimate terran late game all in cuz once those ravens are gone, you are pretty much screwed. Ravens need more safety (yes faster movement is a start but fungal chain can stop it). Either they should be slightly more cost effective or allow it to live easier
Avilo, I for one support you. Thank you for your threads and input. You dive head on into the issues that current races are facing. While the opposition can only offer a "get better" view point and believe that because one named Terran (Taeja) can do well that must mean everyone can play like him.
I hope Blizzard reads this, and I hope that even the very dense Dustin Browder can put his pride aside for once and admit that this Raven buff is an incorrect decision to fix what they broke with the Queens.
It comes down to Fungal. It is broken in its current state. What possibly changes could we offer? Maybe it should work more like Plague did. Not kill but just drain life. And the fact that Terran is so micro centric it completely negates the work and effort into micro.
while i do agree that if they are trying to buff raven late game vs zerg, this is the wrong way to do it(i dont think terran needs any buff though, and yes, i am terran)
On August 19 2012 15:16 TsGBruzze wrote: I am a terran and i Would be sad if they buffed terran... Let The metagame change...
no reasons, no justification, no actual arguments to offer. just "I am a terran and i Would be sad if they buffed terran... Let The metagame change..." why did you even post? contribute something useful please, or leave.
On August 19 2012 15:16 TsGBruzze wrote: I am a terran and i Would be sad if they buffed terran... Let The metagame change...
no reasons, no justification, no actual arguments to offer. just "I am a terran and i Would be sad if they buffed terran... Let The metagame change..." why did you even post? contribute something useful please, or leave.
It's a pretty straightforward post, he thinks Terran is balanced, and that the problem is in the metagame and not any innate weakness of the race.
Fungal can't be nerfed because it makes up for zergs other weaknesses and is central to ZvP balance. HOTS will see a huge fungal nerf, mark my words.
As for the raven change, I agree that the speed change is dumb. I don't think the raven should be stronger or more accessible than it is though. It gets exponentially stronger the more you have. If you are going to keep the ability set on the raven as it is, buffing it will make it the new infestor since it has applications against every unit in the game. If you want it to be more accessible it needs to be more of a niche unit.
The creep reduction is a good idea. I for one don't think the queen buff was excessive in theory. In practice it turned out that terran can no longer pressure zerg in the early game without committing a LOT. So be it. It's still better than zerg not being able to take a 3rd until the terran already has 3OC and having to play every ZvT from behind economically. Ideally, zerg wouldn't the Infestor Broodlord combo be so unbeatable but that's life. You kind of have to approach TvZ lategame with the mindset of "I'm not going to engage that army, I'm going to circumvent it". Players who can do that effectively are the ones who are beating zerg.
Btw, even though I humored you enough to write this post, I have to include the following obligatory response because it is you.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
Nerchio 2-0 over Puma. Nerchio 2-0 over ForGG. Moonglade 2-0 over Bomber. Vortix 3-0 over ForGG. Vortix 3-2 over supernova.
Foreign zergs were never known to take out Code S Korean Terrans en masse before 1.5...
Vortix lost in TSL 4 recently to MVPKeen, he also lost to Supernova in that same fucking tourney 2-1 in group stages. Every game against supernova was really tense and could of gone either way. Stop fucking talking about Vortix. He's really fucking good but he's not the reason ZvT is imbalanced or anything and the fact we think he's capable of occasionally beating Korean terrans on occasion somehow means ZvT is imbalanced doesn't make it true at all. It's actually just shitting on a really really really fucking good zerg's achievement. If he wins imba, if he loses then all is well. Fucking atrocious.
Ditto Nerchio too.
As for the OP...
1) Raven's are... difficult to use and I wouldn't personally mind a buff to them but nothing huge. The speed buff doesn't seem particularly relevant towards anything but even so sometimes ravens work and sometimes they don't and the trick is to fully figure out why and how we can use ravens most effectively. I don't think this is a fully explored avenue of Terran theory.
2) Queen range is healthy for the matchup and reversing it would fuck the TvZ metagame in an unhealthy way. Keep queens as is, change a different part. I think reversing a change or just straight up nerfing/removing something as an option is a bad way to change starcraft. Players should be encouraged to try new shiny things to fix problems, not have their shiny new thing just taken away (admittedly some exceptions apply, particularly those concerning certain High Templar's neckwear...)
3) Fungal growth is a very severe spell but it is possible to play around it with vikings. If you spread your vikings out across multiple screen lengths (which KR terrans do quite a bit, I remember seeing Gumiho do it most recently against one of hte SlayerS zergs in GSTL finals) then they cannot be fungalled that efficiently. Yeah infestors are really good. Wouldn't mind a nerf tbh but it's probably not going to happen. Combined with PDD vikings can actually dominate the air war against corrupters and if Zerg don't have air control they have trouble keeping broodlords alive.
Just how I see's it currently, a random NA GM's Terran.
What if Terrans (like me) start making builds that are designed to incorporate Ravens at the 14 minute mark insted? This is at a timing where Terran has 3 bases and very high mineral income... A lot of that income is actually dumped into Scans for killing tumors. Some Ravens might give you 2-3 more Barracks worth of Marine production.
The problem is that there almost no mid-game in TvZ right now, and with "14 mins transition into raven" we will receive no-early, no mid and no late-game, only something like post-late game with micro battles between ravens cloud and Zerg army.
On August 19 2012 15:16 TsGBruzze wrote: I am a terran and i Would be sad if they buffed terran... Let The metagame change...
That's a very shitty and trolly post but i'll bite and say... Stop living under your 2010-terran rock and go ladder for a few hours. Then come back and say what you just said again, spoiler alert, YOU WON'T.
Terran is in an awful position atm not only in TvZ, but TvP too. Take your time to actually read Avilo's thread here and you'll understand.
What if Terrans (like me) start making builds that are designed to incorporate Ravens at the 14 minute mark insted? This is at a timing where Terran has 3 bases and very high mineral income... A lot of that income is actually dumped into Scans for killing tumors. Some Ravens might give you 2-3 more Barracks worth of Marine production.
The problem is that there almost no mid-game in TvZ right now, and with "14 mins transition into raven" we will receive no-early, no mid and no late-game, only something like post-late game with micro battles between ravens cloud and Zerg army.
I think, that is just ridiculous.
Sry, but what other races call "Zerg midgame", has turned into "I win if I just turtle through his allin", as Terrans (and Protoss) simply figured out that you can turtle through anything that does not include a thousand Broodlords.
On August 19 2012 15:16 TsGBruzze wrote: I am a terran and i Would be sad if they buffed terran... Let The metagame change...
no reasons, no justification, no actual arguments to offer. just "I am a terran and i Would be sad if they buffed terran... Let The metagame change..." why did you even post? contribute something useful please, or leave.
It's a pretty straightforward post, he thinks Terran is balanced, and that the problem is in the metagame and not any innate weakness of the race.
[D] The raven buff does not address TvZ issues
do you notice this? like i said, no reasons, no justification, no actual arguments to offer. if you want to be considered post something with actual content please.
On August 19 2012 14:47 Kaleidos wrote: I think Blizzard knows how much bad design it is fungal vs air units. They even tested a no air fungal long time ago, but in WoL looked it simply was too much. I foresee a no fungal vs air in hots with the hydra buff and hydra support buff (ya that doesn't help the current game). Talkin' about PvT, even just as a spectator (yup i'm Z), i noticed how HT's Feedback shutdown any attempt for the terran to go T3 Air, since both BC's and Ravens suffer immensely vs feedback, which the protoss always have in play late game. Maybe we should have Storm and Feedback on 2 different units (new Archon)? I don't know and it is not my job to find a solution, but i believe there might be an issue here too.
Feedback was indeed on a different unit in BW, the Dark Archon
IEM in the past few days. MVP vs Nestea - HSM into Nesteas Corrupter Broodlords. Nestea GG's MVP vs Slivko - HSM into Slivko's infestors. Slivko GG's
How did he do it to avoid fungals on his ravens? He scanned in advance to see his exact opponents composition and location, spread out his ravens and approached in small groups from multiple angles. This is all without the speed increase, let alone when the patch comes through.
Yes it did take him ages to build up his group of ravens and then the energy. But he turtled hard and continuesly multi prong dropped to buy heaps of time.
On August 19 2012 15:53 Incomplet wrote: IEM in the past few days. MVP vs Nestea - HSM into Nesteas Corrupter Broodlords. Nestea GG's MVP vs Slivko - HSM into Slivko's infestors. Slivko GG's
How did he do it to avoid fungals on his ravens? He scanned in advance to see his exact opponents composition and location, spread out his ravens and approached in small groups from multiple angles. This is all without the speed increase, let alone when the patch comes through.
Yes it did take him ages to build up his group of ravens and then the energy. But he turtled hard and continuesly multi prong dropped to buy heaps of time.
I think you forgot to mention that the map in both those games were METROPOLIS. A map where terran can actually turtle hard enough to get out ravens. And you also failed to mention that the slivko game you referenced, MVP still almost died to the ultra transition after the first broodlord attack. Honest mistake im sure
On August 19 2012 15:53 Incomplet wrote: IEM in the past few days. MVP vs Nestea - HSM into Nesteas Corrupter Broodlords. Nestea GG's MVP vs Slivko - HSM into Slivko's infestors. Slivko GG's
How did he do it to avoid fungals on his ravens? He scanned in advance to see his exact opponents composition and location, spread out his ravens and approached in small groups from multiple angles. This is all without the speed increase, let alone when the patch comes through.
Yes it did take him ages to build up his group of ravens and then the energy. But he turtled hard and continuesly multi prong dropped to buy heaps of time.
I think what most are complaining about is how difficult it is to transition into sky terran with the exception of a few maps that allow for that kind of play to happen.
On August 19 2012 15:53 Incomplet wrote: IEM in the past few days. MVP vs Nestea - HSM into Nesteas Corrupter Broodlords. Nestea GG's MVP vs Slivko - HSM into Slivko's infestors. Slivko GG's
How did he do it to avoid fungals on his ravens? He scanned in advance to see his exact opponents composition and location, spread out his ravens and approached in small groups from multiple angles. This is all without the speed increase, let alone when the patch comes through.
Yes it did take him ages to build up his group of ravens and then the energy. But he turtled hard and continuesly multi prong dropped to buy heaps of time.
I think what most are complaining about is how difficult it is to transition into sky terran with the exception of a few maps that allow for that kind of play to happen.
I'd rather say it's the other way around. Skyterran transition is nearly fine and people get better and better with it. Broodlord/Infestor/Corruptor transition is too early, though without any other artillery (or at least long ranged unit) earlier, it's a tough thing to get to the sweet spot.
On August 19 2012 15:53 Incomplet wrote: IEM in the past few days. MVP vs Nestea - HSM into Nesteas Corrupter Broodlords. Nestea GG's MVP vs Slivko - HSM into Slivko's infestors. Slivko GG's
How did he do it to avoid fungals on his ravens? He scanned in advance to see his exact opponents composition and location, spread out his ravens and approached in small groups from multiple angles. This is all without the speed increase, let alone when the patch comes through.
Yes it did take him ages to build up his group of ravens and then the energy. But he turtled hard and continuesly multi prong dropped to buy heaps of time.
Also, it is on Metropolis, the map that is easiest to get into split map turtle situation.
I really think they just need to make toss and zerg harder somehow... Like with terrans there is a larger skill gap than between the other ones because they kept all the micro and interesting combinations of units that work but they patched out all the stupid stuff like mule on gold bases and 100% return on bunkers. Now maybe we should look at reverting some off the zerg and protoss buffs from the last patches or introduce something else. I honestly feel a little bad for terran sometimes on ladder (though not when they bully you with marauders ugh)
On August 19 2012 15:53 Incomplet wrote: IEM in the past few days. MVP vs Nestea - HSM into Nesteas Corrupter Broodlords. Nestea GG's MVP vs Slivko - HSM into Slivko's infestors. Slivko GG's
How did he do it to avoid fungals on his ravens? He scanned in advance to see his exact opponents composition and location, spread out his ravens and approached in small groups from multiple angles. This is all without the speed increase, let alone when the patch comes through.
Yes it did take him ages to build up his group of ravens and then the energy. But he turtled hard and continuesly multi prong dropped to buy heaps of time.
I think this bolded part is important.
If the two players are "even skill" I would say chances favour the engagement goings in Zergs favour however. With the speed change, I do think it will help to even such an engagement, although I personally would like to see changes that affect the early game/mid game as Zerg has become much like Protoss in TvP since the queen range buff. I say that in regards to the fact that many Terrans feel like they have to kill or cripple the Protoss to go into the late game with a fair chance.
By all means I feel a buff of Ravens would be nice (as a Terran player ), but to me if feels like it wouldn't be necessary if Terran wasn't already behind from the safety and economy the queens provide in the early and mid game. Perhaps the creep changes combined with the Raven change will even things up together. I'm hoping so, but if not, I think taking away the Raven buff and either increasing Raven start energy/HSM cost/upgrade length/Raven build time, etc, or changing the queen range to 4 would be a nice start.
edit: I guess some other people got to this first. But yeah, the transition time needed for this with regards to Terrans position that he was put in from the mid game is the problem it would seem.
From a pure game design stand point, it makes much more sense to me to have air-units be slowed by fungal and not rooted, since whatever "fungal" actually is doesn't stick a flying creature/machine to the ground simply because its not standing on the ground. It does however get into the engines/stick to the muscles of flying units hence they should be slowed (crashing would be unfair ). Secondly why the hell can you stack infinity air-units on top of each other? Just give them the same collision-detection as ground units. I'm not a pro-player, I'm not even an active player at all but I do enjoy watching the game and I have an analytic personality so don't take this as balance-arguments, but in my mind that solves the "fungal problem". I know this completely changes how air-play would work but does it seem reasonable?
On August 19 2012 16:08 leveller wrote: I really think they just need to make toss and zerg harder somehow... Like with terrans there is a larger skill gap than between the other ones because they kept all the micro and interesting combinations of units that work but they patched out all the stupid stuff like mule on gold bases and 100% return on bunkers. Now maybe we should look at reverting some off the zerg and protoss buffs from the last patches or introduce something else. I honestly feel a little bad for terran sometimes on ladder (though not when they bully you with marauders ugh)
I feel like 2 things need to happen:
Terran needs to be buffed OR zerg and protoss nerfed
AND
Skill ceiling for zerg and protoss need to be higher (however you interpret this, whether it be high multitasking/micro like terran, or in their own unique ways). For terran, there is a lot of reward if you're skilled. And so recently, we've been seeing the game balanced around that, so that lower level players poorly (as seen in that ladder thread showing the MMR offset that exists for racial imbalances)
On August 19 2012 16:08 leveller wrote: I really think they just need to make toss and zerg harder somehow... Like with terrans there is a larger skill gap than between the other ones because they kept all the micro and interesting combinations of units that work but they patched out all the stupid stuff like mule on gold bases and 100% return on bunkers. Now maybe we should look at reverting some off the zerg and protoss buffs from the last patches or introduce something else. I honestly feel a little bad for terran sometimes on ladder (though not when they bully you with marauders ugh)
I feel like 2 things need to happen:
Terran needs to be buffed OR zerg and protoss nerfed
AND
Skill ceiling for zerg and protoss need to be higher (however you interpret this, whether it be high multitasking/micro like terran, or in their own unique ways). For terran, there is a lot of reward if you're skilled. And so recently, we've been seeing the game balanced around that, so that lower level players poorly (as seen in that ladder thread showing the MMR offset that exists for racial imbalances)
While terran might need to split/kite during fight...or how you put it micro more, although not 100% true...the other races already got other things...you can just let your energy go to max and then throw 4 mules...everything will be fine...well zerg can't inject on full energy and everything be fine...the same goes for chronoboost(although to a lesser extent), zerg also has to creep spread and during fight even if you consider it A move for zerg they do have to keep their infestors alive cast fungal and surround your units as much as possible...while the protosses have to forcefield, keep their colosi back from vikings, blink the stalkers...make sure their zealots aren't stuck in the back....while as terran you just stim/siege and split...I do think that all of them take equal fight micro while the other races even take more than terran for macro...just my 2 cents.
On August 19 2012 15:53 Incomplet wrote: IEM in the past few days. MVP vs Nestea - HSM into Nesteas Corrupter Broodlords. Nestea GG's MVP vs Slivko - HSM into Slivko's infestors. Slivko GG's
How did he do it to avoid fungals on his ravens? He scanned in advance to see his exact opponents composition and location, spread out his ravens and approached in small groups from multiple angles. This is all without the speed increase, let alone when the patch comes through.
Yes it did take him ages to build up his group of ravens and then the energy. But he turtled hard and continuesly multi prong dropped to buy heaps of time.
I think what most are complaining about is how difficult it is to transition into sky terran with the exception of a few maps that allow for that kind of play to happen.
I'd rather say it's the other way around. Skyterran transition is nearly fine and people get better and better with it. Broodlord/Infestor/Corruptor transition is too early, though without any other artillery (or at least long ranged unit) earlier, it's a tough thing to get to the sweet spot.
And the BL/infestor/corrupter transition can come so early is that in the early game, queens are much better defensively so Zerg can drone up and expand slightly quicker which leads to fast infestors which shuts down Terran early mid game. Then Terran has to wait for the pre BL push. But with the creep so far, that push can be cleaned up by ling bling infestor if Terran steps on creep. Zergs are getting hive tech earlier and earlier because of this.
On August 19 2012 15:53 Incomplet wrote: IEM in the past few days. MVP vs Nestea - HSM into Nesteas Corrupter Broodlords. Nestea GG's MVP vs Slivko - HSM into Slivko's infestors. Slivko GG's
How did he do it to avoid fungals on his ravens? He scanned in advance to see his exact opponents composition and location, spread out his ravens and approached in small groups from multiple angles. This is all without the speed increase, let alone when the patch comes through.
Yes it did take him ages to build up his group of ravens and then the energy. But he turtled hard and continuesly multi prong dropped to buy heaps of time.
MVP vs Nestea and MVP vs Slivko are games where MVP is a huge favorite(mvp is 14-5 vs nestead in KR tlpd). The really really impressive raven games were Kas vs Nestea.
On August 19 2012 16:08 leveller wrote: I really think they just need to make toss and zerg harder somehow... Like with terrans there is a larger skill gap than between the other ones because they kept all the micro and interesting combinations of units that work but they patched out all the stupid stuff like mule on gold bases and 100% return on bunkers. Now maybe we should look at reverting some off the zerg and protoss buffs from the last patches or introduce something else. I honestly feel a little bad for terran sometimes on ladder (though not when they bully you with marauders ugh)
I feel like 2 things need to happen:
Terran needs to be buffed OR zerg and protoss nerfed
AND
Skill ceiling for zerg and protoss need to be higher (however you interpret this, whether it be high multitasking/micro like terran, or in their own unique ways). For terran, there is a lot of reward if you're skilled. And so recently, we've been seeing the game balanced around that, so that lower level players poorly (as seen in that ladder thread showing the MMR offset that exists for racial imbalances)
While terran might need to split/kite during fight...or how you put it micro more, although not 100% true...the other races already got other things...you can just let your energy go to max and then throw 4 mules...everything will be fine...well zerg can't inject on full energy and everything be fine...the same goes for chronoboost(although to a lesser extent), zerg also has to creep spread and during fight even if you consider it A move for zerg they do have to keep their infestors alive cast fungal and surround your units as much as possible...while the protosses have to forcefield, keep their colosi back from vikings, blink the stalkers...make sure their zealots aren't stuck in the back....while as terran you just stim/siege and split...I do think that all of them take equal fight micro while the other races even take more than terran for macro...just my 2 cents.
at a even remotely close to high level setting no one is gonna leave 4 mules undropped unless they need scan. your argument would only apply to the lower levels and a lesser extent to zerg because thats the only race who can make 20 workers at the same time. "equal fight micro"...... right. "just stim/siege and split"(not even mentioning tank focus fire and the fact that you are splitting roughly 50 marines) is easier than bunching everything on one control group(you can see this clearly in idra vs taeja in ASUS ROG recently and just yesterday in vortix vs supernova on multiple games.) and pressing F. im not saying zerg is completely broken, but do not pretend that it isn't easier for the zerg than the terran..
On August 19 2012 15:53 Incomplet wrote: IEM in the past few days. MVP vs Nestea - HSM into Nesteas Corrupter Broodlords. Nestea GG's MVP vs Slivko - HSM into Slivko's infestors. Slivko GG's
How did he do it to avoid fungals on his ravens? He scanned in advance to see his exact opponents composition and location, spread out his ravens and approached in small groups from multiple angles. This is all without the speed increase, let alone when the patch comes through.
Yes it did take him ages to build up his group of ravens and then the energy. But he turtled hard and continuesly multi prong dropped to buy heaps of time.
Good thing we all have the abilities of the 4time GSL champ.
Well its only a buff in the sense that it now moves as fast as a medivac. The only situation I can possibly think of where this would be useful is if you want to drop something in the Zergs base but have PDD coverage in case there's queens and spores. In any other circumstance it doesn't really become a factor.
So yeah, the raven buff won't affect terran lategame much. But I reckon that the creep range nerf will help out a lot more for terran ( creep spreads slower, more tumours are visible in a scan ect ).
On August 19 2012 15:53 Incomplet wrote: IEM in the past few days. MVP vs Nestea - HSM into Nesteas Corrupter Broodlords. Nestea GG's MVP vs Slivko - HSM into Slivko's infestors. Slivko GG's
How did he do it to avoid fungals on his ravens? He scanned in advance to see his exact opponents composition and location, spread out his ravens and approached in small groups from multiple angles. This is all without the speed increase, let alone when the patch comes through.
Yes it did take him ages to build up his group of ravens and then the energy. But he turtled hard and continuesly multi prong dropped to buy heaps of time.
Do you know how many times has that strategy failed to work? Because it's pretty important to understand whether your discussing examples proving the rule or just an exception to it.
As a plat terran I can't do anything to harass zerg while they are getting their lair tech up by just defending with queens and lings and spines. Sometimes zergs with just attack me with lings because I'm focusing too much on harass which is doing no damage and I just get attacked by lings and I have nothing back at my base to defend because my macro isn't perfect. Zerg is a joke I sometimes get fake baneling busted they make like 60+ lings I scout it with a reaper or scan I make mass bunkers they go back into macro mode because I can't move out with my ground army due to their mass lings by my watch tower. I can't drop because they'll see it before it happens with their 6+queens and mass creep spread. I try to turtle up they go for super fast brood lords, what am I meant to do? If zergs ability to be literally untouched before their lair tech, I'm just gonna stop playing the game, it's just not fun.
On August 19 2012 14:55 Empire.Beastyqt wrote: Raven/bc/viking is insanely good combo, I probably never lost with it if I managed to get to it..problem is you cant get it because both ravens and bc's cost way too much.
You upgrade infestor energy thing, make them and they are ready to fungal. You need to upgrade 3 things for raven AND +1 range +armor for buildings (5 upgrades that cost way too much) and even after that you have to wait long time before actually using HSM. Even when you have energy to do it you get fungaled and cant get HSM off because its range is crap.
Also why do ravens cost 100-200? HT is way more cost effective for its cost.
Agree with the upgrade costs being too high, but comparison v. HT is silly. Air units are more expensive than ground units for obvious reasons. (Imagine flying marines w/ stim, flying stalkers w/ blink, or flying banelings) If HTs could fly around @2.25 speed I am pretty certain that they would cost A LOT more.
On August 19 2012 15:53 Incomplet wrote: IEM in the past few days. MVP vs Nestea - HSM into Nesteas Corrupter Broodlords. Nestea GG's MVP vs Slivko - HSM into Slivko's infestors. Slivko GG's
How did he do it to avoid fungals on his ravens? He scanned in advance to see his exact opponents composition and location, spread out his ravens and approached in small groups from multiple angles. This is all without the speed increase, let alone when the patch comes through.
Yes it did take him ages to build up his group of ravens and then the energy. But he turtled hard and continuesly multi prong dropped to buy heaps of time.
Do you know how many times has that strategy failed to work? Because it's pretty important to understand whether your discussing examples proving the rule or just an exception to it.
I'm sure mvp wouldn't be doing it in a tournament vs someone of nesteas caliber if he knew it didn't have a high success rate.
I think removing the stun on the fungal growth would do great good to this game on so many different levels. It's simply a dumb game mechanic. You have one race that relies heavily on unit control and micro and the other races have ways of shutting that down easily.
If blizz was to keep the queen range buff they might need to nerf inject by one larva to make up for it.
As it is now whever you try to push zerg around 10min to keep him on his toes he'll have a creephighway making that attack take ages. Queens defend it easily and stall so much time that he can drope up to 70drones, deal with your attack and simply roll you over later on.
Besides some game design/balance issues I find the biggest problem to be the difference of skill required to play the different races.
On August 19 2012 15:53 Incomplet wrote: IEM in the past few days. MVP vs Nestea - HSM into Nesteas Corrupter Broodlords. Nestea GG's MVP vs Slivko - HSM into Slivko's infestors. Slivko GG's
How did he do it to avoid fungals on his ravens? He scanned in advance to see his exact opponents composition and location, spread out his ravens and approached in small groups from multiple angles. This is all without the speed increase, let alone when the patch comes through.
Yes it did take him ages to build up his group of ravens and then the energy. But he turtled hard and continuesly multi prong dropped to buy heaps of time.
actually, slivko wasted all his infestor energy on infested terrans and neural parasite trying to be cute and build a cc with a scv. Nestea didnt even see the ravens. He knew they were there but they all just kinda popped up and started dropping hsm like they were out of style.
A Seeker missile being launched from very close range doesnt really make sense IMO and the range to "trigger" them should be increased to 9+. Its a fair change IMO since you get a lot more warning against the incoming missile and some seconds are taken off from the duration due to the missile flying over friendly units first.
If Blizzard insists on keeping the 22 range unit and the "lock down all resource crystals in a base" ability in HotS this increased trigger range should be fair. The slow moving missile isnt that OP anyways and the only Terran ability which will force an enemy to micro against it (like Banelings rolling in).
On August 19 2012 15:53 Incomplet wrote: IEM in the past few days. MVP vs Nestea - HSM into Nesteas Corrupter Broodlords. Nestea GG's MVP vs Slivko - HSM into Slivko's infestors. Slivko GG's
How did he do it to avoid fungals on his ravens? He scanned in advance to see his exact opponents composition and location, spread out his ravens and approached in small groups from multiple angles. This is all without the speed increase, let alone when the patch comes through.
Yes it did take him ages to build up his group of ravens and then the energy. But he turtled hard and continuesly multi prong dropped to buy heaps of time.
I think what most are complaining about is how difficult it is to transition into sky terran with the exception of a few maps that allow for that kind of play to happen.
I'd rather say it's the other way around. Skyterran transition is nearly fine and people get better and better with it. Broodlord/Infestor/Corruptor transition is too early, though without any other artillery (or at least long ranged unit) earlier, it's a tough thing to get to the sweet spot.
And the BL/infestor/corrupter transition can come so early is that in the early game, queens are much better defensively so Zerg can drone up and expand slightly quicker which leads to fast infestors which shuts down Terran early mid game. Then Terran has to wait for the pre BL push. But with the creep so far, that push can be cleaned up by ling bling infestor if Terran steps on creep. Zergs are getting hive tech earlier and earlier because of this.
Yeah. But maybe we should ask ourselves, why Zergs go for Broodlords over everything else. Everything else has gotten figuered out, because it can't fight T1-T2 P/T compositions around max, but can't force engagements without range. Imo blizzard has failed to forsee Protoss Warpgate dependence (I don't blame them for that; it's a new unique concept) and then took the easy way out (you have to take the easy ways in alpha and beta stages, else a game won't finish), nerfing everything left and right that had the potential to crush Warpgate Units - leaving zerg without the designed-to-be-solid midgame units, roach and hydralisk and therefore with too little variety. Long story short, a Broodlord and Infestor "anti mass up" - nerf and a buff for zerg midgame units to mass up better (easiest way to do so: hive tech upgrades) is long overdue. It just won't happen in WoL, as it would be to drastic of a change. For WoL, the hope should be that they adjust everything in a way, that in the end the game ends up balanced, even if this means that sometimes maxed T3 battles are the best way to play.
I agree a bit, i would vote for an increase in range over anything else but i honestly think that the imbalance in TvZ is indisputable based on the numbers and that terran needs an a nice lategame buff to equalize. Watching so many foreign zergs beat top koreans is demoralizing, i just don't see what i can do in the match up anymore. I would not be in favor of reverting the queen buff for a number of reasons, the ovie and creep changes are good however. I certainly parallel what you talk about with creep denying aggression and lategame strength, only a few days ago i played a game where i killed a zerg's main hatchery and 3rd hatchery two times as well as a 4th, despite so much economic damage and being maxed at least once the zerg pulled ahead and utterly crushed me with ultralisks and zerglings even while i was going MMM with tanks.
I feel very hopeless in the match up currently, it makes me sad to see zergs choose ultralisks when fighting MMM with ghosts and thors and still manage to win despite the mistake in unit composition.
Two fungals killing 30 marines isn't right. For 150/150 (infestor) plus its full energy bar, it gets to kill 750 minerals worth of units? Sure High Templar can do it, but you can at least dodge storm.
I feel like the Raven speed buff, is changed to make Raven more accessible in the mid game, since then you can go out, deny creep without losing the Raven.
PvZ is also in a troubled state, so i feel whatever change that will have to happen, has to address PvZ as well. Whether that's a creep spread nerf, inject nerf (making queen spawn 3 larvae, instead of 4 on each hatch,) or a change to fungal growth, doesn't really matter.
On August 19 2012 15:53 Incomplet wrote: IEM in the past few days. MVP vs Nestea - HSM into Nesteas Corrupter Broodlords. Nestea GG's MVP vs Slivko - HSM into Slivko's infestors. Slivko GG's
How did he do it to avoid fungals on his ravens? He scanned in advance to see his exact opponents composition and location, spread out his ravens and approached in small groups from multiple angles. This is all without the speed increase, let alone when the patch comes through.
Yes it did take him ages to build up his group of ravens and then the energy. But he turtled hard and continuesly multi prong dropped to buy heaps of time.
Do you know how many times has that strategy failed to work? Because it's pretty important to understand whether your discussing examples proving the rule or just an exception to it.
I'm sure mvp wouldn't be doing it in a tournament vs someone of nesteas caliber if he knew it didn't have a high success rate.
And yet in the very tournament you cite this approach failed more often that it succeeded. There are reasons why this strategy only works on 2 largest maps in pool - should they be removed it will go away. That should speak volumes as to its validity.
i kind of agree with you that it doesnt address what they want it to, but idk if they need to address it anymore. Also, its good this thread is about this game and not one not even in beta yet
On August 19 2012 15:53 Incomplet wrote: IEM in the past few days. MVP vs Nestea - HSM into Nesteas Corrupter Broodlords. Nestea GG's MVP vs Slivko - HSM into Slivko's infestors. Slivko GG's
How did he do it to avoid fungals on his ravens? He scanned in advance to see his exact opponents composition and location, spread out his ravens and approached in small groups from multiple angles. This is all without the speed increase, let alone when the patch comes through.
Yes it did take him ages to build up his group of ravens and then the energy. But he turtled hard and continuesly multi prong dropped to buy heaps of time.
Do you know how many times has that strategy failed to work? Because it's pretty important to understand whether your discussing examples proving the rule or just an exception to it.
I'm sure mvp wouldn't be doing it in a tournament vs someone of nesteas caliber if he knew it didn't have a high success rate.
kinda weird that it just so happens to be on metropolis right? ill chalk it up to coincidence
Stop looking at statistics and open some replays from recent tournaments. Try to find mistakes in their play and compare them. From my observations it seems like playing certain race is much less forgiving.
I would be very happy if Blizzard removes of 100% snare from fungal and replace it with 80% slow as it was suggested above.
The notion that the queen buff was wrong, is absolutely false. The fact is that every unit should be 'viable' in combat, and every race's macro mechanic should have a "late game" application.
Think of the MULE in the late/endgame: Basically, having enough orbitals means you get more army supply. Chrono boost? The way it interacts with upgrades makes for a more powerful maxed army. You get ALL the upgrades. However... The way zerg functioned, the late game actually meant they had even LESS army supply, as you'd generally have 8-12 supply sunk into queens. That was hard for Blizzard to balance. Now that queens can tag along with a Hive army and contribute in a meaningful way, it raises the skill cap for both players in both positioning and spell micro. And thematically it just feels better - watching the creep and spines push swarm forward slowly is what the game should have always been.
Combine this late game point with the propensity for 90%+ terrans to open early hellions (because zerg had no real counter to hellion harass), and the queen buff makes perfect sense. However, this brought us to the unexpected consequence: Creep is really damn good, and now that it's possible to have more queens earlier without dying, creep pushing has reached its intended design. That turned the balance, and made it easier for zerg to hit their late game comfortably.
Now, today, there are few terrans who play the late game to its highest potential. One player who does is MVP! When the late game hits, he thins out his bio, starts getting air upgrades, and transitions to a raven/BC composition. Creep is a lot less relevant against this army, and scans are no longer required to clean creep (leaving more energy for MULEs, therefore more supply for army size). From a design perspective, you can see what the intent is, but of course BC/raven have some shortcomings that never really got hashed out in balance patches because Terran early/midgame was so powerful for so long. Remember; every unit should be viable. This is why we can't nerf the queen, we have to buff the terran lategame.
I think the raven speed buff does help address that. With a good spread (the same way you spread vikings), fungal is not as powerful as OP states; and Battlecruisers don't really give a damn about fungals and are able to protect each other from neurals pretty well. If I had to make an additional change (assuming the minor raven buff/creep nerf doesn't pan out), I'd probably just reduce the cost of terran air a bit. It makes sense that you can't go "bio forever", and using the high tech units should be encouraged. Heck, I'd even adjust how Battlecruisers deal damage, because low damage/high rate of fire sucks in the late game vs armor upgrades.
But leave the Queen alone; The buff made early game a lot more stable especially in ZvZ.. Baneling all-ins were powerful, popular, and easy to execute at all levels of play from bronze to Pro, they were as common as hellion openings were. It helps with map balance as well. There's no reason zerg should be without a 5 range unit in the early game, it allowed for too many abusive strategies exploiting the 1-2 range deficit, especially with proxies/cheese (and these strategies still work, but they're no longer about finding a nook or cranny to block with a building).
Don't fight buffs to the late game and demand a lopsided early game. Every patch since release has been trying to smooth out these problems, which did result in a lot of Terran nerfs. If anything, it's a step in the right direction. I hope the BC, Ghost and Thor receive similar attention.
On August 19 2012 17:19 fds wrote: Stop looking at statistics and open some replays from recent tournaments. Try to find mistakes in their play and compare them. From my observations it seems like playing certain race is much less forgiving.
I would be very happy if Blizzard removes of 100% snare from fungal and replace it with 80% slow as it was suggested above.
Great idea, or give it a slowing gradient, so that inner units get more slowed than the outer ones, so that targeting with the fungal spell is rewarding!
On August 19 2012 14:50 larse wrote: It has been pointed out many times, that the problem of Raven is not that Raven is not powerful enough, but the transition to raven is extremely difficult.
To address this problem, the following buffs are needed:
1. Durability material upgrade is removed. But its effects become default.
2. Raven energy research time reduced to 80, down from 110. (Infestor's energy research time is 80). The cost of the research reduced to 100/100, down from 150/150
3. Seeker missile research time reduced to 80, down from 110. The cost of the research reduced to 100/100, down from 150/150.
I've been of the opinion that the Durable materials should have been default for a while now. I think 3 upgrades for the raven to get maximum usefulness is a bit too much , that require too much research time. I dont know if i agree that ALL the changes are needed together tho.
EDIT: I would maybe try and suggest that its the maps we play on today that arent suited very well for Terrans. I think the mapmakers went overboard with the sizes of the maps, which imply a lategame focus, case and point; metropolis, atlantis, whirldwind.
I think Taldarim is in the catagori aswell, but the features on the map /rocks on third /siege natural , makes up for distances, which is why the winrates arent as lopsided, (last i checked). This is isolated from the TvZ point btw, i know the map has a bad reputation in other mapmatchups aswell, because of the layout
Ravens are slow and have to move in close to attack -> Get fungalled before they get in range -> Speed is apparently not the solution.
Raven speed makes it easier to split, dodge fungals and get in closer, faster to use HSMs. What's more, it's stupid to say that "fungal growth many times locks down ravens making it so you cannot HSM (regardless of how well you split" whereas HSM very rarely damages all the units. Both players need to split their units while casting spells to shut down the others' spellcasters. The infestors have a range advantage, you have a considerable speed advantage.
On August 19 2012 16:53 PersonDudeGuy wrote: I agree a bit, i would vote for an increase in range over anything else but i honestly think that the imbalance in TvZ is indisputable based on the numbers and that terran needs an a nice lategame buff to equalize. Watching so many foreign zergs beat top koreans is demoralizing, i just don't see what i can do in the match up anymore. I would not be in favor of reverting the queen buff for a number of reasons, the ovie and creep changes are good however. I certainly parallel what you talk about with creep denying aggression and lategame strength, only a few days ago i played a game where i killed a zerg's main hatchery and 3rd hatchery two times as well as a 4th, despite so much economic damage and being maxed at least once the zerg pulled ahead and utterly crushed me with ultralisks and zerglings even while i was going MMM with tanks.
I feel very hopeless in the match up currently, it makes me sad to see zergs choose ultralisks when fighting MMM with ghosts and thors and still manage to win despite the mistake in unit composition.
I think you are misunderstanding a lot of stuff. If you are referring to IEM with the foreign zergs doing well vs korean terrans - the games that the terrans lost they actually made some pretty poor choices and mistakes. It's not as cut and dried as "bad foreigner zerg beats pro korean terran", it's usually the foreign zergs have one fairly inflexible style they stick to that happens to beat what that terran is doing but wouldn't hold up if the terran had practiced against that style at all in the past.
As for your game where you lost to ultra/ling, i don't know what level you play at but is it possible you forgot to get upgrades or didn't expand enough or something?
Also (not aimed at PersonDudeGuy) can someone explain to me why everyone is complaining that fungal is overpowered but chooses to skip Ghosts? Even one or two good EMPs can change the whole game. Tanks are great vs infestors as well but everyone always flies their vikings too far away from the tank lines.
What would people say, if i suggested that the queen range was an upgrade on the evo chamber? maybe 100/50 or something. the cost / research time isnt suppost to be big, its simply to enable some more diverse early game. sound like a bullshit suggestion? or want to try it out?
Taeja wins 80% of his TvZ. I guess you just suck at TvZ and just need to step it up instead of creating threads in the forums you shouldnt be creating. At this point im quite sure that even if you revert the queen range change, zerg would still get 6 queens and start spreading creep.
That change only helped zerg players realize that getting a lot of queens early on is actually incredibly powerful due to the amount of creep one gets out. Take the range away and i can see the stephano style 4 roach with a lot of queens and how it gets up the same amount of creep.
The core issue with Terrans is that you guys do stupid shit, move out at wrong timings and lose all your army, and then blame creep spread for it. You cant just faceroll people anymore, time to rethink your strategies, maybe watch some taeja games.
Zerg is usually behind in upgrades against P and against T, adding another upgrade they have to get on the evo chamber will just put them even further back.
Make fungals unstackable. So if infestors hit aready fungaled units with the spell again, it does absolutely nothing, not even refresh the spell duration. This, in my opinion, would make fungal require a little more skill/timing to use, as opposed to how easy is to cast right now (with its instant cast time and refreshable duration it takes little skill to perform chain fungals from safe range). Along with this nerf, a little duration buff could be implemented: from 4 to 5 or 6 seconds.
On August 19 2012 17:46 Tritanis wrote: Make fungals unstackable. So if infestors hit aready fungaled units with the spell again, it does absolutely nothing, not even refresh the spell duration. This, in my opinion, would make fungal require a little more skill/timing to use, as opposed to how easy is to cast right now (with its instant cast time and refreshable duration it takes little skill to perform chain fungals from safe range). Along with this nerf, a little duration buff could be implemented: from 4 to 5 or 6 seconds.
On August 19 2012 17:45 -JoKeR- wrote: Zerg is usually behind in upgrades against P and against T, adding another upgrade they have to get on the evo chamber will just put them even further back.
How about the Spawning pool then? - The point either way should be the following; Since Zergs in ZvZ are really happy with the queen buff, it should be easily accesable, all zergs get gas reasonable early so an upgrades for range on the pool would be possible,
In ZvP the queen range has had little effect, the upgrade argument is good tho, which is why it could be placed on the pool instead of tying up time on the evo.
In ZvT it would force zergs to get gas in the early game, which would reduce the econ powering potential. So make the upgrade 50mins/50gas and it should prevent the very very delayed gas, as a result u reduce the drone "explosion"
On August 19 2012 17:46 Tritanis wrote: Make fungals unstackable. So if infestors hit aready fungaled units with the spell again, it does absolutely nothing, not even refresh the spell duration. This, in my opinion, would make fungal require a little more skill/timing to use, as opposed to how easy is to cast right now (with its instant cast time and refreshable duration it takes little skill to perform chain fungals from safe range). Along with this nerf, a little duration buff could be implemented: from 4 to 5 or 6 seconds.
problem with this is blink
That is why the slowing fungal would be a better option in my opinion.
On August 19 2012 16:56 BanditX wrote: Two fungals killing 30 marines isn't right. For 150/150 (infestor) plus its full energy bar, it gets to kill 750 minerals worth of units? Sure High Templar can do it, but you can at least dodge storm.
you can also dodge fungal if you scan ahead and split
Or adding some mauarders to the mix like the korean terran does
On August 19 2012 16:08 leveller wrote: I really think they just need to make toss and zerg harder somehow... Like with terrans there is a larger skill gap than between the other ones because they kept all the micro and interesting combinations of units that work but they patched out all the stupid stuff like mule on gold bases and 100% return on bunkers. Now maybe we should look at reverting some off the zerg and protoss buffs from the last patches or introduce something else. I honestly feel a little bad for terran sometimes on ladder (though not when they bully you with marauders ugh)
I feel like 2 things need to happen:
Terran needs to be buffed OR zerg and protoss nerfed
AND
Skill ceiling for zerg and protoss need to be higher (however you interpret this, whether it be high multitasking/micro like terran, or in their own unique ways). For terran, there is a lot of reward if you're skilled. And so recently, we've been seeing the game balanced around that, so that lower level players poorly (as seen in that ladder thread showing the MMR offset that exists for racial imbalances)
While terran might need to split/kite during fight...or how you put it micro more, although not 100% true...the other races already got other things...you can just let your energy go to max and then throw 4 mules...everything will be fine...well zerg can't inject on full energy and everything be fine...the same goes for chronoboost(although to a lesser extent), zerg also has to creep spread and during fight even if you consider it A move for zerg they do have to keep their infestors alive cast fungal and surround your units as much as possible...while the protosses have to forcefield, keep their colosi back from vikings, blink the stalkers...make sure their zealots aren't stuck in the back....while as terran you just stim/siege and split...I do think that all of them take equal fight micro while the other races even take more than terran for macro...just my 2 cents.
I bolded that part in the last paragraph because I think it is important. I'm only diamond, but I don't want to diminish the value of knowing when to siege, or when, how and how fast to split. I play primarily zerg but playing terran is extremely difficult when it comes to splitting marines and microing against heavy splash units like banelings. I'm not saying one is harder than the other, but "just stim and split" I think under-emphasizes how hard that action is.
The problem is that we're trying to balance a race that is inherently more abusive than others. At the highest levels Terran is more prone to abuse and certain strategies that make them seem overpowered, like bunkers shielding marines until completion or shoot-n-scoot. The problem i that nerfing those strategies penalizes the less skilled players who can't do that. When the infestor buffed happened I barely lost a game in almost two months.. but it was just "ctrl-group all infestors in one group, fungal the hell out of things and win game". Except for avoiding templar and emps, microing infestors has been 12387102938x as easy as microing a general terran army.
I'm no genius and I don't know how to balance this game, but I think moving the races towards a less abusive composition might be helpful.
On August 19 2012 17:46 Tritanis wrote: Make fungals unstackable. So if infestors hit aready fungaled units with the spell again, it does absolutely nothing, not even refresh the spell duration. This, in my opinion, would make fungal require a little more skill/timing to use, as opposed to how easy is to cast right now (with its instant cast time and refreshable duration it takes little skill to perform chain fungals from safe range).
That sounds incredibly stupid because it would make fungal the only spell with that function (not refreshing the spell when stacked) and make it incredibly punishing to Zerg. That's not even a nerf or a balance fix, it's literally just to fuck over ONLY Zerg players.
On August 19 2012 17:46 Tritanis wrote: Make fungals unstackable. So if infestors hit aready fungaled units with the spell again, it does absolutely nothing, not even refresh the spell duration. This, in my opinion, would make fungal require a little more skill/timing to use, as opposed to how easy is to cast right now (with its instant cast time and refreshable duration it takes little skill to perform chain fungals from safe range). Along with this nerf, a little duration buff could be implemented: from 4 to 5 or 6 seconds.
problem with this is blink
Still, I think current fungal is a bigger problem.
If other masters/gm/pro Terrans can leave their input in this thread, that would surely be appreciated by the entire community. I hope I at least put out some food for thought and that this will lead to discussion.
Why do you only want input from other terrans and not from the other side of the matchup by the zergs? Sounds to me like all you want is for people to agree with you.
On August 19 2012 17:46 Tritanis wrote: Make fungals unstackable. So if infestors hit aready fungaled units with the spell again, it does absolutely nothing, not even refresh the spell duration. This, in my opinion, would make fungal require a little more skill/timing to use, as opposed to how easy is to cast right now (with its instant cast time and refreshable duration it takes little skill to perform chain fungals from safe range).
That sounds incredibly stupid because it would make fungal the only spell with that function (not refreshing the spell when stacked) and make it incredibly punishing to Zerg. That's not even a nerf or a balance fix, it's literally just to fuck over ONLY Zerg players.
Let's see. There are a whole two(2) abilities in the game that do damage in an area over time (fungal and storm). And storm already doesn't stack (yes, it is 'refreshed' but you deserve to take the damage if you stay in one place for more than 4 seconds and ignore the shiny lightning storm). So, I disagree. Changing one of the two similar spells to balance the game is not "fucking the zerg over".
Until I start seeing Terrans mixing in Ghosts to deal with mass infestors then i don't see what Blizzard can do about it. While infestors are the best spell caster in the game, they cost 150 gas each so are a massive investment and also come with massive drawbacks( no attack , no utility dps and very large )
I am regularly seeing 10+ packs of these things running around and not seeing Terrans even attempt to EMP them
Without the Infestor the Zerg army including Broodlords is garbage. Muta play is completely negated these days by Terrans who have worked out how to shut it down. Its almost a guaranteed loss to go Muta \ Baneling so that leaves Zerg going for their own Deathball just like Protoss (which imho is in an even worse state than TvZ)
I would personally still like to see Ghost snipe buffed up to +35 and Queen range reduced to 4 and see how that pans out. HOTS is soon here so all of this is moot anyways
On August 19 2012 17:46 Tritanis wrote: Make fungals unstackable. So if infestors hit aready fungaled units with the spell again, it does absolutely nothing, not even refresh the spell duration. This, in my opinion, would make fungal require a little more skill/timing to use, as opposed to how easy is to cast right now (with its instant cast time and refreshable duration it takes little skill to perform chain fungals from safe range).
That sounds incredibly stupid because it would make fungal the only spell with that function (not refreshing the spell when stacked) and make it incredibly punishing to Zerg. That's not even a nerf or a balance fix, it's literally just to fuck over ONLY Zerg players.
What? Of course a single nerf is going to hurt only one race.
On August 19 2012 17:46 Tritanis wrote: Make fungals unstackable. So if infestors hit aready fungaled units with the spell again, it does absolutely nothing, not even refresh the spell duration. This, in my opinion, would make fungal require a little more skill/timing to use, as opposed to how easy is to cast right now (with its instant cast time and refreshable duration it takes little skill to perform chain fungals from safe range).
That sounds incredibly stupid because it would make fungal the only spell with that function (not refreshing the spell when stacked) and make it incredibly punishing to Zerg. That's not even a nerf or a balance fix, it's literally just to fuck over ONLY Zerg players.
Let's see. There are a whole two(2) abilities in the game that do damage in an area over time (fungal and storm). And storm already doesn't stack (yes, it is 'refreshed' but you deserve to take the damage if you stay in one place for more than 4 seconds and ignore the shiny lightning storm). So, I disagree.
Yeah, and I think you "deserve" to take the damage on more units and should be kept in place so they will actually die if you are incapable of splitting/positioning/sieging your units. The other problem with your idea is that it would mess with ZvP a bitsy... Blink would be pretty retarded strong. It's hard enough to defend immortal/sentry and big blink allins, but you mess up a fungal by .1 of a second and it's wasted whilst you only have 5-6 infestors with energy? If you don't fungal in time he blinks away and you have stalkers that lost ~1/2 of their shields? Honestly, the guy who said fungal shouldn't snare and should instead slow by ~80% has a much better idea.
On August 19 2012 15:53 Incomplet wrote: IEM in the past few days. MVP vs Nestea - HSM into Nesteas Corrupter Broodlords. Nestea GG's MVP vs Slivko - HSM into Slivko's infestors. Slivko GG's
How did he do it to avoid fungals on his ravens? He scanned in advance to see his exact opponents composition and location, spread out his ravens and approached in small groups from multiple angles. This is all without the speed increase, let alone when the patch comes through.
Yes it did take him ages to build up his group of ravens and then the energy. But he turtled hard and continuesly multi prong dropped to buy heaps of time.
I agree, he did buy time with his harass but context wise, your point is irrelevant. You are referring to a game that was over 20 min long and a terran who was able to amass an army based off 6 bases. Good luck trying amassing ravens on a map like Antigua.
MVP spread out his units - that's good tactical thinking. The other two zergs didn't, imagine if they did.
Finally people keep saying the speed buff will help but never address how? How will it help? Will it increase chances that fungals miss because they are so agile now? Will it make escaping easier? Will it make getting up close easier?
What actually happens right now, is that terrans tend to group their raven with the rest of the army and unlike zerg where you have melee zerglings and bigger roaches blocking the way of infestors, when a terran moves his army, what usually happens? The ranged units all attack from afar and then a few seconds later the raven flies overhead and right into the line of fire. A zerg sloppy with the way he controls his infestors doesn't suffer as much because the infestors being on the ground usually have to path around roaches, and zerglings first. When do you often see infestors dying? After the ground army has been moped up. Ravens in typical usage? Usually in the first few seconds of skirmishes.
On August 19 2012 17:46 Tritanis wrote: Make fungals unstackable. So if infestors hit aready fungaled units with the spell again, it does absolutely nothing, not even refresh the spell duration. This, in my opinion, would make fungal require a little more skill/timing to use, as opposed to how easy is to cast right now (with its instant cast time and refreshable duration it takes little skill to perform chain fungals from safe range).
That sounds incredibly stupid because it would make fungal the only spell with that function (not refreshing the spell when stacked) and make it incredibly punishing to Zerg. That's not even a nerf or a balance fix, it's literally just to fuck over ONLY Zerg players.
What? Of course a single nerf is going to hurt only one race.
Yeah, I know, I was just meaning to say that it's beyond changing something a bit, or fixing it for other races, it's just completely boning fungal (and most Zergs) in an unfair way. I also added the "ONLY" because the mechanic wouldn't affect storm.
I find it funny when people bring up Taeja's TvZ and saying theres no problem with the current state of affairs. Taeja does not represent the T race as a whole which seems to have alot of problems shown by the lack of success on ladder and tournaments.
What Taeja shows is that his incredible work ethic/skill and decision making can overcome this balance issue most T are facing. Hes an outlier and good on him for playing through hard times in terms of TvZ balance. Another good example would be how god awful the maps (BW) in 06~07 were T favoured (Longinus 2 and Reverse Temple) Savior is the ONLY zerg to overcome map imbalance yet that didn't mean zergs were "fine" at all.
The balance issue can be often be compensated by ones skills/decision making (well up to a point), but most of us know that alot of T players other than a few select korean pros find it very very hard to close that gap (Even these guys says its hard - cbf finding them references :D). So Im not surprised at all seeing the T populace go down, lack of foreigner Ts in the foreign scene and most of the upcoming foreigner pros being mostly Z or P.
I guess this idea : "Make fungals unstackable. So if infestors hit aready fungaled units with the spell again, it does absolutely nothing, not even refresh the spell duration" may be good.
But i prefer the one of that fungal will not be able anymore to root "massive" units, like Archons, Carriers, BC, Mothership.
It is already the case for ultralisk. And with that solution, archon toilet will become easier to place (and then, zerg who are spamming "split ur viking" will have to split their own units, and positionning better, and carriers / BC will become more common.
That will change nothing for ravens, for sure. But it may help mega late game PvZ and TvZ. And if bli wants to see raven used a little more, (actually, there are no reasons for removing carriers from the game, and keep ravens. I do not see more ravens that carriers), they may decrease the amount of energy needed for the missile, or improve the amount of energy which have ravens when they pop. Or increase the range of the missile, and decrease something else of this spell (damages, splash...)
Next thing you gonna tell us is that PvZ is totally fine and you aren't forced to do a 2 base timings every single game since Zerg gets out of control in the early game and you cant pressure them any more with your early zealots etc, to deny the third due to queens kiting the crap out of your early units... Obviously, If you actually want to play like that all the time that's fine.
Oh and:
People keep mentioning Taeja.
Well if all you got is mentioning Taeja out of hundreds of Terran pros (both Korean and foreign) then you basically confirm the silliness of TvZ where you have to play perfectly to win OR all the other Terran pros have suddenly become shit at the matchup.
On August 19 2012 15:53 Incomplet wrote: IEM in the past few days. MVP vs Nestea - HSM into Nesteas Corrupter Broodlords. Nestea GG's MVP vs Slivko - HSM into Slivko's infestors. Slivko GG's
How did he do it to avoid fungals on his ravens? He scanned in advance to see his exact opponents composition and location, spread out his ravens and approached in small groups from multiple angles. This is all without the speed increase, let alone when the patch comes through.
Yes it did take him ages to build up his group of ravens and then the energy. But he turtled hard and continuesly multi prong dropped to buy heaps of time.
Do you know how many times has that strategy failed to work? Because it's pretty important to understand whether your discussing examples proving the rule or just an exception to it.
I'm sure mvp wouldn't be doing it in a tournament vs someone of nesteas caliber if he knew it didn't have a high success rate.
No I'm sure he wouldn't be doing it in a tournament if he had any other viable choice in a late game turtle. What go harder bio? Harder mech? Harder turrets? Harder ghosts?
It is quite obvious that fungal range needs to reduced. Chain fungals would still be possible with reduced range but the infestors would be more at risk if they needed to get closer to fungal.
HSM energy cost cannot be reduced since 2 HSM on one Raven would be OP.
Raven upgrades needs to be cheaper and have lower research time.
All of this is very obvious and it baffles me that Blizzard has not really implemented it yet.
On August 19 2012 18:15 YyapSsap wrote: I find it funny when people bring up Taeja's TvZ and saying theres no problem with the current state of affairs. Taeja does not represent the T race as a whole which seems to have alot of problems shown by the lack of success on ladder and tournaments.
What Taeja shows is that his incredible work ethic/skill and decision making can overcome this balance issue most T are facing. Hes an outlier and good on him for playing through hard times in terms of TvZ balance. Another good example would be how god awful the maps (BW) in 06~07 were T favoured (Longinus 2 and Reverse Temple) Savior is the ONLY zerg to overcome map imbalance yet that didn't mean zergs were "fine" at all.
The balance issue can be often be compensated by ones skills/decision making (well up to a point), but most of us know that alot of T players other than a few select korean pros find it very very hard to close that gap (Even these guys says its hard - cbf finding them references :D). So Im not surprised at all seeing the T populace go down, lack of foreigner Ts in the foreign scene and most of the upcoming foreigner pros being mostly Z or P.
There's never been many top foreign terrans, even when terrans ruled the earth in Korea.
Zerg is definitely quite strong now, but you didn't take into account at all that Infestors can be nullified with hts and ghosts.
Also, creep is getting nerfed so soon it should be a bit easier on the terran side of things.
As for the queen change.. I don't really know how to feel. In a way I feel like it completely nullifies all hellion openings and makes it very easy for zerg to get a good saturation without sacrificing any larvae. On the other hand, it might just take some time for terrans to figure out how to effectively play tvz.
Aren't the winrates still quite even? There is little statistical support to saying that something about zerg is imba.
Terran has such small timing windows to make something happen.
All early game cheeses patched out.
Mid-game (if they survived they can push with 2-2 bio +1 tank and do something.
Late game Terran has to outplay the zerg straight up. Running around the map sniping expos because they lose any straight up battle.
Ravens are garbage. I can't believe pro gamers are humoring blizzard by actually making them. Broodlords benefit from melee upgrades which compound all game. Why would you switch into air terran when you spent the whole game getting 3-3 bio and mech upgrades.
On August 19 2012 18:13 ScienceNotBusiness wrote: oh i get it....a terran player who can barely beat low GM on NA is proposing a balance argument. LOL
It may be reaaaally difficult for you. But maybe you can look past the fact that this thread hasn't been made by a Code S Korean and read the opening post.
I play zerg and yet believe that fungal should snare instead of root. A massive slow, something like "units affected by fungal suffer an 80% slow" would make for a much better game imo.
Nerfing infestors is a very delicate thing to do, it's a staple of a lot of zerg builds to be able to not die before broodlords, and plays a big part in the big sentry/immortal pushes. But later on it becomes too strong, I think having broodlords with slightly less health (taking one less viking volley to kill for example) would also be a potential fix.
And to finish queens with 4 range, right between the old and new one. You have to admit that the old 3 range made double factory hellion allins much too strong, but the new 5 one turns the matchup into a 10mn no-rush borefest.
Templar/infestors are able to become useful 100% right when they pop out in the form of either feedbacks, archons, fungal, or IT. Ravens are a gamble and incredible risk because of the time necessary to make them pay off with HSMs, and even in the case you do get an HSM, if your raven is fungalled you suddenly have a paper weight in terms of an investment. Then the ravens die, that's -200 gas for TErran and the infestors are able to burrow and get away.
:O
stopped reading
PDD is not useless.
Any unit (except the ultra) is at the mercy of fungal. This is starcraft. With more raven speed maybe you can start raven splitting. "Oh zerg HAS to clump oup broods for HSM to be effective", well, if zerg can split broods, you certainly can split ravens. GL.
On August 19 2012 11:19 cactusjack914 wrote: Yea, lets just ignore having this discussion because avilo started the thread? Im guessing if this thread was started by someone else the discussion would have started insteaded of just being ignored completely.
How is your arguement plausible, when no one else started it?
On August 19 2012 18:44 NeonFox wrote: I play zerg and yet believe that fungal should snare instead of root. A massive slow, something like "units affected by fungal suffer an 80% slow" would make for a much better game imo.
Nerfing infestors is a very delicate thing to do, it's a staple of a lot of zerg builds to be able to not die before broodlords, and plays a big part in the big sentry/immortal pushes. But later on it becomes too strong, I think having broodlords with slightly less health (taking one less viking volley to kill for example) would also be a potential fix.
And to finish queens with 4 range, right between the old and new one. You have to admit that the old 3 range made double factory hellion allins much too strong, but the new 5 one turns the matchup into a 10mn no-rush borefest.
Really like those ideas actually, it is really tough for terran when they get chain fungalled, yet were only a few pixels out of position. The idea that fungal stops you microing at all seems very negative for the game.
Queens with 4 range sounds about right too. The early game dynamic between marines and stalkers is quite interesting because of the 1 range difference and requires very precise micro, whereas with queens having equal range as marines/hellions means that battles are just attack move.
A 4 range queen would suddenly make micro more important again, although it would be a lot tougher for the terran player compared to the old 3 range. Any idiot could kite 3 range queens but it would require a lot more attention and skill if the range difference was only 1.
Changes that encourage more micro are surely good?
Templar/infestors are able to become useful 100% right when they pop out in the form of either feedbacks, archons, fungal, or IT. Ravens are a gamble and incredible risk because of the time necessary to make them pay off with HSMs, and even in the case you do get an HSM, if your raven is fungalled you suddenly have a paper weight in terms of an investment. Then the ravens die, that's -200 gas for TErran and the infestors are able to burrow and get away.
:O
stopped reading
PDD is not useless.
Any unit (except the ultra) is at the mercy of fungal. This is starcraft. With more raven speed maybe you can start raven splitting. "Oh zerg HAS to clump oup broods for HSM to be effective", well, if zerg can split broods, you certainly can split ravens. GL.
Hi, first time posting on Team Liquid, thought i would address some stuff that avilo said in accordance to the TvZ matchup
A) Look at the Match Win-Rates for July. they are still close to 50-50, something you fail to concede when writing your posts B) Yes, the queen buff IS powerful, but so are many of the utilities that Terran have to offer. Many terran's have lately been going a style that includes a fast 3 command centers, using hellions to kill creep tumors (when possible) and a banshee for harass. the banshee and hellions pull the queens in so many different directions, the zerg is forced to create units to deal the with hellions or loose drones/their creep spread. even the threat of an attack from the terran can force units from the zerg, balancing the advantage the zerg gets from being able to drone so hard in the early game C) The Raven speed change does address the issues with late game TvZ brood lord Infestor. you whine about how imbalanced fungal growth is as a stunning spell, but a speed increase with the ravens will help in wasting fungals as the infestors try to fungal your army. D) continuing with the complaints on Infestors, you talk about how they "force an engagement" in places that are unfavorable to your race. well i hate to break it to you, but we aren't the only ones with those capabilities. Protoss can use a combination of storm and force fields to both force an engagement and destroy an army in a matter of seconds. Terran's can use chokes to really punish ling heavy builds, and brood lord armies can be easily trapped due to how slow they are.
I understand you feel frustrated with the new patch changes, a race consistently feels at odds when it is nerfed or another is buffed, but with time, players learn to adapt to a changing situation with different strategies and mindsets. I would recomend checking out Demuslim or Supernova if you wanted to see their style in TvZ, which has been working out quite well for them!
On August 19 2012 11:45 .Sic. wrote: Why did a lot of the terrans stop getting ghosts for EMP and snipe vs infestors (I've seen a few like gumiho)? I know that protoss players try to actively feedback vs infestors or storm them.
I think one of the issues with ghosts vs infestors is that fungals can hit cloaked ghosts with fungals. So in big engagements, fungals is actually better due to the size of infestors. Even if infestors are clumped up, it takes quite a few EMPs to land while it takes 1-2 fungals to nap all the ghosts. Also, if enemy has overseers, your ghosts are just so much harder to retain while infestors can stay in the back and usually get away. zergs have been a lot better with their infestor control and retention.
ive seen one EMP get majoritty of the infesters of a Zerg, infesters clump up pretty nicely and we need all th energy we can get so even removing 2/3rd of the infesters can pretty mcuh gurantee you win the next engagement if your smart at it
It takes 2 EMPs to remove fungal. You only need about 3-4 fungals to adequately accentuate your force for the duration of an engagement; I'd be surprised if a battle lasted longer than that. Also with the lower EMP radius, you really can't hit 2/3 of the infestors if they are maxed and have the appropriate ratio in their composition.
3-4 fungals does not destroy an entire Terran army...
3-4 fungals barely kills 2 small clumps of marines
what? 3-4 fungals ALWAYS kills clumps of marines. I'm pretty sure it only takes 2 fungals to bring marines down to red and 3 to kil them
It's all dependent on medivac energy, sometimes 3-4 fungals dont kill a single marine.
On August 19 2012 11:10 InDesconrowl wrote: Give it some time, Taeja is doing just fine in TvZ.
Instead of asking blizzard to change the game because you are struggling why don't you analyze Taeja's gameplay and learn how he succeeds in TvZ.
dude stop... that's always everyone excuse, mvp is doing fine, taeja is doing fine, well guess what, nestea won an entire gsl without dropping a single game, if you wanna say taeja is doing fine, then zerg shouldn't have ever been buffed, because nestea is doing fine
But terran is getting buff :s Ah. this feels useless
On August 19 2012 11:45 .Sic. wrote: Why did a lot of the terrans stop getting ghosts for EMP and snipe vs infestors (I've seen a few like gumiho)? I know that protoss players try to actively feedback vs infestors or storm them.
I think one of the issues with ghosts vs infestors is that fungals can hit cloaked ghosts with fungals. So in big engagements, fungals is actually better due to the size of infestors. Even if infestors are clumped up, it takes quite a few EMPs to land while it takes 1-2 fungals to nap all the ghosts. Also, if enemy has overseers, your ghosts are just so much harder to retain while infestors can stay in the back and usually get away. zergs have been a lot better with their infestor control and retention.
ive seen one EMP get majoritty of the infesters of a Zerg, infesters clump up pretty nicely and we need all th energy we can get so even removing 2/3rd of the infesters can pretty mcuh gurantee you win the next engagement if your smart at it
It takes 2 EMPs to remove fungal. You only need about 3-4 fungals to adequately accentuate your force for the duration of an engagement; I'd be surprised if a battle lasted longer than that. Also with the lower EMP radius, you really can't hit 2/3 of the infestors if they are maxed and have the appropriate ratio in their composition.
What... you need way more than 3-4 fungals unless the terran is really bad and doesnt split his units. 2 emps from one ghost can render atleast 3 infesstors useless. If you snipe, even better cause the infestors are now dead.
blizzard has never balanced a game perfectly.. not one of them ever, the only thing you can really do imo is adapt like how the scene did in BW and make maps that cater to certain races over other races to balance the issues out.
So really ask what would balance out issues in TvZ? personally i like the idea of having lots of up/down hills that deny easy creep spread as an example that would help keep creep back but not in anyway make Z at a real disadvantage, it would just slow down the creep spread a bit. Another example would be map sizes / distances from say main-nat-3rd for T drops vs Z.. just some examples. No need for anything extreme just experiment with maps and work your way towards a more balanced game.
On August 19 2012 17:46 Tritanis wrote: Make fungals unstackable. So if infestors hit aready fungaled units with the spell again, it does absolutely nothing, not even refresh the spell duration. This, in my opinion, would make fungal require a little more skill/timing to use, as opposed to how easy is to cast right now (with its instant cast time and refreshable duration it takes little skill to perform chain fungals from safe range).
That sounds incredibly stupid because it would make fungal the only spell with that function (not refreshing the spell when stacked) and make it incredibly punishing to Zerg. That's not even a nerf or a balance fix, it's literally just to fuck over ONLY Zerg players.
Wrong. Storm does not stack, and stacking EMPs has extremely dimished returns.
On August 19 2012 19:01 partydude89 wrote: Hi, first time posting on Team Liquid, thought i would address some stuff that avilo said in accordance to the TvZ matchup
B) Yes, the queen buff IS powerful, but so are many of the utilities that Terran have to offer. Many terran's have lately been going a style that includes a fast 3 command centers, using hellions to kill creep tumors (when possible) and a banshee for harass. the banshee and hellions pull the queens in so many different directions, the zerg is forced to create units to deal the with hellions or loose drones/their creep spread. even the threat of an attack from the terran can force units from the zerg, balancing the advantage the zerg gets from being able to drone so hard in the early game C) The Raven speed change does address the issues with late game TvZ brood lord Infestor. you whine about how imbalanced fungal growth is as a stunning spell, but a speed increase with the ravens will help in wasting fungals as the infestors try to fungal your army.
First, welcome to TL!
Second, The fact that the way Terran has to keep up with Zerg is by doing a 3 OC build is what people are angry about. It creates No-Rush, No Early Action, games that are down right terrible to watch. Last thing Starcraft needs is less viewers when its already dwarfed in viewership by a sub-par game. In order to kill creep with Hellions, Terran has to A) Find a hole in range 5 Queen defense. B) Find active creep tumors, usually located where the Queens are. and C) Fall behind in worker count/income to use a scan, while Zerg just drones behind his non-larva costing Queens. All this to deny their rapid spreading map vision. Seems like Zerg gets the best end of the bargain.
Third, spreading Ravens to avoid Fungals works, sometimes. Until you realize that Fungal is range 9 and HSM is range 6. IF Terran ever does get a HSM off without the Raven dying uselessy, I expect the Zerg to be required to split their units. Similar to how Terran is required to split when you attack move with Banelings. Not to mention Brood Lord tech and its supporting units (and even alternative if Brood Lords fail) all benefit from +Melee upgrades. Terran's tech tree is nowhere near as linear and simple as Zerg. You can research one upgrade and Fungal is good to go. Terran has to, at minium, research two. Corvid Reactor for Raven starting energy, which still isn't enough to HSM straight from the Starport, and HSM itself. Seems like Zerg, again, gets the better end of the bargain.
TvZ may be "balanced" depending on how you wish to interpret the numbers, but ravens SUCK.
And i mean outright suck in their design, they have abilities that have no synergy whatsoever and are often not worth upgrading. Let's take a look at them:
- Pop-up Turret
On the surface it seems like a cheap wall that can synergize with the ranged terran army, unfortunately their 1x1 footprint and measley HP makes them utterly worthless. Not to mention that they are pea-shooters, and all the upgrades they can get have no impact on their functionality at all.
- PDD
Of course this can be useful, unfortunately it does not block the most important projectiles such as broodlings and colossi lasers. The only spell worth using.
- Seeker Missile
The all-time worst ability in the game, 2 years running and still an utter piece of shit unless the game somehow goes to mass air in TvT. Supposed to be a test of skill where the enemy micros away his units, unfortunately the missile is either:
A) Never launched because the raven gets blown up by fungals/feedback B) Never hits the target because it moves like a 1970s daihatsu C) Somehow manages to hit something and kills it but because it costs 125 energy the zerg remakes his army and you are now helpless
The obvious solution is just to give the Raven irradiate, which is far more versatile and skill testing. It is also a strategy in itself as making the powerful but fragile "raven cloud" supported by MMM can be very mobile and exciting to watch ala SK Terran.
Master Terran/Zerg who has played both sides of the matchup extensively here.
I feel that if it's so easy to get to late game as Zerg (which it is which Queen buff given creep spread with extra Queens etc), fungal shouldn't be as powerful. Fungal not only deals damage but also negates micro. It takes an incredible amount of multitasking to keep marines spread out to avoid getting mass fungaled while worrying about macro (forget about multi-pronged attacks while Infestors are out). Brood Lord/Corruptor/Infestor is borderline impossible to deal with because of the tech switches required. Obviously MMM shouldn't be a viable counter to that unit composition, but in order to get a different tech tree, you need to completely switch your tech infrastructure and that takes time that you just don't have during the mid-game.
As for ideas to "balance" that...I'd say decreasing fungal radius or removing the negation of micro by the spell itself. The dynamic unit movement in Starcraft 2 essentially guarantees that Marines/whatever are going to move in a perfect ball, and that's a perfect environment for an Infestor to get 20+ kills with literally 5 clicks. It takes zero skill, and it's incredibly frustrating not only to play against a Zerg as a Terran and have your whole control group die, but also to watch games where Terrans clearly should win, but end up losing simply because the Zerg can preserve a handful of Infestors.
On August 19 2012 18:28 Vapaach wrote: On the other hand, it might just take some time for terrans to figure out how to effectively play tvz.
There is little statistical support to saying that something about zerg is imba.
yes you would probably still say this same fucking bullshit in 3 years....."let the terrans figure out how to play tvz"....i heard that sentece MONTHS ago....how fucking long do guys like you want to let "terra figure out"???
there is more then enough statistical support, ladderwinrates say nothing you should activate your brain or google how ladder winrates will allways be close to 50/50 even if one race is drasticly overpowered....and go check how many terrans/zergs/protoss are in GM in the different servers, THAT alone is enough statistical support
On August 19 2012 19:29 Sixer wrote: Master Terran/Zerg who has played both sides of the matchup extensively here.
I feel that if it's so easy to get to late game as Zerg (which it is which Queen buff given creep spread with extra Queens etc), fungal shouldn't be as powerful. Fungal not only deals damage but also negates micro. It takes an incredible amount of multitasking to keep marines spread out to avoid getting mass fungaled while worrying about macro (forget about multi-pronged attacks while Infestors are out). Brood Lord/Corruptor/Infestor is borderline impossible to deal with because of the tech switches required. Obviously MMM shouldn't be a viable counter to that unit composition, but in order to get a different tech tree, you need to completely switch your tech infrastructure and that takes time that you just don't have during the mid-game.
As for ideas to "balance" that...I'd say decreasing fungal radius or removing the negation of micro by the spell itself. The dynamic unit movement in Starcraft 2 essentially guarantees that Marines/whatever are going to move in a perfect ball, and that's a perfect environment for an Infestor to get 20+ kills with literally 5 clicks. It takes zero skill, and it's incredibly frustrating not only to play against a Zerg as a Terran and have your whole control group die, but also to watch games where Terrans clearly should win, but end up losing simply because the Zerg can preserve a handful of Infestors.
The changes to the Raven mean that it can now outrun these units, where previously it was slower: - Sentries - Unstimmed marines - Ghosts - Void rays - Infesters (off creep) - Hydras (off creep)
well you could think these current changes don't affect alot, because tumors most of the time aren't spread on max range anyway, and the raven won't speed up an escape faster then other units(oops apparently it does quiet heavily even yay). But the tumors will have an effect on low level zergs creep spread, where terran is really hard to play. And the raven buff helps you escape, if you use the raven. So yes if you think about not changing anything, nothing will change for you. I personally have no problem keeping my raven up and running the whole game (unless i lose horrible against mutas), but i see alot of people losing their ravens needlessly. And most not even utilizing it. Its kind of like the refusal to use the mothership against zerg.
On August 19 2012 11:14 Arkansassy wrote: I think you should have bolded this, avilo. Obivously some people just see your name and don't bother reading - or can't *shrugs*
Pretty much this. Did any other pro comment on this matter in this thread?
There's a few things that could make the raven much better.
Turrets get benefits from upgrades Seeker Missile costs half, maybe 3/4 energy so you don't use one seeker missile and lose your entire amount of energy that takes ages to build up Seeker missile initial fire range increased so your ravens don't insta die as soon as you cast it. PDD is fine as it is.
Irradiate would be nice to have again, but I think with a good amount of seeker missile buffs it could be as good as the Sci vessel was with irradiate.
Regardless of win rates, people need to learn that the effort involved needs to be considered in balance. Terrans have to do SO much more than other races to get a win, and buffing Raven speed does nothing to change this.
IN FACT, akin to the pre speed-nerf infestor, this may indeed be a nerf to the Raven, getting it fungalled even easier.
The amount of people going "Just play like TaeJa, ezpz" is aggravating. He's arguably the best player in the world right now, you can't just play like him. He's not using any kind of special builds, he's just amazingly good with everything he does.
Every Terran but him struggles with the match-up. Just look at the IEM results yesterday.
The upgrades need to be accessible easier. There is 5 upgrades for Ravens which only affect the unit itself, 2 from Engineering bay and 3 from Startport's Tech-Lab and that's just way too much. They should look either at the Upgrades build time or cost and I would like to see Durable Materials removed and granted to Ravens automatically.
One of the issue with creep is that it just recedes insanely slowly. I say it's ridiculous in the current meta-game, NOTE; current, it was much different when creep spread wasn't so easily spread before so it just made sense it receded slowly. Right now the fact that it takes 120 seconds for creep tumor and 60 seconds for overlord creep to recede is really something Blizzard should look at when it comes to creep.
I understand Zerg should have the opportunity to have the defender's advantage with slow creep recede but in the current state it's too much in my opinion thus it would only need to be a slight reduce.
Op could be a post in the balance discussion thread imo.
But ontopic: Queen buff should not be reverted; i agree that fungal taking away micro is problematic.
Queen scenario: blizzard proposes queen change -> everyone plays with queen -> different queen buff comes up. I feel like this will be the same scenario. The change is not final.
On August 19 2012 11:10 InDesconrowl wrote: Give it some time, Taeja is doing just fine in TvZ.
Instead of asking blizzard to change the game because you are struggling why don't you analyze Taeja's gameplay and learn how he succeeds in TvZ.
dude stop... that's always everyone excuse, mvp is doing fine, taeja is doing fine, well guess what, nestea won an entire gsl without dropping a single game, if you wanna say taeja is doing fine, then zerg shouldn't have ever been buffed, because nestea is doing fine
Or DRG's 90% win rate in TvZ at one point, infact if that's how we're going to approach it then maybe we should have nerfed zerg!
But seriously, people need to actually have a discussion about the post instead of saying "avilo u r a fag" or "taeja does it". TL discussion is fucking embarrassing sometimes...
We can´t. I think other than Korean GM randoms like Mvp there is hardly anybody who is truy capable of judging. The super high level Zergs don´t know Terran enough and the other way around. Thats why I personally don´t care a lot about QXCs or Avilos opinion. Both are judging from their own perspective, but both are not capable of abusing terran like MKP, Taeja and in a certain way Mvp.
When we discuss balance we should always look at the highest level of play. Sadly there are only very, very few games between these strongest players. The sample size is just way too small do judge.
I agree with most of the OP. The biggest concern I have is the time the change was made, and the reason it was made to begin with. Blizzard has stated in numerous interviews and blog posts that they thought zerg wasn't getting to be zergie enough with 4 hellions containing them. While I disagree that 4 hellions can contain a zerg (speedlings can surround them easily if terran isn't staring at the hellions for that exact moment, or roaches), I will consent for the sake of argument. They change the queens to make zerg feel more zergie, this is a nice idea, zerg feels more zergie, whoopdie do! The big problem here is that they made a clear balance change in favor of zerg, at a point when the matchup was even at all levels (and slowly moving towards the zerg's favor what with map and metagame changes). They combined the queen change with the overlord speed change, and a whole lot of maps that allow zerg to spot move outs from terrans through overlord cliffs next to the choke at the natural. This allows zerg to just build queens "blindly", because if terran moves out they will know about it immediately. Terran has to over-commit to do an attack that punishes queen play, meaning zerg can over-react in defense and still be in a superior position.
The simplest of answers is to reverse the queen range change. Hellions need to be able to provide that valuable information and map control. If terran has no safe way to scout without comitting, then they will always be forced to take risks to stay on par with a zerg who has a strong economy and catch-all defense.
The hellion builds from terran forced a reaction from zerg, they had to sim city and play tight, and if they wanted to take their third before lair without commiting a lot of larvae to speedlings, they would have to make some roaches or slowly push out with spine(s) and queens. This allowed terran to draw units to the front and get a fairly good idea of what was going on in the zerg's base without having to see it. It allowed zergs to drop macro hatches early in their main and power up on 2 bases for really unit heavy t2 midgames. These factors combined made for a much more interactive TvZ midgame, the early was a bit predictable (terran would have an expo and 4-6 hellions). There was still the exciting posibility of killing drones if zerg made a mistake and terran could sneak some hellions in, or zerg might be able to kill off the hellions if they commited to speedlings and got a surround when terran wasn't paying close enough attention, but there was some sense of stability. Neither player was super scared of dieing immediately because they both had a good read on the game (overlords to check gas timings, hellions to spot tech choices and queen counts). The queen change essentially erased this portion of the game, it's skipped over entirely, and zerg can go straight to three base. They have the option of either teching quickly to infestors and then brood or ultra, or they have the option to just make a ton of units and killing a terran who played safe and didn't take a super fast third base. Neither of these promote lots of little engagements. If zerg is going heavy on the ling bane, and lighter on the infestors/mutas, then an aggressive terran dies more often than not because zerg has cheaper production and stronger economy. This forces terrans to rely on siege tanks to survive the midgame. However, if zerg is going heavier on the infestors/ling and teching more quickly to hive, the tanking terran won't be putting on any pressure and zerg will be able to get their scary econ/infestor/hive combo going more quickly than terran will be able to deal with. It's kind of a strange setup, where zerg has a range between 2 distinct styles, and terran has a range between 2 distinct styles. In it's simplest form, tank heavy does well against ling/bane heavy play, and aggro bio with expos behind it does well against turtly infestor play, however defensive tank play does very poorly against passive infestor/hive play, and aggro bio does very poorly against heavy ling/bane.
Since terran's production facilities cost so much, and tanks take so long to produce, commiting to a lot of tanks prevents terran from being aggressive with bio, and committing to a lot of barracks and quicker medivacs to put on pressure with bio prevents terran from suddenly having enough tanks to play an efficient defensive game vs heavy ling/bane. Zerg on the other hand can build an infestation pit, see a ton of bio coming, and still instantly morph 30 banelings and delay going hive tech until they've stabilized, or on the flipside, they can see a lot of tanks in a defensive posture and only make banelings to defend drops and dump all the rest of their gas into infestors and hive tech. These mechanics alone straight up favor zerg. The compensation is supposed to be that their units are less effective and they have to have more drones so their max army should be considerably weaker than that of a terran's, however this didn't pan out as previously zergs had to be able to engage fairly straight up. Terrans have resorted to doing extremely risky builds just to keep up with zerg, going 1 rax CC CC into double gas off only a few marines, and then going directly into double ebay. The flipside is 2 base marine/marauder hellion all-ins, which if scouted do quite poorly. These builds are becoming standard, which allows zergs to just all-in blindly, or after having a speedie ovie scout a vulnerability, and win an overwhelming percentage of their games through exploiting simple build order losses of terrans forced into a bad spot.
Reverting the queen change will remove a lot of the risk factor of the build order choices, and while the focus will still be around both players securing their third bases, the interaction surrounding that focus will return to it's previous wonderment. Zergs will have to identify and exploit mistakes from terran players, and terrans will have opportunities to identify timings and openings in zerg's defense, pulling their mutas and lings around the map with medivac harass, and pushing forward to deny more creep and threaten zerg's fourth. We will finally get to experience a terran player pushing with marine tank after pulling a zerg's army out of position with carefully timed and placed medivac drops, securing a strong position, and taking a good engagement. Or zerg masterfully deflecting drops with just the right number of units and well placed static defense and a good overlord spread, and then catching an army off-guard and chasing terran back to a defensive position at their third. What made TvZ such an amazing matchup is that terran had a lot of options with their army, they could put most of it into drops and just leave their tanks and marines behind to defend, or they could focus their entire army together and just drill a single position on the map. Zerg would have to react by cutting off reinforcements, balling up enough units, and then crushing the isolated army. The amazing displays of multitasking, unit control, and strategic army positioning was really a treat to watch. I have yet to see a TvZ post patch evoke the same feeling, and the closest I've gotten are from games where both players executed old pre-patch build orders.
TL;DR: Terran defense loses to zerg passive hive, terran aggro loses to zerg aggro Revert change to remove the high number of build order wins/losses, and most importantly: Bring back terran's ability to move out on the map in the midgame by pulling zerg out of position with drop(s)
Such a silly thread. You contradicted yourself on the first paragraphs. How is it that a buff that improves ravens' ability to dodge/juke Fungal Growth doesn't help Ravens against infestors ?
On August 19 2012 14:47 Kaleidos wrote: I think Blizzard knows how much bad design it is fungal vs air units. They even tested a no air fungal long time ago, but in WoL looked it simply was too much. I foresee a no fungal vs air in hots with the hydra buff and hydra support buff (ya that doesn't help the current game). Talkin' about PvT, even just as a spectator (yup i'm Z), i noticed how HT's Feedback shutdown any attempt for the terran to go T3 Air, since both BC's and Ravens suffer immensely vs feedback, which the protoss always have in play late game. Maybe we should have Storm and Feedback on 2 different units (new Archon)? I don't know and it is not my job to find a solution, but i believe there might be an issue here too.
Feedback was indeed on a different unit in BW, the Dark Archon
..and i didn't even play BW :D ..Blizzy is probably saving a change in the protoss templar tech for LotV.
Anyway i see many suggesting to nerf infestor range or nerf fungal some other way. I believe that you do not want to see Less chain fungals ..you want to see None of them. Gameplay first, then balance.
On August 19 2012 20:14 Mondieu wrote: Such a silly thread. You contradicted yourself on the first paragraphs. How is it that a buff that improves ravens' ability to dodge/juke Fungal Growth doesn't help Ravens against infestors ?
He is trying to explain that this buff will slightly help Terran but it will not solve late-game problem.
Before the queen patch, the matchup was pretty even. Then it took a nose dive for terrans for the first couple of months after the patch. In the most recent tournaments however, the amount of terrans and zergs in the final stages have been more or less equal.
This behaviour of the TvZ winrate is to be expected after buff like that and does not indicate an imbalance before, after or even during the period of less winrate for terrans. The reason is that zerg players were not required to adapt to the new patch. They could play the old usual style without the big queen emphasis that we are seeing nowadays, and still fare well against terrans just like before the patch. Terrans were forced to adapt and create new builds to counter the new zerg playstyle. This process took some time, but now terrans and zergs are once again on even footing.
I'm sure there are high master/GM zergs that would play a UMS where you change the game the game to adequately balance the issues at hand.
This would of course require that you make a UMS map where the balance changes you suggest take place, and take the time to refine them and have those changes evaluated by your peers.
I think the points made in the OP are certainly thought provoking, but the availability of the map editor means that there is a way to show proof of concept for changes that you believe would fix the issue. There is too much talk going on when there is the option to act.
I'm of the opinion that the multi-million dollar company who's job it is to make these changes and to keep their game current and balanced is better suited to theorycraft than anyone else, and this includes pro players. I do, however, think that it's possible they make mistakes. The burden of proof is on us, the community, to show them AT LEAST proof of concept of a change that would make better sense before stating that their direction is wrong.
AS a GM terran player I can say that the true problem of tvz lies in infestors and creep. Giving zerg ability zerg to see everything whats happening. I mean, how many times youve seen terran to have comeback after bad start? And zerg? And raven speed doesnt help to that... The problem with raven is that you need to invest shitton of money to get them, example. 3 upgrades, atleast 2 starports is already 1000/1000 for infestor you need 300/300 to get them... +no dmg upgrade for autoturret, but if youre able to get huge raven count I cant disagree with it, its good.
the worst with the patching is that they patch it at different levels. the games dont always reach late game, so while they buff terran late game the buff will not always be noticeable ingame, simply because you dont always get to late game. the zerg buffs are all T1, every game you have sniperqueens, every game you have the overlord scouting.
this is just bad balancing by blizzard.
they should not buff a unit that is uesless, they should nerf stuff ppl (both terran and protoss) complain about. like funGGal
On August 19 2012 11:45 .Sic. wrote: Why did a lot of the terrans stop getting ghosts for EMP and snipe vs infestors (I've seen a few like gumiho)? I know that protoss players try to actively feedback vs infestors or storm them.
I think one of the issues with ghosts vs infestors is that fungals can hit cloaked ghosts with fungals. So in big engagements, fungals is actually better due to the size of infestors. Even if infestors are clumped up, it takes quite a few EMPs to land while it takes 1-2 fungals to nap all the ghosts. Also, if enemy has overseers, your ghosts are just so much harder to retain while infestors can stay in the back and usually get away. zergs have been a lot better with their infestor control and retention.
ive seen one EMP get majoritty of the infesters of a Zerg, infesters clump up pretty nicely and we need all th energy we can get so even removing 2/3rd of the infesters can pretty mcuh gurantee you win the next engagement if your smart at it
It takes 2 EMPs to remove fungal. You only need about 3-4 fungals to adequately accentuate your force for the duration of an engagement; I'd be surprised if a battle lasted longer than that. Also with the lower EMP radius, you really can't hit 2/3 of the infestors if they are maxed and have the appropriate ratio in their composition.
3-4 fungals does not destroy an entire Terran army...
3-4 fungals barely kills 2 small clumps of marines
what? 3-4 fungals ALWAYS kills clumps of marines. I'm pretty sure it only takes 2 fungals to bring marines down to red and 3 to kil them
It's all dependent on medivac energy, sometimes 3-4 fungals dont kill a single marine.
It depends upon ratio of medivacs to marines. The situation you describe only really happens when marines numbers are very low and medivac numbers are really high. When it gets to the point where each marine has his own personal medivac then fungals are not effective at all, but at this point the zerg player should have a load of units ready to pop out.
In any sort of large scale engagement fungals are going to kill marines very effectively.
On August 19 2012 19:01 partydude89 wrote: Hi, first time posting on Team Liquid, thought i would address some stuff that avilo said in accordance to the TvZ matchup
A) Look at the Match Win-Rates for July. they are still close to 50-50, something you fail to concede when writing your posts B) Yes, the queen buff IS powerful, but so are many of the utilities that Terran have to offer. Many terran's have lately been going a style that includes a fast 3 command centers, using hellions to kill creep tumors (when possible) and a banshee for harass. the banshee and hellions pull the queens in so many different directions, the zerg is forced to create units to deal the with hellions or loose drones/their creep spread. even the threat of an attack from the terran can force units from the zerg, balancing the advantage the zerg gets from being able to drone so hard in the early game C) The Raven speed change does address the issues with late game TvZ brood lord Infestor. you whine about how imbalanced fungal growth is as a stunning spell, but a speed increase with the ravens will help in wasting fungals as the infestors try to fungal your army. D) continuing with the complaints on Infestors, you talk about how they "force an engagement" in places that are unfavorable to your race. well i hate to break it to you, but we aren't the only ones with those capabilities. Protoss can use a combination of storm and force fields to both force an engagement and destroy an army in a matter of seconds. Terran's can use chokes to really punish ling heavy builds, and brood lord armies can be easily trapped due to how slow they are.
I understand you feel frustrated with the new patch changes, a race consistently feels at odds when it is nerfed or another is buffed, but with time, players learn to adapt to a changing situation with different strategies and mindsets. I would recomend checking out Demuslim or Supernova if you wanted to see their style in TvZ, which has been working out quite well for them!
i dont understand why you would be "forced" to fight terran in a choke. he would have to be right outside your base for this and only on certain maps. really poor analogy. and brood lord with corruptor and infestor support are not "easily trapped" because they win 90% of the fights they get into up front, thats why most of the time people just walk around broods if possible. i have never seen anyone make brood lords alone. and its not like brood lords are a hard unit to get into like battlecruisers or carriers otherwise either youd see more BC/carrier or less broods.
i dont like queen change either, and i would prefer fungal to just slow units a la ensnare in BW
or make fungal have a latency so you can run from it. too much stuff in sc2 is impossible to avoid. id much rather have AOE spells like emp, storm and fungal be strong but possible to micro against, than deal low damage but impossible to avoid
On August 19 2012 20:48 summerloud wrote: i dont like queen change either, and i would prefer fungal to just slow units a la ensnare in BW
or make fungal have a latency so you can run from it. too much stuff in sc2 is impossible to avoid. id much rather have AOE spells like emp, storm and fungal be strong but possible to micro against, than deal low damage but impossible to avoid
problem is fungal USED to be low damage but impossible to avoid but they changed it so its pretty much a psi storm that you cant run out of once its been cast. the rooting effect was designed for a entirely different kind of damage/duration...
On August 19 2012 20:58 CaF-Lunar wrote: foreigner mentality at it´s best - crying instead of getting better.
From ForGG's twitter:
"박지수 @ForGG1
fucking zerg imba..... "
Say that again? -_-
That doesn't prove anything... I can also point out that Stephano said ZvT currently is 50/50, and how Taeja has great win ration against the Zerg players. I've also seen that ForGG lost to Vortix, and then some Terran players said that even though they think ZvT is in a Zerg's favor, ForGG played terrible and deserved to lose.
On August 19 2012 20:58 CaF-Lunar wrote: foreigner mentality at it´s best - crying instead of getting better.
From ForGG's twitter:
"박지수 @ForGG1
fucking zerg imba..... "
Say that again? -_-
That doesn't prove anything... I can also point out that Stephano said ZvT currently is 50/50, and how Taeja has great win ration against the Zerg players. I've also seen that ForGG lost to Vortix, and then some Terran players said that even though they think ZvT is in a Zerg's favor, ForGG played terrible and deserved to lose.
So, your point is?
Also, Koreans love to balance whine. They are in no way immune to this fault.
On August 19 2012 20:58 CaF-Lunar wrote: foreigner mentality at it´s best - crying instead of getting better.
From ForGG's twitter:
"박지수 @ForGG1
fucking zerg imba..... "
Say that again? -_-
That doesn't prove anything... I can also point out that Stephano said ZvT currently is 50/50, and how Taeja has great win ration against the Zerg players. I've also seen that ForGG lost to Vortix, and then some Terran players said that even though they think ZvT is in a Zerg's favor, ForGG played terrible and deserved to lose.
So, your point is?
Also, Koreans love to balance whine. They are in no way immune to this fault.
Balance whining is not necessarily a fault. Implying that would be implying the game is perfectly balanced.
On August 19 2012 20:58 CaF-Lunar wrote: foreigner mentality at it´s best - crying instead of getting better.
From ForGG's twitter:
"박지수 @ForGG1
fucking zerg imba..... "
Say that again? -_-
That doesn't prove anything... I can also point out that Stephano said ZvT currently is 50/50, and how Taeja has great win ration against the Zerg players. I've also seen that ForGG lost to Vortix, and then some Terran players said that even though they think ZvT is in a Zerg's favor, ForGG played terrible and deserved to lose.
So, your point is?
do you people actually read before you post? the first guy who posted "foreigner mentality at it´s best - crying instead of getting better.", he responded with what forgg said. taking things out of context is fun huh? and get in line, you are only the 15th person to bring up taeja. is there really so few other examples? oh wait.
make auto turrets able to stack or be placed closer together and let them get upgrades from ground mech
et voila: raven already kinda viable
furthermore nerf seeker missile dmg/aoe by a lot, but also increase that pathetic range and reduce energy cost.
i think those are very obvious changes, potentially increasing fun factor and balance of tvz lategame big time, but blizz wont do it. why? too afraid of any notable adjustments as long as terran at least does fine in early/midgame.
I am going to make an online namelist to revert every single balance change to GSL #1 patch.
Since fruit dealer won it, zerg was perfectly balanced. This is proven by Nestea winning against marineking on close positions metalopolis of all maps.
This also proves that close positions metalopolis and other small maps were fine.
Of course, since we can't just change two races, we also need to change protoss back to how they worked those days.
Who is with me?
Yes, this is a stab at the lolcows who think Taeja playing well means the game is balanced.
On a related note: It'd be fun to bring back the patch to those days and see how people would play the game with their current level mechanics and game knowledge. More than likely zergs would do even worse than they did back then, since the greed factor has been ingrained in their body, but large enough maps and the game could turn out interesting.
I dont agree with you on one point especially: HSM take too much time to get done, and have a low probability of working. If you look at the time that it takes for a zerg to switch to broodlords, ravens are very short to get. On the "hard to use" part, positioning of broodlords+funguals is also tricky.
I dont really know if its "harder" to use brood/corruptor/infestor/baneling or marine,HSM, tank and... ghost maybe?
But i do know that the ghost/templar/infestor battles are the ones that decide the battle in the first place, so its about even for me.
Also i dont think having 1 build (HSM) that hard counters a long term investment like broodlord / infestor tech is fair. Its like vortex vs zerg air + archon toilet. Its just not fair that you can lose a full army in 1-2 seconds (except with nuke maybe?).
On August 19 2012 21:38 iloveav wrote: I dont agree with you on one point especially: HSM take too much time to get done, and have a low probability of working. If you look at the time that it takes for a zerg to switch to broodlords, ravens are very short to get. On the "hard to use" part, positioning of broodlords+funguals is also tricky.
I dont really know if its "harder" to use brood/corruptor/infestor/baneling or marine,HSM, tank and... ghost maybe?
But i do know that the ghost/templar/infestor battles are the ones that decide the battle in the first place, so its about even for me.
Also i dont think having 1 build (HSM) that hard counters a long term investment like broodlord / infestor tech is fair. Its like vortex vs zerg air + archon toilet. Its just not fair that you can lose a full army in 1-2 seconds (except with nuke maybe?).
Dont know, but its how i see it.
are you even aware that ravens cost 100/200, hsm is a 125 energy spell and all that investment is basically useless against ultraling? also you will never have a critical number of hsm in time when you are on a normal build (meaning 1 starport), even if you scout the greater spire in the making. also its absolutely not reliable. as op said its hard countered by fungal (due to a lot higher range) and some time zergs might figure out there is another reason to split their stuff besides mothership.
there are reasons you never see ravens unless its a 50 min camping game on metropolis.
On August 19 2012 20:58 CaF-Lunar wrote: foreigner mentality at it´s best - crying instead of getting better.
From ForGG's twitter:
"박지수 @ForGG1
fucking zerg imba..... "
Say that again? -_-
That doesn't prove anything... I can also point out that Stephano said ZvT currently is 50/50, and how Taeja has great win ration against the Zerg players. I've also seen that ForGG lost to Vortix, and then some Terran players said that even though they think ZvT is in a Zerg's favor, ForGG played terrible and deserved to lose.
So, your point is?
do you people actually read before you post? the first guy who posted "foreigner mentality at it´s best - crying instead of getting better.", he responded with what forgg said. taking things out of context is fun huh? and get in line, you are only the 15th person to bring up taeja. is there really so few other examples? oh wait.
i didn´t respond to anything, I just mean that bad players shouldn´t cry about balance. With bad players i mean most foreigners compared to koreans.
just my opinion, will i now get hate because i say what i think? (like Naniwa? :pppp).
On August 19 2012 11:07 avilo wrote: ... There are a few core issues to why so many Terrans, including pro korean Terran players are suddenly being beaten handily by inferior Zergs, most often when the game goes to lategame. After watching some of the TvZs at IEM I was surprised to see the Korean terrans drop games to Zergs that I have barely ever heard the name of. This pretty much never happened before. However it is not something new to SC2, but rather to the terran race. Great zerg players have been dropping games to inferior players (in particular terrans) since I first started following the scene, a few months after release. Early TvZ seemed like an exam the zerg had to score high on to then be in an ~even mid game. I don't agree that there are issues in TvZ. Or if there are, it is too soon to tell. At least Korea doesn't seem to have a problem.
1) Raven HSM can be cost effective if the opponent clumps up broodlord/infestor, but you need about a 3 minute wait time to ever get HSM and you have to perfectly predict your opponent 100% committing to broodlord/infestor/corruptor. The problem: time, efficiency, fungal growth. They are also great against banelings and corruptors. I agree that it takes way too long to get anything back for your resources invested, though. If a fight breaks out before you get the energy to cast HSM, the ravens are going to be dead weight. Turrets pretty much suck and PDD is only useful against air. I think buffing or changing turrets for a new spell might be a good idea, here, so the Ravens without 100 energy are not useless. Infestors can dump any excess energy for iTerrans, maybe ravens would be more viable if they could dump their energy into something better.
No one is really arguing that ravens aren't the answer to TvZ lategame. What I will argue here is that the reason ravens don't work even when you do build them is because fungal growth many times locks down ravens making it so you cannot HSM (regardless of how well you split). I will also argue that the amount of time, research cost, and energy for the HSM is not appropriate or proportional or balanced for what the HSM is supposed to be able to do. I too think the energy cost for HSM is a bit high. I believe it is this way to keep ravens from stocking 2 HSMs each. I propose lowering it slightly and also lowering the max energy on ravens. This wouldnt hurt Ravens much at all, seeing as after an HSM they can only drop a turret at the moment. This would be a bit of an odd change as all casters have a max of 200, but meh. It would make ghosts slightly better and HTs worse against max mana ravens. Yeah...
Templar/infestors are able to become useful 100% right when they pop out in the form of either feedbacks, archons, fungal, or IT. Ravens are a gamble and incredible risk because of the time necessary to make them pay off with HSMs, and even in the case you do get an HSM, if your raven is fungalled you suddenly have a paper weight in terms of an investment. Then the ravens die, that's -200 gas for TErran and the infestors are able to burrow and get away. The raven is not the equivalent of the HT/infestor, that is the ghost, which is also useful right when it pops out. Yes they are a huge gamble, I agree again.
A raven speed buff does zero to address these issues because the problem is and never will be raven speed. The problem is how fungal growth pins down ravens making HSM unusable, and the amount of time necessary to put ravens into play and make them pay themselves off. It would make it harder for zerg to fungal them, since they get less time, but yes, it doesn't really change much.
2) The queen buff. The queen range buff has been controversial, for obvious reasons. Blizzard recently has acknowledged that creep spread is incredibly powerful but I want to go over why creep has come into the forefront as a balance concern in zvt.
Everyone knows how Zerg works. Their economy with larva inject can grow exponentially, faster than both Terran and Protoss in theory. The catch? You can only get this super economy if you are able to drone, drone, drone unhindered.
Why has creepspread become such an issue? Well, it's a factor of many things. The queen buff (many dubb it the "queendralisk" nowadays) allows Zergs to make a unit that requires no larva, can accumulate heals, and also can spread creep - creep which helps deny a lot of timing attacks by simply being on the map giving vision/time to react. Creep will not be the thing that scouts attacks for the zerg until far past the early and mid game. Everyone scouts with zerglings and overlords, and creep halfway across the map will most likely not be enough time to react if you were previously "drone, drone, drone"-ing.
Pre-queen buff, creep was more easily able to be controlled with hellions that could kite queens, allowing Terran to keep Zerg's economy in check. Ever since the queen buff, you now see queens holding off virtually all aggression in the first 10 minutes of the game to the point that Terrans have indeed been trying equivalent "greed" builds but all of these greed builds naturally lend themselves towards a lategame TvZ, which right now, as mentionted above - the raven is a gamble due to the amount of preparation time required to pay itself off. Queens holding off attacks for the first 10 minutes probably says more about the attacks than the queens (or is someone you play against going mass queens?). 4-6 queens will be able to defend very small amounts of units without taking casualties, but any real attack would smash them. If terran is teching, upgrading, expanding and the like, they most likely wont have a force big enough to really hurt a zerg with a good amount of queens and the potential of reinforcements in a head-on fight. Real attacks work, pokes will have to avoid the queens if possible, and if not should not be attempted. If you do try these pokes and they are unsuccessful, obviously the zerg should be in the lead and the game will snowball from there.
The queen preventing hellions denying creep...allows more creep spread...allows denial of attacks...allow all larva to be used on drones until Zerg can power 100% units/tech...all of this snowballs to the point where Terran "has to do damage" but cannot due to the reaction time creep spread allows to deny attacks + the queens themselves. Again, creep doesn't give reaction time. It does give mobility on the map and strength in battle, though.
3) Fungal growth/infestor I believe this one is another core issue for late game, not only with TvZ but PvZ as well (yeh, as a random masters player I can talk a bit about this one too). I am (or rather used to be) a random master player too, high five! With protoss being the winningest race in Korea, and almost tied with zerg internationally in the month of July, I don't see a reason to talk about issues in PvZ. (PvZ favoring protoss in both statistics.)
Broodlord infestor is basically the super army in both lategame TvZ/PvZ. The problem is not how strong broodlords are per se, it's the combination of fungal growth locking down stalkers/units, as well as fungalling vikings/ravens.
Fungal growth completely negates any possible micromanagement from Protoss/Terrans and simply makes the game into a game of running away from the fungal growth, or in the Zerg's case hitting 1 fungal growth means you 100% force an engagement because the opponent cannot flee or use their units. I agree, the anti-micro part of fungal is boring. Hitting clumps of infestors with EMPs is pretty much a forced retreat for zerg. Same for EMP on HTs. Same for a HT getting a good storm on MMM(, although the terran wont have to wait as long to recoup.) The speed of stimmed MM can also force engagements or secure a decent chunk of army lost for nothing.
For TvZ, a lot of lategame air vs air battles turn into "dodging the 1 fungal growth" to the point every pro terran will scan everywhere when engaging brood/corruptor with vikings/ravens to see where the infestors are. 1 fungal results in a chain of 5-10 more fungals can often times mean the end of a game or losing a large expensive chunk of your army for free. In Terran's case, that means their AA is gone from 1 fungal landing into chain fungals, in Protoss's case it's many times a ton of blink stalkers that simply will never be able to reach the broodlords, or archons being trapped in place. Nice having scan, though, huh? Zerg would probably love to know where your ghosts and ravens are when they engage. Don't complain that terran players are using one of their staple spells. Also, if all your AA dies to 1 chain fungal then I would propose splitting better.
The infestor is not OP per se, but the stunning effect of fungal is quite problematic in every match-up. Again, PvZ is favoring protoss and ZvZ is a mirror. Pulling in "every match-up" is pointless. There are bigger balance problems. Protoss winning ~52.3% of match-ups in Korea would suggest taking a look at protoss would be time better spent, at least in my eyes. Fungal's anti-micro is more of a design problem than one of balance actually. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The above essentially describes what has happened with TvZ. The raven speed buff will not change a thing because the above issues are the core issues. It does not matter how fast your raven is if it gets fungalled. You can build ravens but never have them guaranteed to pay themselves off like infestors/templar are able to because of the current HSM energy/time/research requirements. Infestors and HTs are not guaranteed to pay themselves off. Ghosts, feedback, tanks etc. can all neutralize them before they give any return.
Blizzard has said they are nerfing creep spread. They are looking at the raven obviously. What I would suggest and bring up for discussion is to tweak the raven hsm energy/upgrade research times/build times/tweak the splash+damage accordingly and make it so these units do not end up as paper weights so often like they do. If they want to change the raven I would agree making changes around the energy or the turret spell.
To be honest, at this point what would be best for the game period (including ZvP) is to revert the queen change. The overlord speed buff was an excellent change, giving zerg a better scouting option, but the queen change has proven over the last 2-4 months to be too much - perhaps it's time to acknowlege a mistake. ZvP is, again, not favoring zerg, why would this help the match-up? The overlord speed change was not a buff, it was an un-nerf considering maps have gotten a lot bigger since release (metropolis vs any release map). It was taking longer and longer for zerg to get anything out of their overlords and they covered much less of the map. These 2-4 months have proven that Korean terrans adapt way faster than non-Korean ones.
But if blizzard does not want to go the route of reverting the change, they need to buff the raven or tweak something else in some way. A raven speed change does nothing for the match-up nor address any of the current problems with ravens or unhindered Zerg economies.
If other masters/gm/pro Terrans can leave their input in this thread, that would surely be appreciated by the entire community. I hope I at least put out some food for thought and that this will lead to discussion.
The worst thing that could possibly happen in terms of a balance patch is ravens are given a speed buff and then Terran is left alone for the next 5 months wondering, "how did this address anything?"
I don't think the queen change is an issue at all. Guess what, it's not mindlessly easy to harrass zerg and do free damage... no different from trying to harrass someone who has sentries, a cannon, or a bunker.
If something is potentially imbalanced it's the infestor... fungal is amazingly good, and the recent popularity of heavy infestor play with both heavy fungal use and mass infested terrans is no accident- that stuff is seriously strong.
However, I am seeing a severe lack of actual countering to infestor/broodlord. Terrans especially are whining that they can't steamroll it with their standard army they make every game... well, how long does it have to take before you try specifically countering the infestor?
A few well placed EMPs can render infestors completely useless and almost instantly cause the game to end in terran's favor. Why aren't we seeing a lot more ghost usage?
It's not as easy for protoss but feedback can decimate infestors, and infestor/BL can be dealt with by using a style other than the standard deathball. Split up your army and attack in multiple locations, blink up into his main... the broodlords can't be everywhere, they're too slow.
Once terrans and protoss are actually trying hard to counter infestors then I'll listen to the complaints.
I've got an all Tier 1 bio army going into the late game and I'm losing games against opponents with mass Tier 3. This game is broken. Why can't Blizzard see that?
On August 19 2012 21:56 Elvin wrote: Make Ravens automatically spawn with 2 HSM which you cannot resupply (Like Vultures and mines in BW). Use energy for turrets/PDD.
On August 19 2012 20:58 CaF-Lunar wrote: foreigner mentality at it´s best - crying instead of getting better.
From ForGG's twitter:
"박지수 @ForGG1
fucking zerg imba..... "
Say that again? -_-
That doesn't prove anything... I can also point out that Stephano said ZvT currently is 50/50, and how Taeja has great win ration against the Zerg players. I've also seen that ForGG lost to Vortix, and then some Terran players said that even though they think ZvT is in a Zerg's favor, ForGG played terrible and deserved to lose.
So, your point is?
do you people actually read before you post? the first guy who posted "foreigner mentality at it´s best - crying instead of getting better.", he responded with what forgg said. taking things out of context is fun huh? and get in line, you are only the 15th person to bring up taeja. is there really so few other examples? oh wait.
When we are at "taking things out of context", you are perfect example. You quoted my post and how I mentioned Taeja, but you are the one that didn't read, obviously, because I said that doesn't prove anything. He is saying how Koreans are thinking that Zerg is imba, and if you go few pages back, you will see how a lot of people quote Koreans like that it does mean a thing. I was saying that I can also quote Byun, TaeJa and Stephano, and tell the same thing how Zerg is not imba, but it doesn't prove anything, those are just quotes... That was my point, but you obviously didn't get it at all.
I find it interesting how you argue that ravens are flying paperweights for 3 minutes until they get HSM.
First off ravens too are useful right off the bat, they have other abilities beside the HSM. But of the sake of argument lets say ravens are totally useless.
How is that different from corrupters in TvZ? Before they can morph they are basicly flying paperweights aswell. Sure you can deny some drops but when it comes to actual engagements they are really not going to do much. During the past year? or so zerg has learned how to survive so that they can get to broodlords. Now its the terrans turn to do the same.
Trying to argue that terrans cant know what zerg is making is crap, in lategame terrans can make a ton of orbitals and have a ton of scans available.
If Taeja was having 500 apm and was relying on execution based play (say 5 dropships microed perfectly without missing a beep on macro) I would agree with you on the point that he is so good he can overcome imbalances. But the fact is that Taeja does not do that, in fact he doesnt even rely on a specific strategy or build.
What has happened is we get this lategame micro battle, many complain about the lack of micro in starcraft 2, well now we are getting some. Vikings trying to kill broodlords while avoiding fungal, corrupters trying to kill the vikings while avoiding HSM, Ravens trying to HSM big groups of zerg/dropping pdd to protect vikings, Infestors trying to fungal/neural everything and finaly ghosts trying to kill infestors while avoiding the broodlords.
This is the type of fight where I believe the player with the better micro will come up on top every time, this is good for starcraft, and it creates huge amounts of excitement as the game quite literally can be decided by a few fungals or a few missiles(nestea vs mvp @ iem).
Finally I want to note that the TvZ metagame completely shifted with the latest patch. Obviously the one race that got the buffs will perform better as the others are trying to figure out how to deal with it. Currently we are starting to see terrans slowly striking back, but not enough time has passed yet.
all race matchup is fine, its quite balance as of now.
If you want to bitch about the unparalleled balance between each stage of the game, then that's a different story. But looking it as a whole, balance difference between protoss, terran, and zerg is most likely not significant (and if it is, not enough for significance to matter)
On August 19 2012 22:04 iky43210 wrote: all race matchup is fine, its quite balance as of now.
If you want to bitch about the unparalleled balance between each stage of the game, then that's a different story. But looking it as a whole, balance difference between protoss, terran, and zerg is most likely not significant (and if it is, not enough for significance to matter)
If it is significant, it matters. That's the definition of significant. Protoss is doing a bit better than the other 2 races. ~52.3% win-rate or so. I'd say it is significant, but if it is caused by the game itself or the meta-game is hard to say.
On August 19 2012 22:04 iky43210 wrote: all race matchup is fine, its quite balance as of now.
If you want to bitch about the unparalleled balance between each stage of the game, then that's a different story. But looking it as a whole, balance difference between protoss, terran, and zerg is most likely not significant (and if it is, not enough for significance to matter)
It is imbalanced at different level of plays, you can't say that balance is the same at Gold, Diamond, Mater, Grand Master and Korean level. And that is why people are whining sadly. The only thing I am looking at is pro level of play(Grand Master and Korean level), and there, you are right, the game is quite balanced.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
the game doesnt need a giant change doing small things like making ravens faster and creep slower is exactly what blizz needs to do
the game is so balanced right now that a careless nerf or buff just makes it more imbalanced they need small nerfs taht are carefully thought out and tested and watched religiously
people said the same thing about warp prisoms now warp prism harass is hugely hard to deal with as Zerg
You mean no careless unnecessary giant changes like giving the queen an extra two range in an already close to 50-50 balanced match-up...right?
As for blizzard going slow with changes, that is great, but changing raven speed does nothing to address any of the balance issues for the TvZ match-up that occurred after the queen buff patch.
The creep spread nerf I'm sure most players agree blizzard needs to do.
And I guess it was close to 50-50 when ghost were way more powerful? Tanks would hit at 50 on bio and we played on Steppes of War in GSL and ladder right? Plus speed reapers and faster raxx & bunkers, I guess you didnt complain back then... funny. Hilarious how people cant understand that it takes time, and yes the queen buff was necessary, harsh for the terran metagame clearly, but a simple helion build requiring a mass zergling production / roaches so the zerg could at least get out of his base, was too strong, and it has been too strong for way too long without people realizing it. You never asked yourself, why, out of all match ups in SC2, the helion opening was the most used? I mean, easily, 80% of TvZ were opened with helions. So yeah, you guys are lost because you lost a lot on practice and habits on a build that isnt that useful anymore, deal with it
I find it bizarre that people believe ghosts were some tyrannical unit in the history of TvZ when they were only used for a tiny window. You'd be laughed at for suggesting it (I think IdrA was multiple times directly after the Infestor buff that he thought was a nerf). The history of TvZ is the history of early aggression being tested against defensive skills, not super late game ghost armies beating maxed brood lords. At some point they just tilted it farther in the direction of the defender than many Ts are comfortable with, and I agree with them.
When one race has a superior late game, maps give three bases, and they have good scouting and defense against harassment, it's not hard to see why some Ts feel annoyed. It's exactly how Zs felt against mass reapers or 2rax or even that hellion build, all of which got nerfed fairly quickly, and Ts feel annoyed that Blizzard doesn't seem to be doing anything as substantial as the queen range buff was. Of course, Blizzard doesn't really care that much because they'd rather roll out HotS.
Edit: I mean think of it this way. TvZ used to be the most exciting matchup to watch as a random player. When you sit down to watch a TvZ today, is it as interesting as a year ago? Not so much.
Because they were tyrannical on T3 units, and about the queen buff it's hilarious how all you terrans jumped on it so you could bitch about it. It cancels an abuse of helions being too annoying / restricting early game, END OF STORY, queens still cost 150, they still are long to build, and they still have shitty damage. Many zergs didnt even change their playstyle / queen number after the patch. This is ridiculous, when you had the most imbalanced units and features you were ok with it, but when Blizzard takes it in the right direction, which is diversifying the possibilities in this match up, you just yell at imbalance. Yes, terrans can macro, and yes, there is other way to prevent a zerg from droning. Creep? Use your freaking ravens, for so fucking long I've seen so many terrans skipping ravens lategame, "but it's so fragile" oh because infestors arent? Ghost's emp is still viable against clumped up infestors, and even the best zergs are still fragile on their infestors positioning, 2 emps / 8 snipes, and you cancel / kill 600+ worth of gas, but hey, you really cant spend 200 on a raven, it's too fragile... It's not an harass unit, seeker missile / pdd is so underrated against broodlord armies it's hilarious to see that 95% of terran dont even try experimenting with their own race for years now, but they much prefer to whine and whine on TL / bnet about it. Terran is fine, you just got lazy (and many pros too) getting used to play simplified builds that you trained over and over. You didnt toy around with your race like Protoss or Zergs did, and like Artosis said, this patch is good, disregarding balance, because it will force terrans to move their ass and finally try new things.
Some Terrans such as MVP are starting to mess around with Sky Terran lategame. I wonder if it's going to catch on. If it does, this Raven buff won't be critical, but it'll certainly help. Hopefully it's not just winning from surprise value.
On August 19 2012 11:49 ilbh wrote: I think avilo's points makes sense... what about increasing the range of HSM? so you can still use it while fungal'ed. I don't remember if its possible to cast HSM while fungal'ed... if not possible they should make it possible.
imo Terran has some fundamental problems... but not going to discuss it here lol
I believe you can cast it while fungaled, it's just a matter of the range being an issue. I'd say a "solution" for HSM would be to allow ravens to target HSM onto the terran's own units. That way if you really want to land them, you can hsm a marine, stim it and run it in, and that way zerg will either have to fungal a single marine in place or run away (i believe if you kill a unit that has HSM on it, the HSM will travel to the death location and then explode, thus still making the kamikaze marine a good move)
On August 19 2012 22:04 iky43210 wrote: all race matchup is fine, its quite balance as of now.
If you want to bitch about the unparalleled balance between each stage of the game, then that's a different story. But looking it as a whole, balance difference between protoss, terran, and zerg is most likely not significant (and if it is, not enough for significance to matter)
i know blizz shares that opinion but i think its bullshit. no matchup should feel like on a timer. that terran win% would be beyond terrible if terrans stopped their timing attacks at min ~12 or so.
On August 19 2012 21:58 jdsowa wrote: I've got an all Tier 1 bio army going into the late game and I'm losing games against opponents with mass Tier 3. This game is broken. Why can't Blizzard see that?
3/3 Marines with shield,stim and medivacs are not T1.
Having better "tier" army than your opponent should not guarantee you a free win.
The game is not balanced around "tiers" and the only race who truly has something close to tiers is Zerg.
On August 19 2012 21:58 jdsowa wrote: I've got an all Tier 1 bio army going into the late game and I'm losing games against opponents with mass Tier 3. This game is broken. Why can't Blizzard see that?
Tanks medivacs 3/3 grades all Tier1, you heard it here first.
Terrans would built tier3 stuff if it wasnt gimmicky as shit.
Why don't terrans use the raven more? I find that Hunter Seeker Missile is the most annoying thing in the world to deal with as a zerg whether it be with a flock of corrupters or broodlords.
And don't say that infestors hard counter it, because that isn't true. You just have to be smart with it's usage.
I heard that if you EMP or Snipe the zergs infestors you just flat out roll his army. Terrans stuck inside that box of "How they are supposed to play."
Honestly as a Terran I don't really care about the Raven buff. I mean, sure lategame Zerg is really hard to deal with but it's not what I think is the most important to fix. The creep change is IMO the more important change of this patch and this is why : what made ZvT the most interesting matchup pre-patch, was all the back and forth action all over the map during early and mid game.
Now with the queen buff, zergs can just skip this phase of the game and rush straight to lategame. Buffing terran lategame sure would fix the matchup as in "50% Balance" but it would just create boring turtle games - the same as we see in PvZ (and TvZ kinda also) - these are not interesting to watch nor to play.
And that's the real problem - Nowdays most non mirror matchups are boring turtlefests where Protoss and Zergs just rush to 200/200 from their highest tech.
Blizzard doesnt really need to nerf something, but there needs to be an incentive to do something else than turtle or 2base all-in in the early mid game, and this for all matchups. And if they fix this Terrans wont even need a lategame buff.
it doesnt address how the infestor still controls the matchup - at every stage of the game. The infestor is not just viable at every single stage of the game but a hard-counter to any and all army compositions for terran. I'm not saying that the unit is retarded OP or anything but it needs some tweaks. Most critical would be not rooting air I think. Im fine if it still does damage to air but it shouldnt root vikings to let corruption and transfuse just annihilate everything.
Edit: Oh, and I agree with the above. That queen buff made it insanely easy for zerg to rush to their late-game. I dont think anyone really knew just how powerful their late-game was until we started seeing so many TvZ match ups go there. An additional side effect of the queen buff is that they last even longer when you bring them up with your late-game army to transfuse. I really think they went overboard with that buff...
On August 19 2012 22:44 Ouija wrote: I heard that if you EMP or Snipe the zergs infestors you just flat out roll his army. Terrans stuck inside that box of "How they are supposed to play."
Must reactor hellion expand every game, on every map, all the time....cannot use another build....every...
On August 19 2012 22:44 Ouija wrote: I heard that if you EMP or Snipe the zergs infestors you just flat out roll his army. Terrans stuck inside that box of "How they are supposed to play."
Must reactor hellion expand every game, on every map, all the time....cannot use another build....every...
yea making a unit more expensive than the one its supposed to counter, and also being absolutely useless in every other regard in that matchup, especially if you dont go bio. seems fair ...
On August 19 2012 22:44 Ouija wrote: I heard that if you EMP or Snipe the zergs infestors you just flat out roll his army. Terrans stuck inside that box of "How they are supposed to play."
I heard that if you type IDDQD in chat all your marines gain +5 damage.
On August 19 2012 22:41 blug wrote: Why don't terrans use the raven more? I find that Hunter Seeker Missile is the most annoying thing in the world to deal with as a zerg whether it be with a flock of corrupters or broodlords.
And don't say that infestors hard counter it, because that isn't true. You just have to be smart with it's usage.
Yes annoying is what HSM currently is. Raven casts HSM ,dies to corruptors while HSM puts 6 corruptors into 1/2 health. Annoying? Yes. Cost effective? I doubt it.
Raven is the answer because ghost had to be nerfed..
You can't have a unit that is good against massive units like broodlords and ultralisks and then has nukes and EMP against infestors and HT's..
It was simply to much.. just watch MVP play.. ravens seems OP when he uses it..
Mech it up with early ravens that will help you cancel the creep advantage and spare your scans for the enemy base to check ou the hive timing or for mules! And then eventually go for the viking plus HMS..
Oh and btw the turret spamming with ravens can be very good also
On August 19 2012 22:44 Ouija wrote: I heard that if you EMP or Snipe the zergs infestors you just flat out roll his army. Terrans stuck inside that box of "How they are supposed to play."
Must reactor hellion expand every game, on every map, all the time....cannot use another build....every...
yea making a unit more expensive than the one its supposed to counter, and also being absolutely useless in every other regard in that matchup, especially if you dont go bio. seems fair ...
Dont forget to add that since the radius got decreased, a ghost can EMP maybe 2 infestors at a time. It's not even close to a cost-efficient exchange, nor is it really a viable strat. That's why you dont see any terrans doing it. The koreans would ahave been all over it by now if it actually worked.
My big question is why is Raven only good for the HSM? With every single raven balance thread it is all about HSM and its cost effectiveness.
Now I could be wrong..... but doesnt it have two other spells? The one that blocks projectile attacks and the other that gives you a turret to add to your firepower?
You can build a turret wall to block movements paths. To cut off reinforcements. To harass so you dont have to split your army.
You can use PDD to stop the corruptors.
Raven is not only a HSM caster. I think if all the spells can be used than its a surprisingly strong unit. Use turrets to block lings or just help with broodlords. The turret I think is the key spell of the raven, not the HSM.
Avilo, a TLDR; would be nice next time. just sayin.
Skyterran builds seem to ultimately be the answer, but lategame production facility demands are so different to midgame demands that it will always be a tough transition I think the other option could be fine tuning on nukes, those broodlord armys arent the speediest things out, if blizzard reduced (slightly) the time that it takes for a nuke to land that could have an interesting effect on the metagame
On August 19 2012 22:44 Ouija wrote: I heard that if you EMP or Snipe the zergs infestors you just flat out roll his army. Terrans stuck inside that box of "How they are supposed to play."
Must reactor hellion expand every game, on every map, all the time....cannot use another build....every...
yea making a unit more expensive than the one its supposed to counter, and also being absolutely useless in every other regard in that matchup, especially if you dont go bio. seems fair ...
Dont forget to add that since the radius got decreased, a ghost can EMP maybe 2 infestors at a time. It's not even close to a cost-efficient exchange, nor is it really a viable strat. That's why you dont see any terrans doing it. The koreans would ahave been all over it by now if it actually worked.
It is not viable to add ghost to your army late game like terran does vs Protoss?? But it is viable to add ravens??? 1 emp for 2 infestors seems cost effective for me considering that is now 200/300 resources spent that are rendered useless. I just watched KawaiiLight use ghosts vs infestors in a team league and utterly demolished the zerg right after. If you don't think it is worth it to try then just stop complaining and continue to lose all your TvZ's. Ghost counter infestors whether you like it or not it is up to you to use them.
More expensive? Gas is a way more valuable resource in the late game...Don't you have like 7 mules? 200 minerals seems tough to come by.
huh I don't understand people that states that ghosts are not worth it... They were THE unit to build pre-nerf. Now they are 100% useless? Doesn't make sense. TvZ late game relies almost entirely on fungals. If you can't get a fungal on the bio force or on the air squad (like raven/viking) you're fucked, unless you have an incredible lead. Lending a few clutch emps while the ghosts are cloaked should (and will) become standard.
Ghosts were THE unit a few patches ago because snipe > Zerg. It was that simple. They had other abilities but they were just the tasty sides to the fucking 700 gm medium rare steak that was snipe.
I've tried ghosts quite a bit in my lategame and I think they are mostly rubbish. They are very bad at dealing with big infestor counts even if they cloak and get in there, and nukes are very random, sometimes amazing usually pointless. Ghosts can be really good if one of two things can occur
1) a splash of emp's .3 seconds before a zerg has to fungal and he can't disengage his army without just getting murdered 2) constant nuke harass as part of a constant aggression strategy, keeping the zergs attention spread and any drone kills relevant (I find if both players are turtling successful nukes are pointless. You killed 25 drones? Big deal the zerg can reproduce that with his huge mineral bank in like 10 seconds).
Blizzard changed the ghosts specifically in a way to try to encourage their specific use for sniping infestors (2×45 was already greater than the 80 High Templar life anyway) and we've seen very little of them lately. We need to see more terrans throw them back in, sit back, see how it plays out when that's more popular again (not so many as before, of course, not Supernova vs DRG style).
On August 19 2012 22:58 CaptainCrush wrote: Dont forget to add that since the radius got decreased, a ghost can EMP maybe 2 infestors at a time.
This is just wrong. Are they very well split and you're not considering sniping three+ times instead? An accurate EMP blast hitting a crowd of infestors should hit 2 as a bare minimum. Whether that single, very energy-efficient expenditure of a petty 75 energy for up to 100 energy per target hit will be enough to deal with the entire ball is another matter, but then perhaps you should be prepared to launch multiple and practise your targetting. -_-
On August 19 2012 22:44 Ouija wrote: I heard that if you EMP or Snipe the zergs infestors you just flat out roll his army. Terrans stuck inside that box of "How they are supposed to play."
Must reactor hellion expand every game, on every map, all the time....cannot use another build....every...
yea making a unit more expensive than the one its supposed to counter, and also being absolutely useless in every other regard in that matchup, especially if you dont go bio. seems fair ...
Dont forget to add that since the radius got decreased, a ghost can EMP maybe 2 infestors at a time. It's not even close to a cost-efficient exchange, nor is it really a viable strat. That's why you dont see any terrans doing it. The koreans would ahave been all over it by now if it actually worked.
EMP does not need to completely engulf the unit to hit and drain energy. This is the reason why when the radius was so huge, protoss would get roll after 2 or 3 emp blanketed their army. The main reason why ghosts are hard to use late game has more to do with the zerglings and broodlings that lead the charge of the final push. Since the infestors are guarding the Broodlord, they are not near the front line, forcing the terran to use his ghosts from a no-mans land which is filled with path blocking melee units.
Now most people will say that using "ghost drops" would be viable. Protoss have learned that any form of combat drop with spell casters is very risky. SC2 late game if filled with long range air units that can quickly focus down a drop ship filled with casters. This is why korean players have started to use the raven to combat the infestors. Although it is a flying unit, HSM fires instantly and there is no cumbersome drop animation they need to wait through before spell casting.
So don't blame terrans for not using ghost against the death ball. Protoss have the same problem and we don't use rely on HT vs infestors to turn the tide.
Since Avilo touched on the subject i would wish to continue on it.
As the game functions right now the problem with fungal It’s not about that the ability itself but the advantage being to advance thru one tech tree without taking any major risk.
What we have to remember fungal growth is one of the ability that have changed the most since the launch of sc2. The changes was done initially done to give zerg a better response to handling Protoss armored units. I think everyone agrees on that handling allot of the late game protoss composition without fungals would be impossible. The problem here is that the fungal when first presented had a low damage output and a long rotting effect(it was also a missile attack if remember it correctly). When increasing the damage to handle protoss ground units more effectively it lead to a different problem that is present now. This is also why this kind of big changes on abilities should not be done often as the effect of the changes can lead to different problems in the future.
The problem that has occurred is the fugal effectives off handling air units. I think people agree on that choosing different unit composition should lead to different advantages and disadvantages. One unit should not be the answer to everything. The following logic was presented from blizzard when nerfing ghost:
“Snipe damage changed from 45 to 25 +25 Psionic We felt the Snipe ability was countering zerg broodlords and ultralisks slightly too well. Especially at the pro level, we were seeing a lot of games where terran players were playing very defensive games while massing ghosts to counter most of the options zerg players had at their disposal. While we like to see creative and innovative use of units, we felt that in this case Snipe was becoming too effective against zerg’s most expensive units. When adjusting the ability, we tried to settle on a number that would allow using Snipe to remain a viable tactic, though not as powerful as it is now. With this change, brood lords will fall in ten casts of Snipe rather than six (taking into account health regeneration), while an ultralisk will die in 21 casts, up from 11. This also significantly increases the number of ghosts and stockpiled energy needed to pull this tactic off, which we feel confident about because, previously, terran players rarely needed to consider the energy on their ghosts units. “ (http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/4448820/Situation_Report_Patch_143-2_10_2012)
The exact logic and be applied to fungal growth. Infesters are able to counter most options every other race can present. Previously a well executed air attack from protoss could force hydras if the zerg couldn’t handel it with spore crawlers and queens. Blizzard further patched the spore crawlers rooting time to make it easier for zergs. After the infester changed combined with people figuring out the effectiveness off fungal u could now bypass hydras completely without any problems at all. U end up going to the infesters tech which u would have gone for anyway. The opponent is no longer able to force u do adjust your play with his air play and can comfortably play as u wanted to do .
Instead it should be choice of going hydras or doing a good defend with queens and spores. IF u wish to skip hydras/coroupters and take the risk to defend air only with queens and spores u should be rewarded with being able to go infesters. Currently there is no risk att all since the infesters with fungal combined with infested terran counters air units. Fungal growth is not game breaking with any means or overpowered but it does give a unfair advantage to zerg . I believe infesters effectives against air units should be addressed . There should be a bigger risk of going infesters for zerg since the other lair tech choices presents risk factors that seem to be lacking in the infesters. This problem because more apparent in late game where the fungal ability is used to both shut down the ground and air army. Making u rely less on your corrupters. Infested terran used to supplement the lack of attacking units witch allows u to have a higher supply of infesters.
This is my take on it and its only an opinion and by no means facts. I believe people have different opinions in this subject and its more beneficial to present them that trashing down other people opinions.
The thing I like about Avilo balance whine is all the arguments are premised on deep imbalance to begin with. This isn't "Why Ravens aren't viable as the staple of a lategame TvZ composition", it's "We all agree that TvZ is super imbalanced and this is why Ravens won't fix it".
There's no point even responding to your arguments because they're all loaded with the assumption that Vikings don't exist.
On August 19 2012 22:41 blug wrote: Why don't terrans use the raven more? I find that Hunter Seeker Missile is the most annoying thing in the world to deal with as a zerg whether it be with a flock of corrupters or broodlords.
And don't say that infestors hard counter it, because that isn't true. You just have to be smart with it's usage.
Yes annoying is what HSM currently is. Raven casts HSM ,dies to corruptors while HSM puts 6 corruptors into 1/2 health. Annoying? Yes. Cost effective? I doubt it.
So, by your logic, you can trade 2 Ravens for 6 Corruptors? Yes, it is extremely cost efficient. Trading 200/400 for 900/600 is more than cost efficient...
On August 19 2012 22:41 blug wrote: Why don't terrans use the raven more? I find that Hunter Seeker Missile is the most annoying thing in the world to deal with as a zerg whether it be with a flock of corrupters or broodlords.
And don't say that infestors hard counter it, because that isn't true. You just have to be smart with it's usage.
Yes annoying is what HSM currently is. Raven casts HSM ,dies to corruptors while HSM puts 6 corruptors into 1/2 health. Annoying? Yes. Cost effective? I doubt it.
So, by your logic, you can trade 2 Ravens for 6 Corruptors? Yes, it is extremely cost efficient. Trading 200/400 for 900/600 is more than cost efficient...
And target infestors with HSM, not corruptors. They are the back bone of the army and the unit you need to kill.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
the game doesnt need a giant change doing small things like making ravens faster and creep slower is exactly what blizz needs to do
the game is so balanced right now that a careless nerf or buff just makes it more imbalanced they need small nerfs taht are carefully thought out and tested and watched religiously
people said the same thing about warp prisoms now warp prism harass is hugely hard to deal with as Zerg
You mean no careless unnecessary giant changes like giving the queen an extra two range in an already close to 50-50 balanced match-up...right?
As for blizzard going slow with changes, that is great, but changing raven speed does nothing to address any of the balance issues for the TvZ match-up that occurred after the queen buff patch.
The creep spread nerf I'm sure most players agree blizzard needs to do.
And I guess it was close to 50-50 when ghost were way more powerful? Tanks would hit at 50 on bio and we played on Steppes of War in GSL and ladder right? Plus speed reapers and faster raxx & bunkers, I guess you didnt complain back then... funny. Hilarious how people cant understand that it takes time, and yes the queen buff was necessary, harsh for the terran metagame clearly, but a simple helion build requiring a mass zergling production / roaches so the zerg could at least get out of his base, was too strong, and it has been too strong for way too long without people realizing it. You never asked yourself, why, out of all match ups in SC2, the helion opening was the most used? I mean, easily, 80% of TvZ were opened with helions. So yeah, you guys are lost because you lost a lot on practice and habits on a build that isnt that useful anymore, deal with it
I find it bizarre that people believe ghosts were some tyrannical unit in the history of TvZ when they were only used for a tiny window. You'd be laughed at for suggesting it (I think IdrA was multiple times directly after the Infestor buff that he thought was a nerf). The history of TvZ is the history of early aggression being tested against defensive skills, not super late game ghost armies beating maxed brood lords. At some point they just tilted it farther in the direction of the defender than many Ts are comfortable with, and I agree with them.
When one race has a superior late game, maps give three bases, and they have good scouting and defense against harassment, it's not hard to see why some Ts feel annoyed. It's exactly how Zs felt against mass reapers or 2rax or even that hellion build, all of which got nerfed fairly quickly, and Ts feel annoyed that Blizzard doesn't seem to be doing anything as substantial as the queen range buff was. Of course, Blizzard doesn't really care that much because they'd rather roll out HotS.
Edit: I mean think of it this way. TvZ used to be the most exciting matchup to watch as a random player. When you sit down to watch a TvZ today, is it as interesting as a year ago? Not so much.
Because they were tyrannical on T3 units, and about the queen buff it's hilarious how all you terrans jumped on it so you could bitch about it. It cancels an abuse of helions being too annoying / restricting early game, END OF STORY, queens still cost 150, they still are long to build, and they still have shitty damage. Many zergs didnt even change their playstyle / queen number after the patch. This is ridiculous, when you had the most imbalanced units and features you were ok with it, but when Blizzard takes it in the right direction, which is diversifying the possibilities in this match up, you just yell at imbalance. Yes, terrans can macro, and yes, there is other way to prevent a zerg from droning. Creep? Use your freaking ravens, for so fucking long I've seen so many terrans skipping ravens lategame, "but it's so fragile" oh because infestors arent? Ghost's emp is still viable against clumped up infestors, and even the best zergs are still fragile on their infestors positioning, 2 emps / 8 snipes, and you cancel / kill 600+ worth of gas, but hey, you really cant spend 200 on a raven, it's too fragile... It's not an harass unit, seeker missile / pdd is so underrated against broodlord armies it's hilarious to see that 95% of terran dont even try experimenting with their own race for years now, but they much prefer to whine and whine on TL / bnet about it. Terran is fine, you just got lazy (and many pros too) getting used to play simplified builds that you trained over and over. You didnt toy around with your race like Protoss or Zergs did, and like Artosis said, this patch is good, disregarding balance, because it will force terrans to move their ass and finally try new things.
Helion contains were completely fair because a Z can exponentially grow much faster than a Terran can so it's not always necessary to be a base ahead while droning. The win percentages during that time period after the Ghost Nerf completely support this, there's no way around it. It was balanced. Everyone including high level pros like DRG agreed that it was completely fine.
Now between the Queen Buff and the OL buff, you cannot punish Z's for taking a third. It is impossible. You can only punish them only if they are excessively greedy to the point it is stupid.
And I love this talk about how Ghosts are suppose to counter Infestors. Please try walking through that wall of fucking Broodlords that are standing in front of them and see what happens. You can get 3 Infestors maybe if you get a perfect EMP while they are literally standing on top of each others asses. And that's if you manage to somehow get past the long range Blords + Overseers that they will have once he sees you have Ghosts. If you believe that Ghosts are the answer to TvZ late game along with Ravens you really need a wake up call.
And Terran didn't try different builds? Zerg toyed with their race? You understand that Zerg has been utilizing the same openings and roughly the same timings and unit compositions since the FUCKING BETA. Please don't be stupid. Terran has utilized mech, speed reapers, mass Ravens (yes, Mass Ravens), and all other sorts of things. And what happened? Most of the time it got nerfed. Seeker Missile in beta was nerfed because of "team games" and a whole shitload of Zerg whine when Idra lost ALL of his mutas to Seeker Missiles (this was when Seeker Missile was at the Fusion Core mind you). Speed Reapers got nerfed even when Z's were adapting to it after the first nerf (look at the win percentages, it was nowhere near 60/40, it was like 55/45 on TERRIBLE maps for Z), etc.
Every time Terran has tried something new, Blizzard nerfs it into the ground. Thors? No you can't use them. Tanks? We don't like Tanks (even though there are 500 anti-tank options in the game). Mech in general? N0pe. BC rushes (A legit opening vs P back then), nope, we don't want that shit happening. Ghosts? We'll nerf it purely off of one game where Nestea misplayed a late game situation terribly. Blue Flame Helion timings? Oh, we'll nerf it based on ONE tournament and a whole lot of Z whine. Alot of this bullshit has occurred because people on all three sides have whined over stupid shit, rather than adapting. That being said, Terran and Protoss players have adapted a hell of alot more than Z players; they didn't get massive unit face lifts to IMPROVE their race like you got with the Infestor. They didn't get build times on a legitimately pretty good unit in the Ultra late game. They didn't get free buffs on their scouting units, nor did they get an absolutely ridiculous buff to a virtual free defense unit now.
On August 19 2012 23:47 naggerNZ wrote: The thing I like about Avilo balance whine is all the arguments are premised on deep imbalance to begin with. This isn't "Why Ravens aren't viable as the staple of a lategame TvZ composition", it's "We all agree that TvZ is super imbalanced and this is why Ravens won't fix it".
There's no point even responding to your arguments because they're all loaded with the assumption that Vikings don't exist.
Vikings do exist. And if you make one mistake the Z chain fungals them all to death and you auto lose the game.
On August 19 2012 22:41 blug wrote: Why don't terrans use the raven more? I find that Hunter Seeker Missile is the most annoying thing in the world to deal with as a zerg whether it be with a flock of corrupters or broodlords.
And don't say that infestors hard counter it, because that isn't true. You just have to be smart with it's usage.
Yes annoying is what HSM currently is. Raven casts HSM ,dies to corruptors while HSM puts 6 corruptors into 1/2 health. Annoying? Yes. Cost effective? I doubt it.
So, by your logic, you can trade 2 Ravens for 6 Corruptors? Yes, it is extremely cost efficient. Trading 200/400 for 900/600 is more than cost efficient...
And target infestors with HSM, not corruptors. They are the back bone of the army and the unit you need to kill.
Any decent Masters Z will keep his Infestors well behind his Blord/Corrupter army before you actually engage. When he sees the Ravens move up he will FG them instantly and they will pretty much flat out die before they can Seeker Missile. You are much better off using PDD premptively and taking out the Corrupters with Vikings/Thors.
This is all assuming you aren't flat out dying to any 2/3 base variation baneling busts that can and will likely kill you since you're playing in the dark and the Z has all the map control/vision in the world in this particular match-up.
On August 19 2012 18:21 FinalForm wrote: Please just rid of those damn free overlord parking spots that see Every unit that enters and leaves your base. Those were totally unnecessary.
Not quite the thread for this, but there isnt any map with "pillars" anymore where you can put a siege tank on top of.
These things dont really matter for the Raven since it has to get into range 6 to "fire ze missiles" ... and since you cant do both apply a Point Defense Drone (100 energy) AND fire a Seeker Missile (125 energy) they dont really provide good hiding spots for Ravens.
To make the Raven acceptable two changes are needed IMO: 1. Seeker Missile cast range increased to 9 or more (same as Fungal Growth and Psi Storm) and 2. make any mechanical units receive only half damage from feedback (Why should a bunch of wires and energy conductors in a machine be affected by a psionic ability anyways?).
Ravens die too easily and for their cost they dont deal enough damage. Consequently they need a little tweaking ... just like the Carrier.
I'm a low level player, and mostly a spectator, but allow me to add my grain of salt to this thread. What about PDD, what about simply put, the other uses of the raven ? I Think the discussion is centered a bit too much on HSM. Is it because of the flamboyant usage during IEM these last few days? Why not use PDD to render corruptors useless when fighting the BL siege push with your vikings, why not use it to deter creep spread in the mid game?
The discussion is a bit narrow minded if you allow me. All i can see is
1/ We have issues with Zerg Hive Tech deathball 2/ We used to deal with it with ghosts but can't do that as effectively anymore 3/ We're looking for a cast that kills the whole army in HSM much like snipe used to 4/ It doesn't do the trick so we are here discussing the matter.
I think a lot of the persons here are focusing a bit too much on HSM to deal with it. What if Ravens weren't the answer through HSM ? what if the buff to ravens was to prioritize ravens in the midgame to manage zerg creep spread? Perhaps people are reading a bit too much in Blizzard's various nerfs and buff, to the point they focus too much on them and forget that other unit compositions and build could perhaps be tried to counter that deathball.
Ravens are the least used caster in the game, but is it because they are that bad, or is it because are trying to use it to another purpose than the one that they were originally intended to?
OP is essentially saying TvZ sucks because of fungal.
So get ghosts.
Ravens deal with broods, infestors, and corruptors quite admirably if you can have them on the flank of your vikings - look at MVP's play for an example. Ravens are also pretty tough. If they get fungal'd, back off. Your bio has stim, ultras and broods are slow.
I do agree that the research time of raven upgrades should be reduced. You need a lot of starports, tech labs, and upgrades before you can even build ravens for them to be effective.
Ghosts can EMP and snipe infestors, and while snipe has been nerfed it is still quite good against brood lords and pre-max upgraded Ultras.
The problem, in my eyes, lies in that Zerg can techswitch so quickly Terran can't have enough of one unit to deal with it.
Ultras - need marauders. Broods - need vikings and ravens. Infestors - need ghosts.
Terrans have been asking how to spend their gas in late game, so I don't think cost is thaaaaaat much of an issue. But production certainly is, just due to how the mechanics work.
The solution is to not sit back and allow the Zerg to get to this stage where they can tech-switch at will and exploit Terran's production style. It's to put them on the back foot, be aggressive, constantly drop and generally be a nuisance, reduce their income, and create a situation where they simply don't have the bank to tech switch constantly.
On August 19 2012 23:37 iaguz wrote: Ghosts were THE unit a few patches ago because snipe > Zerg. It was that simple. They had other abilities but they were just the tasty sides to the fucking 700 gm medium rare steak that was snipe.
I've tried ghosts quite a bit in my lategame and I think they are mostly rubbish. They are very bad at dealing with big infestor counts even if they cloak and get in there, and nukes are very random, sometimes amazing usually pointless. Ghosts can be really good if one of two things can occur
1) a splash of emp's .3 seconds before a zerg has to fungal and he can't disengage his army without just getting murdered 2) constant nuke harass as part of a constant aggression strategy, keeping the zergs attention spread and any drone kills relevant (I find if both players are turtling successful nukes are pointless. You killed 25 drones? Big deal the zerg can reproduce that with his huge mineral bank in like 10 seconds).
Was trying to remember where I've heard of your name... You're that guy everyone calls Gimly yeah? I was at WCS cheering you on xD
On August 20 2012 00:29 Larkin wrote: Ghosts can EMP and snipe infestors,
... not with the vision advantage which Zerg has from Overlords everywhere and creep spread. Do remember that cloak gets nerfed in HotS to have a fixed duration with a cooldown. You dont have it available whenever you want (and the energy is there) AND you need several snipes for an Infestor, but one Fungal Growth will reveal the whole pack of Ghosts and keep them in place to be killed by Zerglings. So:
- EMP: deals no direct damage and prevents damage if hit correctly - Fungal Growth: deals damage, locks down AND reveals cloaked units
So please dont start saying "but you can EMP" ... only one or two Fungal Growths will be the death of the Ghosts due to revealing them and locking them down, while an EMP still lets you withdraw your Infestors ... and since the Zerg is usually the more mobile army that wont be a problem.
On August 19 2012 23:37 iaguz wrote: Ghosts were THE unit a few patches ago because snipe > Zerg. It was that simple. They had other abilities but they were just the tasty sides to the fucking 700 gm medium rare steak that was snipe.
I've tried ghosts quite a bit in my lategame and I think they are mostly rubbish. They are very bad at dealing with big infestor counts even if they cloak and get in there, and nukes are very random, sometimes amazing usually pointless. Ghosts can be really good if one of two things can occur
1) a splash of emp's .3 seconds before a zerg has to fungal and he can't disengage his army without just getting murdered 2) constant nuke harass as part of a constant aggression strategy, keeping the zergs attention spread and any drone kills relevant (I find if both players are turtling successful nukes are pointless. You killed 25 drones? Big deal the zerg can reproduce that with his huge mineral bank in like 10 seconds).
Was trying to remember where I've heard of your name... You're that guy everyone calls Gimly yeah? I was at WCS cheering you on xD
I remember watching this guys games too. He almost lost a supply depot that he built to block out a probe, and then commented on it in game. Pretty funny game.
On August 20 2012 00:29 Larkin wrote: Ghosts can EMP and snipe infestors,
... not with the vision advantage which Zerg has from Overlords everywhere and creep spread. Do remember that cloak gets nerfed in HotS to have a fixed duration with a cooldown. You dont have it available whenever you want (and the energy is there) AND you need several snipes for an Infestor, but one Fungal Growth will reveal the whole pack of Ghosts and keep them in place to be killed by Zerglings. So:
- EMP: deals no direct damage and prevents damage if hit correctly - Fungal Growth: deals damage, locks down AND reveals cloaked units
So please dont start saying "but you can EMP" ... only one or two Fungal Growths will be the death of the Ghosts due to revealing them and locking them down, while an EMP still lets you withdraw your Infestors ... and since the Zerg is usually the more mobile army that wont be a problem.
You talk as though that Ghosts don't have snipe/nukes/cloak.
And yes, Nukes are incredibly useful late game.
Stop talking as if ghosts are absolutely useless compared to infestors. They are different, not worse. If you get an EMP off on infestors those infestors are useless for ages while a fungal on a group of units doesn't mean death, especially when there are 8 medivacs healing them.
Also if you are losing stuff to fungals you are walking to far away from your siege tanks with your marines.
On August 19 2012 23:37 iaguz wrote: Ghosts were THE unit a few patches ago because snipe > Zerg. It was that simple. They had other abilities but they were just the tasty sides to the fucking 700 gm medium rare steak that was snipe.
I've tried ghosts quite a bit in my lategame and I think they are mostly rubbish. They are very bad at dealing with big infestor counts even if they cloak and get in there, and nukes are very random, sometimes amazing usually pointless. Ghosts can be really good if one of two things can occur
1) a splash of emp's .3 seconds before a zerg has to fungal and he can't disengage his army without just getting murdered 2) constant nuke harass as part of a constant aggression strategy, keeping the zergs attention spread and any drone kills relevant (I find if both players are turtling successful nukes are pointless. You killed 25 drones? Big deal the zerg can reproduce that with his huge mineral bank in like 10 seconds).
Was trying to remember where I've heard of your name... You're that guy everyone calls Gimly yeah? I was at WCS cheering you on xD
Yup, hehe thanks.
On August 20 2012 00:29 Larkin wrote: I don't understand this complaint.
OP is essentially saying TvZ sucks because of fungal.
So get ghosts.
Ravens deal with broods, infestors, and corruptors quite admirably if you can have them on the flank of your vikings - look at MVP's play for an example. Ravens are also pretty tough. If they get fungal'd, back off. Your bio has stim, ultras and broods are slow.
I do agree that the research time of raven upgrades should be reduced. You need a lot of starports, tech labs, and upgrades before you can even build ravens for them to be effective.
Ghosts can EMP and snipe infestors, and while snipe has been nerfed it is still quite good against brood lords and pre-max upgraded Ultras.
The problem, in my eyes, lies in that Zerg can techswitch so quickly Terran can't have enough of one unit to deal with it.
Ultras - need marauders. Broods - need vikings and ravens. Infestors - need ghosts.
Terrans have been asking how to spend their gas in late game, so I don't think cost is thaaaaaat much of an issue. But production certainly is, just due to how the mechanics work.
The solution is to not sit back and allow the Zerg to get to this stage where they can tech-switch at will and exploit Terran's production style. It's to put them on the back foot, be aggressive, constantly drop and generally be a nuisance, reduce their income, and create a situation where they simply don't have the bank to tech switch constantly.
Have you ever tried to use ghosts vs zerg? It's not the same as using them against Protoss. VS protoss high templars are slow and easier to snipe and they bunch up harder so it's easier to punish a sloppy protoss. Infestors are really fast and really fat and it's really hard to do this to them. EMP works on every Protoss unit so even if the HT's are chilling at the back the ghosts remain relevant unlike vs Zerg where snipe just tickles all their units and you can only emp the infestors (well I guess maybe also the queens too). It's also hard to kepe ghosts out the front of your army because thats what the broodlords will attack first. Add in tank splash too! fun.
The other thing is how the army works as a whole. When you emp a bunch of protoss units you stim and run in there and the Protoss has to engage. If you emp a bunch of infestors then the zerg army tends to be fast enough it can just retreat and wait til it has energy again. This is why if you're going to emp infestors it has to be just as the Zerg is trying to engage and this is very difficult because when zerg is trying to engage you have like a thousand things you have to do all at once like split, stim, move shit, split split split some more and focus and if you have ravens and flying units you also gotta micro them. It's fucking harrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrd.
On August 20 2012 00:29 Larkin wrote: Ghosts can EMP and snipe infestors,
... not with the vision advantage which Zerg has from Overlords everywhere and creep spread. Do remember that cloak gets nerfed in HotS to have a fixed duration with a cooldown. You dont have it available whenever you want (and the energy is there) AND you need several snipes for an Infestor, but one Fungal Growth will reveal the whole pack of Ghosts and keep them in place to be killed by Zerglings. So:
- EMP: deals no direct damage and prevents damage if hit correctly - Fungal Growth: deals damage, locks down AND reveals cloaked units
So please dont start saying "but you can EMP" ... only one or two Fungal Growths will be the death of the Ghosts due to revealing them and locking them down, while an EMP still lets you withdraw your Infestors ... and since the Zerg is usually the more mobile army that wont be a problem.
I didn't know about the cloak nerf, so thanks for that.
Well you shouldn't be allowing these overlords to be there. One thing MVP always does when he gets his starport out is to send a Viking around the map and clear up overlords. Not only does it reduce Zerg's vision, it costs them a few hundred minerals.
And with Ravens, you can clear up creep with ease.
Maybe Terrans could begin to accomodate ghosts in medivacs, as Protoss does with warp prisms and HT's to feedback infestors.
I don't know. A good blanket of EMPs = no fungals. A good fungal = dead bio. It's the same kind of thing in TvP with storm. It's just the way the game works. But now I see Terrans not even trying to deal with infestors except with splitting.
On August 19 2012 23:37 iaguz wrote: Ghosts were THE unit a few patches ago because snipe > Zerg. It was that simple. They had other abilities but they were just the tasty sides to the fucking 700 gm medium rare steak that was snipe.
I've tried ghosts quite a bit in my lategame and I think they are mostly rubbish. They are very bad at dealing with big infestor counts even if they cloak and get in there, and nukes are very random, sometimes amazing usually pointless. Ghosts can be really good if one of two things can occur
1) a splash of emp's .3 seconds before a zerg has to fungal and he can't disengage his army without just getting murdered 2) constant nuke harass as part of a constant aggression strategy, keeping the zergs attention spread and any drone kills relevant (I find if both players are turtling successful nukes are pointless. You killed 25 drones? Big deal the zerg can reproduce that with his huge mineral bank in like 10 seconds).
Was trying to remember where I've heard of your name... You're that guy everyone calls Gimly yeah? I was at WCS cheering you on xD
On August 20 2012 00:29 Larkin wrote: I don't understand this complaint.
OP is essentially saying TvZ sucks because of fungal.
So get ghosts.
Ravens deal with broods, infestors, and corruptors quite admirably if you can have them on the flank of your vikings - look at MVP's play for an example. Ravens are also pretty tough. If they get fungal'd, back off. Your bio has stim, ultras and broods are slow.
I do agree that the research time of raven upgrades should be reduced. You need a lot of starports, tech labs, and upgrades before you can even build ravens for them to be effective.
Ghosts can EMP and snipe infestors, and while snipe has been nerfed it is still quite good against brood lords and pre-max upgraded Ultras.
The problem, in my eyes, lies in that Zerg can techswitch so quickly Terran can't have enough of one unit to deal with it.
Ultras - need marauders. Broods - need vikings and ravens. Infestors - need ghosts.
Terrans have been asking how to spend their gas in late game, so I don't think cost is thaaaaaat much of an issue. But production certainly is, just due to how the mechanics work.
The solution is to not sit back and allow the Zerg to get to this stage where they can tech-switch at will and exploit Terran's production style. It's to put them on the back foot, be aggressive, constantly drop and generally be a nuisance, reduce their income, and create a situation where they simply don't have the bank to tech switch constantly.
Have you ever tried to use ghosts vs zerg? It's not the same as using them against Protoss. VS protoss high templars are slow and easier to snipe and they bunch up harder so it's easier to punish a sloppy protoss. Infestors are really fast and really fat and it's really hard to do this to them. EMP works on every Protoss unit so even if the HT's are chilling at the back the ghosts remain relevant unlike vs Zerg where snipe just tickles all their units and you can only emp the infestors (well I guess maybe also the queens too). It's also hard to kepe ghosts out the front of your army because thats what the broodlords will attack first. Add in tank splash too! fun.
The other thing is how the army works as a whole. When you emp a bunch of protoss units you stim and run in there and the Protoss has to engage. If you emp a bunch of infestors then the zerg army tends to be fast enough it can just retreat and wait til it has energy again. This is why if you're going to emp infestors it has to be just as the Zerg is trying to engage and this is very difficult because when zerg is trying to engage you have like a thousand things you have to do all at once like split, stim, move shit, split split split some more and focus and if you have ravens and flying units you also gotta micro them. It's fucking harrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrd.
Yeah man, I know it's hard. I play Terran and Protoss in equal measure, and I hate TvZ (but love PvZ). But the game is hard. It's meant to be hard. It seems easier for Zergs at the moment, for sure. But it's about learning, isn't it.
I have to disagree that infestors are "really fast" - they're space buffalo. They're slow. On creep, they have decent speed. But certainly catchable off it.
I think it becomes a positioning issue once again. With your ghosts in your army, like in TvP, it becomes hard because of fungal and broodlings. But if you can cloak and flank around, same with Ravens and HSM from the air, you can CRUSH a Zerg army. You take out the infestors and your bio has freedom to destroy broods and ultras with micro and stim.
At times it seems that Zerg can just 1a and win while Terran is working their ass off. But then if you work and come off on top, Terran has been so cost efficient they can push their advantage.
I don't think terran players get the idea that being able to see creep tumors is reason enough to make 1 raven in a game. Like ive seen a terran player use 5 scans in a game to push back the creep do the math that is 1750 minerals that were not mined by mules in that game. Is that more than the price of a raven definitely. Who gives a crap about seeker missile or auto turrets or pdd, detection is probably the most important skill the raven offers.
In my experience with ghosts the first time you get a bunch with cloak it can work out quite nicely because zergs never see this it never happens to them they aren't ready for the possibility. But after you reveal ghosts they have overseers and they fungal the shimmers they are now looking for. Sometimes once is enough though.
On August 20 2012 01:01 FlukyS wrote: I don't think terran players get the idea that being able to see creep tumors is reason enough to make 1 raven in a game. Like ive seen a terran player use 5 scans in a game to push back the creep do the math that is 1750 minerals that were not mined by mules in that game. Is that more than the price of a raven definitely. Who gives a crap about seeker missile or auto turrets or pdd, detection is probably the most important skill the raven offers.
Late game scans aren't really as much of an issue because you aren't technically losing 1750 minerals. You just won't get the minerals as fast.
If you are talking about early game. Just getting to raven tech can be pretty awkward especially when you are trying to pump out medivacs/vikings.
On August 19 2012 15:16 TsGBruzze wrote: I am a terran and i Would be sad if they buffed terran... Let The metagame change...
That's a very shitty and trolly post but i'll bite and say... Stop living under your 2010-terran rock and go ladder for a few hours. Then come back and say what you just said again, spoiler alert, YOU WON'T.
Terran is in an awful position atm not only in TvZ, but TvP too. Take your time to actually read Avilo's thread here and you'll understand.
Why are posts like these allowed but posts shitting on Avilo not? OBNOXIOUS SPOILER I play against Zergs on ladder all the time as Terran, OBNOXIOUS SPOILER I DO think it's balanced.
Stop calling his post a troll and then putting shit effort into your own, its extremely annoying. Most Terran's are just upset the game is balancing out and can't handle the transition. Time to stop bitching, time to start improving.
On August 20 2012 00:29 Larkin wrote: Ghosts can EMP and snipe infestors,
... not with the vision advantage which Zerg has from Overlords everywhere and creep spread. Do remember that cloak gets nerfed in HotS to have a fixed duration with a cooldown. You dont have it available whenever you want (and the energy is there) AND you need several snipes for an Infestor, but one Fungal Growth will reveal the whole pack of Ghosts and keep them in place to be killed by Zerglings. So:
- EMP: deals no direct damage and prevents damage if hit correctly - Fungal Growth: deals damage, locks down AND reveals cloaked units
So please dont start saying "but you can EMP" ... only one or two Fungal Growths will be the death of the Ghosts due to revealing them and locking them down, while an EMP still lets you withdraw your Infestors ... and since the Zerg is usually the more mobile army that wont be a problem.
I didn't know about the cloak nerf, so thanks for that.
Well you shouldn't be allowing these overlords to be there. One thing MVP always does when he gets his starport out is to send a Viking around the map and clear up overlords. Not only does it reduce Zerg's vision, it costs them a few hundred minerals.
And with Ravens, you can clear up creep with ease.
Maybe Terrans could begin to accomodate ghosts in medivacs, as Protoss does with warp prisms and HT's to feedback infestors.
I don't know. A good blanket of EMPs = no fungals. A good fungal = dead bio. It's the same kind of thing in TvP with storm. It's just the way the game works. But now I see Terrans not even trying to deal with infestors except with splitting.
You can't clear the overlords out if you want to go for an early timing, since you won't have the means to deal with them at that point. Those overlord spots + queens prevents terrans from putting pressure on early.
There are a lot of differences in ghosts v HT and ghosts v infestors. For instance, ghosts are very useful in TvP outside of emping the HT. They can emp the army, or they can tank damage very well, and they have high dps against zealots with their auto attack. Against zerg, they are not doing anything, their only job is to take out infestors. Also, HT are slow and if they are caught out of position, they are completely dead. If a clump of infestors get caught out, they can fungal still save a huge chunk of them. The part that makes this even harder, usually zergs will get >15 infestors, whereas protoss usually will have ~6 with the army because infestors scale very well with additional infestors (because you want to be chain fungaling), whereas HT do not scale with additional HT. To stop the fungals, you have to kill so many infestors, instead of just a few HT.
On August 19 2012 23:37 iaguz wrote: Ghosts were THE unit a few patches ago because snipe > Zerg. It was that simple. They had other abilities but they were just the tasty sides to the fucking 700 gm medium rare steak that was snipe.
I've tried ghosts quite a bit in my lategame and I think they are mostly rubbish. They are very bad at dealing with big infestor counts even if they cloak and get in there, and nukes are very random, sometimes amazing usually pointless. Ghosts can be really good if one of two things can occur
1) a splash of emp's .3 seconds before a zerg has to fungal and he can't disengage his army without just getting murdered 2) constant nuke harass as part of a constant aggression strategy, keeping the zergs attention spread and any drone kills relevant (I find if both players are turtling successful nukes are pointless. You killed 25 drones? Big deal the zerg can reproduce that with his huge mineral bank in like 10 seconds).
Was trying to remember where I've heard of your name... You're that guy everyone calls Gimly yeah? I was at WCS cheering you on xD
Yup, hehe thanks.
On August 20 2012 00:29 Larkin wrote: I don't understand this complaint.
OP is essentially saying TvZ sucks because of fungal.
So get ghosts.
Ravens deal with broods, infestors, and corruptors quite admirably if you can have them on the flank of your vikings - look at MVP's play for an example. Ravens are also pretty tough. If they get fungal'd, back off. Your bio has stim, ultras and broods are slow.
I do agree that the research time of raven upgrades should be reduced. You need a lot of starports, tech labs, and upgrades before you can even build ravens for them to be effective.
Ghosts can EMP and snipe infestors, and while snipe has been nerfed it is still quite good against brood lords and pre-max upgraded Ultras.
The problem, in my eyes, lies in that Zerg can techswitch so quickly Terran can't have enough of one unit to deal with it.
Ultras - need marauders. Broods - need vikings and ravens. Infestors - need ghosts.
Terrans have been asking how to spend their gas in late game, so I don't think cost is thaaaaaat much of an issue. But production certainly is, just due to how the mechanics work.
The solution is to not sit back and allow the Zerg to get to this stage where they can tech-switch at will and exploit Terran's production style. It's to put them on the back foot, be aggressive, constantly drop and generally be a nuisance, reduce their income, and create a situation where they simply don't have the bank to tech switch constantly.
Have you ever tried to use ghosts vs zerg? It's not the same as using them against Protoss. VS protoss high templars are slow and easier to snipe and they bunch up harder so it's easier to punish a sloppy protoss. Infestors are really fast and really fat and it's really hard to do this to them. EMP works on every Protoss unit so even if the HT's are chilling at the back the ghosts remain relevant unlike vs Zerg where snipe just tickles all their units and you can only emp the infestors (well I guess maybe also the queens too). It's also hard to kepe ghosts out the front of your army because thats what the broodlords will attack first. Add in tank splash too! fun.
The other thing is how the army works as a whole. When you emp a bunch of protoss units you stim and run in there and the Protoss has to engage. If you emp a bunch of infestors then the zerg army tends to be fast enough it can just retreat and wait til it has energy again. This is why if you're going to emp infestors it has to be just as the Zerg is trying to engage and this is very difficult because when zerg is trying to engage you have like a thousand things you have to do all at once like split, stim, move shit, split split split some more and focus and if you have ravens and flying units you also gotta micro them. It's fucking harrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrd.
Yeah man, I know it's hard. I play Terran and Protoss in equal measure, and I hate TvZ (but love PvZ). But the game is hard. It's meant to be hard. It seems easier for Zergs at the moment, for sure. But it's about learning, isn't it.
I have to disagree that infestors are "really fast" - they're space buffalo. They're slow. On creep, they have decent speed. But certainly catchable off it.
I think it becomes a positioning issue once again. With your ghosts in your army, like in TvP, it becomes hard because of fungal and broodlings. But if you can cloak and flank around, same with Ravens and HSM from the air, you can CRUSH a Zerg army. You take out the infestors and your bio has freedom to destroy broods and ultras with micro and stim.
At times it seems that Zerg can just 1a and win while Terran is working their ass off. But then if you work and come off on top, Terran has been so cost efficient they can push their advantage.
As for speed of infestors being really fast, consider the case where you catch infestors off guard. Off creep, ghosts and infestors are the exact same speed so infestors can kind of get away. They won't be chased down by ghosts. On creep, infestors have a speed multiplier of 1.3, so they can easily get away. Even if you stim bio, bio is only 15% faster than the infestor. That is not much time that you have to punish infestors out of position. Then on top of that, infestors have two escape spells of fungal and burrow to help them escape.
Now for high templar, ghosts are already 20% faster! Add in stimmed bio which is 80% faster! HT also do not have any escape spells. That is why HT caught out of position is a huge blunder, and those HT will not be saved at all. Infestors, however, are not punished anywhere nearly as hard.
On August 20 2012 01:20 D4V3Z02 wrote: Terrans are still winning, that fact proves that TvZ is balanced. Because of that the raven change is fine, theres no need for another change.
Pretty much... MVP owning Nerchio atm in late game ZvT (Basically just won the game with a bunch of seekers on broodlords).
Absolutely totally agree - I saw at IEM Cologne Bomber vs Violet set1. The whole game evolved on the one money fungal which killed all the expensive vikings. I don't understand how a spell can be so OP to do that. If you think about it, Blizzard knew about the power of fungals that they wanted to remove it's ability to affect air units - but zerg qq reverted the change.
Zergs have fungals and protoss have HTs - terran doesn't have a easy kill spell.
On August 20 2012 01:31 Azzur wrote: Absolutely totally agree - I saw at IEM Cologne Bomber vs Violet set1. The whole game evolved on the one money fungal which killed all the expensive vikings. I don't understand how a spell can be so OP to do that. If you think about it, Blizzard knew about the power of fungals that they wanted to remove it's ability to affect air units - but zerg qq reverted the change.
Zergs have fungals and protoss have HTs - terran doesn't have a easy kill spell.
Errr... Hunter Seeker Missile eats broodlords/corrupters. Most underused ability in the game.
On August 20 2012 01:31 Azzur wrote: Absolutely totally agree - I saw at IEM Cologne Bomber vs Violet set1. The whole game evolved on the one money fungal which killed all the expensive vikings. I don't understand how a spell can be so OP to do that. If you think about it, Blizzard knew about the power of fungals that they wanted to remove it's ability to affect air units - but zerg qq reverted the change.
Zergs have fungals and protoss have HTs - terran doesn't have a easy kill spell.
Errr... Hunter Seeker Missile eats broodlords/corrupters. Most underused ability in the game.
MVP being a much better player than the one dimensional zerg players at IEM doesn't prove the viability of the ravens.
On August 20 2012 01:31 Azzur wrote: Absolutely totally agree - I saw at IEM Cologne Bomber vs Violet set1. The whole game evolved on the one money fungal which killed all the expensive vikings. I don't understand how a spell can be so OP to do that. If you think about it, Blizzard knew about the power of fungals that they wanted to remove it's ability to affect air units - but zerg qq reverted the change.
Zergs have fungals and protoss have HTs - terran doesn't have a easy kill spell.
I know this thread is about how bad seeker missles are but Ive been watching MVP use them all weekend now and he's a great benchmark for how good something is used the best way. Guess what he's decimating groups of infestors broodlords and baneling clumps with ease with the seeker missles its really punishing the swarmyness of zerg. Terrans are learning cute new tricks this weekend and your going to see a meta game shift now with Ravens being used as the norm in later game.
On August 20 2012 00:29 Larkin wrote: Ghosts can EMP and snipe infestors,
... not with the vision advantage which Zerg has from Overlords everywhere and creep spread. Do remember that cloak gets nerfed in HotS to have a fixed duration with a cooldown. You dont have it available whenever you want (and the energy is there) AND you need several snipes for an Infestor, but one Fungal Growth will reveal the whole pack of Ghosts and keep them in place to be killed by Zerglings. So:
- EMP: deals no direct damage and prevents damage if hit correctly - Fungal Growth: deals damage, locks down AND reveals cloaked units
So please dont start saying "but you can EMP" ... only one or two Fungal Growths will be the death of the Ghosts due to revealing them and locking them down, while an EMP still lets you withdraw your Infestors ... and since the Zerg is usually the more mobile army that wont be a problem.
You talk as though that Ghosts don't have snipe/nukes/cloak.
And yes, Nukes are incredibly useful late game.
Stop talking as if ghosts are absolutely useless compared to infestors. They are different, not worse. If you get an EMP off on infestors those infestors are useless for ages while a fungal on a group of units doesn't mean death, especially when there are 8 medivacs healing them.
Also if you are losing stuff to fungals you are walking to far away from your siege tanks with your marines.
While he is understating the usefulness of ghosts and, yes, they are different: ghosts are worse than infestors. Considerably so.
On August 20 2012 01:31 Azzur wrote: Absolutely totally agree - I saw at IEM Cologne Bomber vs Violet set1. The whole game evolved on the one money fungal which killed all the expensive vikings. I don't understand how a spell can be so OP to do that. If you think about it, Blizzard knew about the power of fungals that they wanted to remove it's ability to affect air units - but zerg qq reverted the change.
Zergs have fungals and protoss have HTs - terran doesn't have a easy kill spell.
Errr... Hunter Seeker Missile eats broodlords/corrupters. Most underused ability in the game.
MVP being a much better player than the one dimensional zerg players at IEM doesn't prove the viability of the ravens.
That's just a plain ignorant statement. Nerchio is one of the best zergs in the world.
The very presence of Seeker missile will force a reaction from the zerg which could be splitting broodlords however... Splitting slow units costs ALOT of dps time.
Also, if you think these players are so bad then why don't you try seeker missile on ladder against these one dimensional zergs. By your logic the zergs that are vsing MVP are the best of the one dimensional zergs, so the ones you vs should be really easy.
The problem of most Terran players in my opinion is that they refuse to change their mindset. They go for "old strategies" - bio, tank marine, mech, variations of the mentioned, and drill with it until the game is decided by battle. Very rarely and very few players ever think about transitioning to starport or they do after the game has already been decided. They have little experience in these situations and fail most of the time - thats normal, dont cry about it. It takes practice to be good at it. There are already a few players that are good at it but majority are shouting about imbalance. MVP just showed today that it is doable vs Vortix and Nerchio. It would take some months for the rest of the terrans to learn.
All of the information you wrote is true but has already been said for months. The problem is Blizzard doesn't real TL or anywhere else for that matter to decide on how to balance things. They have 2 guys making their own decisions, largely centered on making the game more "fun" and "fresh" so more people buy the games, rather than balancing it properly.
MVP with 4 GSL titles stomping mediocre foreigners.
In other news, china produces rice.
@blug: seeker missiles only cost a 200 gas unit and then take 3 minutes to build up, nope, no window there to get something done.
On August 20 2012 01:41 Scila wrote: All of the information you wrote is true but has already been said for months. The problem is Blizzard doesn't real TL or anywhere else for that matter to decide on how to balance things. They have 2 guys making their own decisions, largely centered on making the game more "fun" and "fresh" so more people buy the games, rather than balancing it properly.
On August 20 2012 01:31 Azzur wrote: Absolutely totally agree - I saw at IEM Cologne Bomber vs Violet set1. The whole game evolved on the one money fungal which killed all the expensive vikings. I don't understand how a spell can be so OP to do that. If you think about it, Blizzard knew about the power of fungals that they wanted to remove it's ability to affect air units - but zerg qq reverted the change.
Zergs have fungals and protoss have HTs - terran doesn't have a easy kill spell.
Errr... Hunter Seeker Missile eats broodlords/corrupters. Most underused ability in the game.
MVP being a much better player than the one dimensional zerg players at IEM doesn't prove the viability of the ravens.
That's just a plain ignorant statement. Nerchio is one of the best zergs in the world.
The very presence of Seeker missile will force a reaction from the zerg which could be splitting broodlords however... Splitting slow units costs ALOT of dps time.
Nerchio is one of the best zergs? Why doesn't he go to GSL and get into Code S then? Unless "one of the best" is like top 10, or top 25, or maybe even top 25, which is still lower than MVP being one of the best terrans.
Did you seriously make this post because of losing to Alkresh? He didn't even use infestors that game and you lost, so infestors aren't the issue- maybe you just aren't playing the matchup properly.
On August 20 2012 01:31 Azzur wrote: Absolutely totally agree - I saw at IEM Cologne Bomber vs Violet set1. The whole game evolved on the one money fungal which killed all the expensive vikings. I don't understand how a spell can be so OP to do that. If you think about it, Blizzard knew about the power of fungals that they wanted to remove it's ability to affect air units - but zerg qq reverted the change.
Zergs have fungals and protoss have HTs - terran doesn't have a easy kill spell.
Errr... Hunter Seeker Missile eats broodlords/corrupters. Most underused ability in the game.
MVP being a much better player than the one dimensional zerg players at IEM doesn't prove the viability of the ravens.
That's just a plain ignorant statement. Nerchio is one of the best zergs in the world.
The very presence of Seeker missile will force a reaction from the zerg which could be splitting broodlords however... Splitting slow units costs ALOT of dps time.
Also, if you think these players are so bad then why don't you try seeker missile on ladder against these one dimensional zergs. By your logic the zergs that are vsing MVP are the best of the one dimensional zergs, so the ones you vs should be really easy.
DRG, Symbol, Leenox, Curious, Life, Coca, Sniper, Hyun, and stephano are the zergs I would consider at the very top tier of zerg players. Nerchio is a very good zerg player. Out of non-koreans, he should be easily considered top 3. But he is not on the same level of MVP. This goes to everyone for the last few comments: MVP is a much better player than Nerchio. Nerchio is a very good player, but MVP is a significantly better player than Nerchio. The finals cannot be used to show whether or not ravens are the greatest unit ever. The games can hint that ravens might be viable, but MVP is a better player.
Why is everyone jumping on the MVP bandwagon? He's beating Zergs that are a level below himself. pretty sure he could use any number of strats/unit comps to beat those guys...
On August 20 2012 01:54 Little-Chimp wrote: I hope everyone watched MVP today
MVP won more because of insane macro/upgrades and relentlessly counter dropping, than the occasional Seeker missiles going off. In most of the games in the final, he had basically won by that point in time anyway. Or at least the games very very much in his grasp and Seeker missiles weren't winning battles for him.
So yeah, informative games to watch for terran potential as a whole, but for Ravens, not so much.
Guys, for the people who are saying that MVP would like a word, and referencing MVP's play as a counter argument to avilo... you do realize that its proving what he is saying, right?
Did you even read the OP?
Changing ravens would make them stronger... MvP thinks they are strong enough already. Avilo thinks that changing the raven will do nothing to address the TvZ issues currently.
I actually see no links between any of those points besides that both think the current ravens are preferable over the new change... (being that a change to make them stronger will make them used)
On August 20 2012 01:57 Swift118 wrote: Why is everyone jumping on the MVP bandwagon? He's beating Zergs that are a level below himself. pretty sure he could use any number of strats/unit comps to beat those guys...
Well, because the other day people were whining, because some midclass, jetlaged Korean Code A and Code S Terrans were losing to the European Elite playing at home in some very close games, that could have gone either way. And now the stupid quit-pro-quo "I just saw tournament X" mentality of TL is flipping the other way around.
On August 20 2012 01:31 Azzur wrote: Absolutely totally agree - I saw at IEM Cologne Bomber vs Violet set1. The whole game evolved on the one money fungal which killed all the expensive vikings. I don't understand how a spell can be so OP to do that. If you think about it, Blizzard knew about the power of fungals that they wanted to remove it's ability to affect air units - but zerg qq reverted the change.
Zergs have fungals and protoss have HTs - terran doesn't have a easy kill spell.
Errr... Hunter Seeker Missile eats broodlords/corrupters. Most underused ability in the game.
MVP being a much better player than the one dimensional zerg players at IEM doesn't prove the viability of the ravens.
That's just a plain ignorant statement. Nerchio is one of the best zergs in the world.
The very presence of Seeker missile will force a reaction from the zerg which could be splitting broodlords however... Splitting slow units costs ALOT of dps time.
Also, if you think these players are so bad then why don't you try seeker missile on ladder against these one dimensional zergs. By your logic the zergs that are vsing MVP are the best of the one dimensional zergs, so the ones you vs should be really easy.
DRG, Symbol, Leenox, Curious, Life, Coca, Sniper, Hyun, and stephano are the zergs I would consider at the very top tier of zerg players. Nerchio is a very good zerg player. Out of non-koreans, he should be easily considered top 3. But he is not on the same level of MVP. This goes to everyone for the last few comments: MVP is a much better player than Nerchio. Nerchio is a very good player, but MVP is a significantly better player than Nerchio. The finals cannot be used to show whether or not ravens are the greatest unit ever. The games can hint that ravens might be viable, but MVP is a better player.
Ok, we'll disregard all of Taejas seeker missile usage as well.
We'll also disregard Violets participation in the tournament, and I'm quite shocked you didn't put him in the list since he is one of the most solid zergs in the world.
You talk as if people who are in GSL are the best of the best, but that simply isn't true. A lot of Korean players in the GSL are equivalent to foreign players. Nerchio I would consider a tier below MVP, however that doesn't mean MVP isn't trying his little heart out for the victories. I don't really see how a top tier zerg would of done anything different with his broodlord placement besides a possible split... however that is unviable to an extent due to how slow broodlords are.
Why are terrans trying to run away from ravens? If MVP can use them against these "low tier" players then surely seeker missiles would work better in everybody's game on these forums. Unless you guys are all GSL champions as well.
Anyways, no more arguing because it's impossible to have a rational argument with terrans that have the evidence right there in front of their faces. Seeker Missile is a great ability and in late game can rape face.
i think the most overlooked factor is not necessarily the unit changes that have occured since the game came out, but rather the changes in the map size that blizzard puts on ladder. with protoss warp, and zerg creep, terran just doesn't matchup as well on larger maps. it also encourages turtling, not as entertaining to watch.
it would be nice to see a few smaller maps back in the pool. not steppes size, that was just silly, but xel'naga cavernesque maps.
I believe the way to fix late game TvZ is to simply put a timer on HSM so raven can use HSM as soon as they pop, and to prevent players from using HSM and PDD at the same time you could put a lock on PDD if HSM is used for a certain amount of time.
No, it wont fix it completely due to the fungal still being left but as long as you use the map to your advantage, have few tanks to target infestors and spread your raven in a big arc along with vikings you should be able to get few HSM to hit the broods/corrupters.
Forgot to add, its quite funny how the only foreigners doing good and all the new upcoming players are zergs, and there are no foreigner terran at any tournament doing even decently lately. On top of that why the tournaments have few terrans doing okey lately is because they are koreans and barely any korean zerg/protosses go to foreign tournaments, especially zergs.
This was just one tournament, so isn't very good for statistics etc, but I'd like to say a few things;
Nerchio and the other zergs MVP beat ARE good at the game, and so the matches were difficult for MVP.
I think more importantly, MVP would not use ravens lategame if he had not practiced it. With his IM zerg practice partners (Nestea etc, some pretty strong zergs in there), and found that it worked well for him.
This was done BEFORE the patch which, while it doesn't directly address some issues with ravens, it IS a buff to ravens. (And a nerf to creep spread thrown in too).
MVP showed that you can safely play through the long ROI time of the raven, which is something we should already kind of know, since zerg armies pre-BL infestor generally can lose to a much lower supply terran army anyway, so therefore a terran can choose to transition around when a zerg starts hive, and be safe from attacks until the Gspire finishes. By then he will hopefully have some ravens with seeker missile ready, and can still do some of the hellion runbys//marine marauder drops that we see being so devastating against the immobile zerg army.
Terrans were beating the zerg lategame army with higher mobility tactics before MVP showed raven use, and ravens are just an example of a tool where you can engage the zerg's doom army after initially hurting his econ with the drops.
On August 20 2012 02:05 Phays wrote: I believe the way to fix lategame TvZ is to simply put a timer on HSM so raven can use HSM as soon as they pop,
Really good idea i thought about that to. Better that kind of buff then speed witch dont even matter broodlords are slow ravens are slow. Just to edit speed does matter later but its not as big as a hsm buff i think
On August 20 2012 02:09 NeMeSiS3 wrote: Terran wins another championship, everyone still bitches throwing out a multitude of excuses as to why that occured. Surprise surprise surprise.
Avilo is bad and should feel bad for balance whining every chance he gets.
The reason he loses is not because of percieved imbalances -- he loses because he is bad just like Idra said.
On August 20 2012 01:54 Little-Chimp wrote: I hope everyone watched MVP today
Stupid posts like this should be instantly banned. MVP win shows nothing about state of TvZ. Fruitdealer won GSL 1. Nestea won GSL 2. And all zergs were crying rivers at that moment. Double standards and lack of common sense in posts like these are just mind blowing.
Also, MVP's Ravens play worked because: 1) Zerg's super passive style allowed MVP split the map. 2) He got insane lead by multi-tasking (Drops/Run-bys). 3) There was zero micro from zerg's side: Trying to break fortified tank lines. Zero flanks. Zero splitting. Sends whole army in a line into terran's ball. Leaves no energy infestors to chill and die. Sends broodlords into most stupid locations without guard and usually loses
So Ravens only worked because opponents played/responded a lot worse, not because they are a great late game TvZ unit. Nerchio and Vortix are great players but putting them at the level of MVP is just ignorant.
On August 20 2012 02:07 Khazroul wrote: This was just one tournament, so isn't very good for statistics etc, but I'd like to say a few things;
Nerchio and the other zergs MVP beat ARE good at the game, and so the matches were difficult for MVP.
I think more importantly, MVP would not use ravens lategame if he had not practiced it. With his IM zerg practice partners (Nestea etc, some pretty strong zergs in there), and found that it worked well for him.
This was done BEFORE the patch which, while it doesn't directly address some issues with ravens, it IS a buff to ravens. (And a nerf to creep spread thrown in too).
MVP showed that you can safely play through the long ROI time of the raven, which is something we should already kind of know, since zerg armies pre-BL infestor generally can lose to a much lower supply terran army anyway, so therefore a terran can choose to transition around when a zerg starts hive, and be safe from attacks until the Gspire finishes. By then he will hopefully have some ravens with seeker missile ready, and can still do some of the hellion runbys//marine marauder drops that we see being so devastating against the immobile zerg army.
Terrans were beating the zerg lategame army with higher mobility tactics before MVP showed raven use, and ravens are just an example of a tool where you can engage the zerg's doom army after initially hurting his econ with the drops.
To be honest, I don't think Nerchio played his best in the series. Game 1 defense was brilliant. Truly brilliant, but game 2 losing 70 drones is inexcusable as a pro player. This isn't the beta anymore and hellion run-bys are hardly new.
The same with other games where nerchio lost a ton.
But that's not to say that MVP didnt play flawlessly because he did. what I am saying is if they both played flawlessly, I think Nerchio wins even if he is much worse of a player. However, when MVP plays flawlessly and Nerchio plays considerably worse, it's a predictable outcome.
not 100% sure but I think Terran players won the last 4 offline events (Taeja's two tourney wins, Kas won the eastern Euro tournament with Korean participants and now MVP won IEM). I think these successes mean that eventual issues in in TvZ are atleast largely exagerated.
In my lowbob opinion, I do not see issues at all if I watch tournament play, there was only a period of Terrans adjusting to Zerg's multiqueen play postpatch.
On August 20 2012 02:20 AngryMag wrote: not 100% sure but I think Terran players won the last 4 offline events (Taeja's two tourney wins, Kas won the eastern Euro tournament with Korean participants and now MVP won IEM). I think these successes mean that eventual issues in in TvZ are atleast largely exagerated.
In my lowbob opinion, I do not see issues at all if I watch tournament play, there was only a period of Terrans adjusting to Zerg's multiqueen play postpatch.
Yes but have you looked at how many Terrans have won in the last 200 tournaments? Ok, so they won a few recent tournaments, but that is dwarfed by the results of many, many before it.
On August 20 2012 02:07 Khazroul wrote: This was just one tournament, so isn't very good for statistics etc, but I'd like to say a few things;
Nerchio and the other zergs MVP beat ARE good at the game, and so the matches were difficult for MVP.
I think more importantly, MVP would not use ravens lategame if he had not practiced it. With his IM zerg practice partners (Nestea etc, some pretty strong zergs in there), and found that it worked well for him.
This was done BEFORE the patch which, while it doesn't directly address some issues with ravens, it IS a buff to ravens. (And a nerf to creep spread thrown in too).
MVP showed that you can safely play through the long ROI time of the raven, which is something we should already kind of know, since zerg armies pre-BL infestor generally can lose to a much lower supply terran army anyway, so therefore a terran can choose to transition around when a zerg starts hive, and be safe from attacks until the Gspire finishes. By then he will hopefully have some ravens with seeker missile ready, and can still do some of the hellion runbys//marine marauder drops that we see being so devastating against the immobile zerg army.
Terrans were beating the zerg lategame army with higher mobility tactics before MVP showed raven use, and ravens are just an example of a tool where you can engage the zerg's doom army after initially hurting his econ with the drops.
To be honest, I don't think Nerchio played his best in the series. Game 1 defense was brilliant. Truly brilliant, but game 2 losing 70 drones is inexcusable as a pro player. This isn't the beta anymore and hellion run-bys are hardly new.
The same with other games where nerchio lost a ton.
But that's not to say that MVP didnt play flawlessly because he did. what I am saying is if they both played flawlessly, I think Nerchio wins even if he is much worse of a player. However, when MVP plays flawlessly and Nerchio plays considerably worse, it's a predictable outcome.
Guess what? ALL pro players lose lots of workers, it happens.
Proof avilo fanboy trolls shouldn't be balance whining so much.
On August 20 2012 02:20 AngryMag wrote: not 100% sure but I think Terran players won the last 4 offline events (Taeja's two tourney wins, Kas won the eastern Euro tournament with Korean participants and now MVP won IEM). I think these successes mean that eventual issues in in TvZ are atleast largely exagerated.
In my lowbob opinion, I do not see issues at all if I watch tournament play, there was only a period of Terrans adjusting to Zerg's multiqueen play postpatch.
Yes but have you looked at how many Terrans have won in the last 200 tournaments? Ok, so they won a few recent tournaments, but that is dwarfed by the results of many, many before it.
... Are you joking? Why do people say such stupid shit without ever looking into anything.
Oh hey, an article which proves you're an idiot, who'd of thought.
"On the quarterly graph we can see that Terran has spent almost the entire duration of competitive Starcraft 2 at the top of the earnings race between the three races, dropping only the 1st Quarter to Zerg (which was when Fruitdealer won his whopping GSL prize). "
Time to have a reality check and stop posting here, you obviously have no idea what you're talking about.
MVP beat alot of VERY good zerg players in IEM, everyone really should go watch those replays with an open mind. I know I am.
I know one event alone doesn't mean much, but they start to add up, Taeja has pretty much been dominating lately so this just adds to the recent Terran win list.
On August 20 2012 02:20 AngryMag wrote: not 100% sure but I think Terran players won the last 4 offline events (Taeja's two tourney wins, Kas won the eastern Euro tournament with Korean participants and now MVP won IEM). I think these successes mean that eventual issues in in TvZ are atleast largely exagerated.
In my lowbob opinion, I do not see issues at all if I watch tournament play, there was only a period of Terrans adjusting to Zerg's multiqueen play postpatch.
Yes but have you looked at how many Terrans have won in the last 200 tournaments? Ok, so they won a few recent tournaments, but that is dwarfed by the results of many, many before it.
The discussion is about the balance right now, which is determined by the latest events. And your arguement is just wrong: Premier Tournaments this year: 21 Terran wins: 11 other races wins: 10
Premier Tournemts last year: 40 Terran wins: 20 other races wins: 20
With 3races, Terran has won >50% of the biggest tournaments in the last one and a half year. Where have you been when you think they are not winning enough tournaments?
On August 20 2012 02:20 AngryMag wrote: not 100% sure but I think Terran players won the last 4 offline events (Taeja's two tourney wins, Kas won the eastern Euro tournament with Korean participants and now MVP won IEM). I think these successes mean that eventual issues in in TvZ are atleast largely exagerated.
In my lowbob opinion, I do not see issues at all if I watch tournament play, there was only a period of Terrans adjusting to Zerg's multiqueen play postpatch.
Yes but have you looked at how many Terrans have won in the last 200 tournaments? Ok, so they won a few recent tournaments, but that is dwarfed by the results of many, many before it.
... Are you joking? Why do people say such stupid shit without ever looking into anything.
Oh hey, an article which proves you're an idiot, who'd of thought.
"On the quarterly graph we can see that Terran has spent almost the entire duration of competitive Starcraft 2 at the top of the earnings race between the three races, dropping only the 1st Quarter to Zerg (which was when Fruitdealer won his whopping GSL prize). "
Time to have a reality check and stop posting here, you obviously have no idea what you're talking about.
"Terran : $1,362,778.00
Zerg : $927,790.00
Protoss : $740,394.00"
...Look at your graph. It goes until may 2012...before the patch... It's now middle of august 2012, so what... almost 3 months of tournaments, and games.
On August 20 2012 02:20 AngryMag wrote: not 100% sure but I think Terran players won the last 4 offline events (Taeja's two tourney wins, Kas won the eastern Euro tournament with Korean participants and now MVP won IEM). I think these successes mean that eventual issues in in TvZ are atleast largely exagerated.
In my lowbob opinion, I do not see issues at all if I watch tournament play, there was only a period of Terrans adjusting to Zerg's multiqueen play postpatch.
Yes but have you looked at how many Terrans have won in the last 200 tournaments? Ok, so they won a few recent tournaments, but that is dwarfed by the results of many, many before it.
... Are you joking? Why do people say such stupid shit without ever looking into anything.
Oh hey, an article which proves you're an idiot, who'd of thought.
"On the quarterly graph we can see that Terran has spent almost the entire duration of competitive Starcraft 2 at the top of the earnings race between the three races, dropping only the 1st Quarter to Zerg (which was when Fruitdealer won his whopping GSL prize). "
Time to have a reality check and stop posting here, you obviously have no idea what you're talking about.
"Terran : $1,362,778.00
Zerg : $927,790.00
Protoss : $740,394.00"
...Look at your graph. It goes until may 2012...before the patch... It's now middle of august 2012, so what... almost 3 months of tournaments, and games.
He said quote "200 tournaments" as in the past 200 tournaments. And if I recall, Terran won the last 4 events no? Doing what you said would actually raise the Terran threshold even higher...
so from release to may it is proven Terran has dominated SC2 professional scene, then we hit may + and terran wins 4 events in a row? :O Terran is COMPLETELY underpowered, throw your game away Zerg isn't balanced let's burn Blizzard HQ down.
On August 20 2012 02:25 LuckyFool wrote: MVP beat alot of VERY good zerg players in IEM, everyone really should go watch those replays with an open mind. I know I am.
I know one event alone doesn't mean much, but they start to add up, Taeja has pretty much been dominating lately so this just adds to the recent Terran win list.
Problem is DRG was probably the #1 player in the world before the Queen patch as well. Balanced should always be for the tip top players (pros) but not to the extent of like the top 5 players.
On August 20 2012 02:20 AngryMag wrote: not 100% sure but I think Terran players won the last 4 offline events (Taeja's two tourney wins, Kas won the eastern Euro tournament with Korean participants and now MVP won IEM). I think these successes mean that eventual issues in in TvZ are atleast largely exagerated.
In my lowbob opinion, I do not see issues at all if I watch tournament play, there was only a period of Terrans adjusting to Zerg's multiqueen play postpatch.
Yes but have you looked at how many Terrans have won in the last 200 tournaments? Ok, so they won a few recent tournaments, but that is dwarfed by the results of many, many before it.
... Are you joking? Why do people say such stupid shit without ever looking into anything.
Oh hey, an article which proves you're an idiot, who'd of thought.
"On the quarterly graph we can see that Terran has spent almost the entire duration of competitive Starcraft 2 at the top of the earnings race between the three races, dropping only the 1st Quarter to Zerg (which was when Fruitdealer won his whopping GSL prize). "
Time to have a reality check and stop posting here, you obviously have no idea what you're talking about.
"Terran : $1,362,778.00
Zerg : $927,790.00
Protoss : $740,394.00"
...Look at your graph. It goes until may 2012...before the patch... It's now middle of august 2012, so what... almost 3 months of tournaments, and games.
He said quote "200 tournaments" as in the past 200 tournaments. And if I recall, Terran won the last 4 events no? Doing what you said would actually raise the Terran threshold even higher...
so from release to may it is proven Terran has dominated SC2 professional scene, then we hit may + and terran wins 4 events in a row? :O Terran is COMPLETELY underpowered, throw your game away Zerg isn't balanced let's burn Blizzard HQ down.
But money for each tournament isn't the same... Hence why going off money earned isn't a solid way to prove anything. Win rates are far better to go off, as they're global and not a variable like the prizepool/tournament.
Nice aggression in all of your posts though. You're really fired up. Just pointing out the graph is old, and money earned is an awful way to show balance.
On August 20 2012 02:20 AngryMag wrote: not 100% sure but I think Terran players won the last 4 offline events (Taeja's two tourney wins, Kas won the eastern Euro tournament with Korean participants and now MVP won IEM). I think these successes mean that eventual issues in in TvZ are atleast largely exagerated.
In my lowbob opinion, I do not see issues at all if I watch tournament play, there was only a period of Terrans adjusting to Zerg's multiqueen play postpatch.
Yes but have you looked at how many Terrans have won in the last 200 tournaments? Ok, so they won a few recent tournaments, but that is dwarfed by the results of many, many before it.
... Are you joking? Why do people say such stupid shit without ever looking into anything.
Oh hey, an article which proves you're an idiot, who'd of thought.
"On the quarterly graph we can see that Terran has spent almost the entire duration of competitive Starcraft 2 at the top of the earnings race between the three races, dropping only the 1st Quarter to Zerg (which was when Fruitdealer won his whopping GSL prize). "
Time to have a reality check and stop posting here, you obviously have no idea what you're talking about.
"Terran : $1,362,778.00
Zerg : $927,790.00
Protoss : $740,394.00"
...Look at your graph. It goes until may 2012...before the patch... It's now middle of august 2012, so what... almost 3 months of tournaments, and games.
He said quote "200 tournaments" as in the past 200 tournaments. And if I recall, Terran won the last 4 events no? Doing what you said would actually raise the Terran threshold even higher...
so from release to may it is proven Terran has dominated SC2 professional scene, then we hit may + and terran wins 4 events in a row? :O Terran is COMPLETELY underpowered, throw your game away Zerg isn't balanced let's burn Blizzard HQ down.
But money for each tournament isn't the same... Hence why going off money earned isn't a solid way to prove anything. Win rates are far better to go off, as they're global and not a variable like the prizepool/tournament.
Nice aggression in all of your posts though. You're really fired up. Just pointing out the graph is old, and money earned is an awful way to show balance.
Ok so let me get this straight, would you agree that since release (including post balance patch) Terran has won the most tournaments and most prize money, yet it is completely under powered against Zerg even though the last 4 events (even after the dreaded patch) shows Terrans winning. That is the argument we are hearing? Interesting, I suppose that is a valid viewpoint, you should balance for Blizzard.
On August 20 2012 02:20 AngryMag wrote: not 100% sure but I think Terran players won the last 4 offline events (Taeja's two tourney wins, Kas won the eastern Euro tournament with Korean participants and now MVP won IEM). I think these successes mean that eventual issues in in TvZ are atleast largely exagerated.
In my lowbob opinion, I do not see issues at all if I watch tournament play, there was only a period of Terrans adjusting to Zerg's multiqueen play postpatch.
Yes but have you looked at how many Terrans have won in the last 200 tournaments? Ok, so they won a few recent tournaments, but that is dwarfed by the results of many, many before it.
... Are you joking? Why do people say such stupid shit without ever looking into anything.
Oh hey, an article which proves you're an idiot, who'd of thought.
"On the quarterly graph we can see that Terran has spent almost the entire duration of competitive Starcraft 2 at the top of the earnings race between the three races, dropping only the 1st Quarter to Zerg (which was when Fruitdealer won his whopping GSL prize). "
Time to have a reality check and stop posting here, you obviously have no idea what you're talking about.
"Terran : $1,362,778.00
Zerg : $927,790.00
Protoss : $740,394.00"
...Look at your graph. It goes until may 2012...before the patch... It's now middle of august 2012, so what... almost 3 months of tournaments, and games.
He said quote "200 tournaments" as in the past 200 tournaments. And if I recall, Terran won the last 4 events no? Doing what you said would actually raise the Terran threshold even higher...
so from release to may it is proven Terran has dominated SC2 professional scene, then we hit may + and terran wins 4 events in a row? :O Terran is COMPLETELY underpowered, throw your game away Zerg isn't balanced let's burn Blizzard HQ down.
But money for each tournament isn't the same... Hence why going off money earned isn't a solid way to prove anything. Win rates are far better to go off, as they're global and not a variable like the prizepool/tournament.
Nice aggression in all of your posts though. You're really fired up. Just pointing out the graph is old, and money earned is an awful way to show balance.
No it's not. The more money a tournament provides, the better the participants. In that way, unlike just looking at "who wins what tournament", you even get a quality factor in - even if it does only work for bigger data as it is a statistical arguement. Who cares that some barely GM master player won the daily 50€ can't-even-reach-128participants tournament...
i dont understand why people are so impatient. The pro players are trying out different stuff and trying out different builds. Give it some freaking time. TvZs are looking awy more "winable" now compared to before so just relax and see what the changes do.
What is relevant should be looking at GSL winrates etc, where a lot of top players compete. As people have already written: nestea won the GSL last year without dropping a map and had a whopping 19-0 record between may and august. Yet everyone was crying about how overpowered terran was. So now the situation is reversed with zergs overall winning and a single terran still at the top and terran is still the overpowered race.
On August 20 2012 02:38 Zoesan wrote: Actually, that is a really dumb argument.
What is relevant should be looking at GSL winrates etc, where a lot of top players compete. As people have already written: nestea won the GSL last year without dropping a map and had a whopping 19-0 record between may and august. Yet everyone was crying about how overpowered terran was. So now the situation is reversed with zergs overall winning and a single terran still at the top and terran is still the overpowered race.
Yeah, nice double standards there.
I dont think terran is overpowered but i think bad terrans think they are underpowered. I would say if you play like mvp does taking bases like he does and cutting of positions terran is op. But bad terrans cant do that.
On August 20 2012 01:41 Scila wrote: All of the information you wrote is true but has already been said for months. The problem is Blizzard doesn't real TL or anywhere else for that matter to decide on how to balance things. They have 2 guys making their own decisions, largely centered on making the game more "fun" and "fresh" so more people buy the games, rather than balancing it properly.
Not mutually exclusive with competitive balance
So, when Taeja wins he's just a transcendent Terran, and when MVP wins he's just on another level. I wonder what people will say when MKP wins a championship?
I have pointed this out in countless threads, and this seems to be another opportune time in this thread.
Zerg win rates have gone DOWN since 1.4.3 and the "OP queen" buff.
If trying to attribute any win rates to the 1.4.3 patch, we should all be complaining about the observer build time buff. Protoss as a whole has been on an absolute tear since then. Meanwhile, previously dominant Zergs like DRG and Stephano seem to be in a slump.
Tldr: considering how OP queens are, they sure don't seem to be helping anybody out.
i think the queenbuff brought the fun back to zerg play .. it simply was not fun to always have to defend, be the victim, figure out what the terran/protoss plans to do early on. Anyway i agree that terran late game is weak, though theoretically the mule economy does not impose any limit to terran income .. however i think avilo is way too biased, getting broodlords out also requires a lot of time and is easily scoutable. Given that hsm can be pretty game deciding, it should get nerfed if research times are buffed. We already have enough "terrible damage" utilities which in general lead to a kind of luck based end game (=> vortex, fungals). I dislike it also as a spectator if one single action, be it the 'money' fungal or vortex or hsm decides the game within some seconds. Same applies to some other unit designs like blue flame hellion (can decide a game early on by extremely quick mass drone killing) baneling (can vaporate a marine army within a second not watching the army).
On August 20 2012 02:48 Jermstuddog wrote: I have pointed this out in countless threads, and this seems to be another opportune time in this thread.
Zerg win rates have gone DOWN since 1.4.3 and the "OP queen" buff.
If trying to attribute any win rates to the 1.4.3 patch, we should all be complaining about the observer build time buff. Protoss as a whole has been on an absolute tear since then while previously dominant Zergs like DRG and Stephano seem to be in a slump.
Tldr: considering how OP queens are, they sure don't seem to be helping anybody out.
Queen cost 150 minerlas making 6 queens isnt worth it they are to slow for hellions to. So no its not that big
Get rid of seeker missiles and add a modified version of irradiate. One that is casted only on biological units and not on other ravens. Also with limited area of effect range. Anyone?
On August 20 2012 02:48 Jermstuddog wrote: I have pointed this out in countless threads, and this seems to be another opportune time in this thread.
Zerg win rates have gone DOWN since 1.4.3 and the "OP queen" buff.
If trying to attribute any win rates to the 1.4.3 patch, we should all be complaining about the observer build time buff. Protoss as a whole has been on an absolute tear since then while previously dominant Zergs like DRG and Stephano seem to be in a slump.
Tldr: considering how OP queens are, they sure don't seem to be helping anybody out.
Queen cost 150 minerlas making 6 queens isnt worth it they are to slow for hellions to. So no its not that big
The purpose of queens is to defend creep tumors and block ramps and defend vs early air harass. Not chasing hellions across the map to kill them.
On August 20 2012 02:55 sickkungen wrote: Get rid of seeker missiles and add a modified version of irradiate. One that is casted only on biological units and not on other ravens. Also with limited area of effect range. Anyone?
Or keep the missile and if needed (which doesn't seem like it is the case) adjust it sligthly?
On August 20 2012 02:48 Jermstuddog wrote: I have pointed this out in countless threads, and this seems to be another opportune time in this thread.
Zerg win rates have gone DOWN since 1.4.3 and the "OP queen" buff.
If trying to attribute any win rates to the 1.4.3 patch, we should all be complaining about the observer build time buff. Protoss as a whole has been on an absolute tear since then while previously dominant Zergs like DRG and Stephano seem to be in a slump.
Tldr: considering how OP queens are, they sure don't seem to be helping anybody out.
Queen cost 150 minerlas making 6 queens isnt worth it they are to slow for hellions to. So no its not that big
The purpose of queens is to defend creep tumors and block ramps and defend vs early air harass. Not chasing hellions across the map to kill them.
Yes but air range isnt changed? So nothing is diffrent. If you scout banshee maybe you can get extra queens so you have 5 instead of 3.
On August 20 2012 02:48 Jermstuddog wrote: I have pointed this out in countless threads, and this seems to be another opportune time in this thread.
Zerg win rates have gone DOWN since 1.4.3 and the "OP queen" buff.
If trying to attribute any win rates to the 1.4.3 patch, we should all be complaining about the observer build time buff. Protoss as a whole has been on an absolute tear since then. Meanwhile, previously dominant Zergs like DRG and Stephano seem to be in a slump.
Tldr: considering how OP queens are, they sure don't seem to be helping anybody out.
So because protoss are doing better against zergs, we should just ignore the TvZ match-up?
I'm sure you can go rant about this in the balance thread, however this thread was made to discuss TvZ.
On August 20 2012 02:09 NeMeSiS3 wrote: Terran wins another championship, everyone still bitches throwing out a multitude of excuses as to why that occured. Surprise surprise surprise.
To be fair, neither Vortix nor Nerchio really used the super-composition of infestor/ corruptor/ broodlord that frequently (in the proper proportions), nor did they use it in a way that corruptors could take out the ravens. Most of the time, when Mvp used his ravens and their HSMs, he had free shots on the broodlords because there was a severe lack of support for those units.
Granted, Mvp had a lot of success with those ravens in the main attacks (and, of course, his multi-pronged harrasses did a tremendous amount of damage too, as Zerg late game becomes relatively immobile), but a lot of the time, the ravens ran right up to clumped broodlords (or open ultralisks) and just obliterated half the undefended Zerg army. If only Vortix or Nerchio had used each important element of the Zerg super-composition to aid each other, I think it would have been a lot tougher for Mvp.
Most of the time, there were zero corruptors or infestors for support. That's not the way to go.
they should just make ravens have a much longer HSM range. it's retarded that they become fungal'd once and basically your 3 minute + $$$ gas investment goes down without being able to do anything.
On August 20 2012 02:20 AngryMag wrote: not 100% sure but I think Terran players won the last 4 offline events (Taeja's two tourney wins, Kas won the eastern Euro tournament with Korean participants and now MVP won IEM). I think these successes mean that eventual issues in in TvZ are atleast largely exagerated.
In my lowbob opinion, I do not see issues at all if I watch tournament play, there was only a period of Terrans adjusting to Zerg's multiqueen play postpatch.
Yes but have you looked at how many Terrans have won in the last 200 tournaments? Ok, so they won a few recent tournaments, but that is dwarfed by the results of many, many before it.
... Are you joking? Why do people say such stupid shit without ever looking into anything.
Oh hey, an article which proves you're an idiot, who'd of thought.
"On the quarterly graph we can see that Terran has spent almost the entire duration of competitive Starcraft 2 at the top of the earnings race between the three races, dropping only the 1st Quarter to Zerg (which was when Fruitdealer won his whopping GSL prize). "
Time to have a reality check and stop posting here, you obviously have no idea what you're talking about.
"Terran : $1,362,778.00
Zerg : $927,790.00
Protoss : $740,394.00"
This doesn't address the issue of "Most recent" at all. Listing off the amount of Prize money means nothing.
On August 20 2012 02:38 Zoesan wrote: Actually, that is a really dumb argument.
What is relevant should be looking at GSL winrates etc, where a lot of top players compete. As people have already written: nestea won the GSL last year without dropping a map and had a whopping 19-0 record between may and august. Yet everyone was crying about how overpowered terran was. So now the situation is reversed with zergs overall winning and a single terran still at the top and terran is still the overpowered race.
Yeah, nice double standards there.
I dont think terran is overpowered but i think bad terrans think they are underpowered. I would say if you play like mvp does taking bases like he does and cutting of positions terran is op. But bad terrans cant do that.
On August 20 2012 02:38 Zoesan wrote: Actually, that is a really dumb argument.
What is relevant should be looking at GSL winrates etc, where a lot of top players compete. As people have already written: nestea won the GSL last year without dropping a map and had a whopping 19-0 record between may and august. Yet everyone was crying about how overpowered terran was. So now the situation is reversed with zergs overall winning and a single terran still at the top and terran is still the overpowered race.
Yeah, nice double standards there.
Just curious but which single terran are we talking? MVP? taeja? Gumiho? MKP?
On August 20 2012 02:20 AngryMag wrote: not 100% sure but I think Terran players won the last 4 offline events (Taeja's two tourney wins, Kas won the eastern Euro tournament with Korean participants and now MVP won IEM). I think these successes mean that eventual issues in in TvZ are atleast largely exagerated.
In my lowbob opinion, I do not see issues at all if I watch tournament play, there was only a period of Terrans adjusting to Zerg's multiqueen play postpatch.
Yes but have you looked at how many Terrans have won in the last 200 tournaments? Ok, so they won a few recent tournaments, but that is dwarfed by the results of many, many before it.
The discussion is about the balance right now, which is determined by the latest events. And your arguement is just wrong: Premier Tournaments this year: 21 Terran wins: 11 other races wins: 10
Premier Tournemts last year: 40 Terran wins: 20 other races wins: 20
With 3races, Terran has won >50% of the biggest tournaments in the last one and a half year. Where have you been when you think they are not winning enough tournaments?
Why don't you do everyone a favor and count how many Terrans won the most Recent tournaments (Post-Patch) for pages 1 and 2. But you can even go more if you want....
I wonder where this discussion thread will go. Like if i said that something is OP and cries it out nothing is ever gonna change anyways. Or if i says that something is wrong in the meta game nothing can be changed right now anyways. We need to figure out how to play this game better. The metagame is evolving everyday and ppl balance whining before a major update to the game comes out (hots) Just wait and see what happens iknow some stuff can be frustrating.
So much ad hominem in this Thread, it makes me Sick.
Whether or not you like or hate Avilo or something in between, use some basic logic and address the substance of his argument and not the person himself.
I expect better from posters on TL. Looks like some people here seriously need to take the LSAT...
On August 20 2012 01:54 Little-Chimp wrote: I hope everyone watched MVP today
I did. Im off to practice dropping in multiple spots, late game micro engagements and production plans. I hope to find those "oh my god 2 scvs 1 marine - PULL ALL DRONES" types of high skilled zergs. Top 3 my ass.
I think the bigger problem has always been(minus the first few months of release where T was very OP) is that we have a MU that may be somewhat fine now for the Korean Terrans(everyone seems to be screaming Taeja in this thread, but one guy doing well doesnt really help expalin why so many Terrans are doing bad, Taeja seems to be just on a roll gameplay wise, wins after wins build confidence) but not so fine for Master/GM players.
This is an incredibly complex problem, because at this point it seems impossible to get Terran to a level where it can be balanced at Korean level and rebalanced at Master/GM level. I know so many Terrans myself that have quit because of these issues, not to mention we have had so many threads (Where did all the Terrans go" comes to mind) that point to this issue as well.
So I agree with Avilo, that the raven change is not going to work. Blizz is going to have to get super creative to fix this problem. Then again, with HoTs around the corner, I hope that blizz can hit the same home run they did with BW.
On August 20 2012 02:20 AngryMag wrote: not 100% sure but I think Terran players won the last 4 offline events (Taeja's two tourney wins, Kas won the eastern Euro tournament with Korean participants and now MVP won IEM). I think these successes mean that eventual issues in in TvZ are atleast largely exagerated.
In my lowbob opinion, I do not see issues at all if I watch tournament play, there was only a period of Terrans adjusting to Zerg's multiqueen play postpatch.
Yes but have you looked at how many Terrans have won in the last 200 tournaments? Ok, so they won a few recent tournaments, but that is dwarfed by the results of many, many before it.
The discussion is about the balance right now, which is determined by the latest events. And your arguement is just wrong: Premier Tournaments this year: 21 Terran wins: 11 other races wins: 10
Premier Tournemts last year: 40 Terran wins: 20 other races wins: 20
With 3races, Terran has won >50% of the biggest tournaments in the last one and a half year. Where have you been when you think they are not winning enough tournaments?
Why don't you do everyone a favor and count how many Terrans won the most Recent tournaments (Post-Patch) for pages 1 and 2. But you can even go more if you want....
And yes, I really don't care about those one night 50€ regional online tournaments, played in Bo1s that some random GM player wins, as he is the only one at this level. You could as well just post EU and US Grandmaster race distribution, as it basically says exactly the same.
It's been a while since my last post on SC2 strategy, and I did not read the comments from page 3 onwards. So I'm sorry if my question had been answered somewhere in this thread.
I want to know why is it that Ghosts are no longer popular against Zerg? I know that the Snipe was nerfed a long while back, but it's still powerful, and can bring Broodlords and Ultralisks down to low health, where they can be finished off by the rest of the army.
I'm also somewhat aware of the discussions about the army efficiency issue regarding Ghosts. It is said that having >10 Ghosts in a TvZ army takes away food supply that can be used for other units which can be more efficient than the Ghosts in terms of fighting. But snipe is still doing quite a lot of damage! So why are pros not using Ghosts anymore?
Raven range makes them Kamikaze, no matter how fast they are. If they get off HSM vs Zerg, the raven should not live, EVER. That 3 minute investment for 2 (expensive) upgrades, starports, and the raven itself is a huge coinflip.
Creep is free map hack that does HUGE economic damage in the form of forcing scans to eliminate because ravens take too long.
Either the range of HSM needs HUGE buff or T needs the ability to get it much, much sooner/cheaper
On August 20 2012 01:54 Little-Chimp wrote: I hope everyone watched MVP today
I did. Im off to practice dropping in multiple spots, late game micro engagements and production plans. I hope to find those "oh my god 2 scvs 1 marine - PULL ALL DRONES" types of high skilled zergs. Top 3 my ass.
Im not gonna lie. you sir, are awesome. I burst out laughing at the nerchio drone pull reference. I do think nerchio is a decently skilled zerg but he couldnt have botched that worst.
On August 20 2012 02:20 AngryMag wrote: not 100% sure but I think Terran players won the last 4 offline events (Taeja's two tourney wins, Kas won the eastern Euro tournament with Korean participants and now MVP won IEM). I think these successes mean that eventual issues in in TvZ are atleast largely exagerated.
In my lowbob opinion, I do not see issues at all if I watch tournament play, there was only a period of Terrans adjusting to Zerg's multiqueen play postpatch.
Yes but have you looked at how many Terrans have won in the last 200 tournaments? Ok, so they won a few recent tournaments, but that is dwarfed by the results of many, many before it.
The discussion is about the balance right now, which is determined by the latest events. And your arguement is just wrong: Premier Tournaments this year: 21 Terran wins: 11 other races wins: 10
Premier Tournemts last year: 40 Terran wins: 20 other races wins: 20
With 3races, Terran has won >50% of the biggest tournaments in the last one and a half year. Where have you been when you think they are not winning enough tournaments?
Why don't you do everyone a favor and count how many Terrans won the most Recent tournaments (Post-Patch) for pages 1 and 2. But you can even go more if you want....
And yes, I really don't care about those one night 50€ regional online tournaments, played in Bo1s that some random GM player wins, as he is the only one at this level. You could as well just post EU and US Grandmaster race distribution, as it basically says exactly the same.
Actually, your interpretation of the data is still flawed. Given that we are talking about Post-Patch, we would need only reference the Tournaments since the patch in early May. And granted, this is if we accept these tournaments over TLPD numbers, which I do not. Therefore, I will include both numbers.
But even using these numbers, we are left with these tournaments:
August IEM Season VII - Global Challenge Cologne IEM $31,800 24 Mvp Nerchio August ASUS ROG Summer 2012 ASUS ROG $30,000 32 TaeJa MC July TeamLiquid StarLeague 4 TSL $34,500 32 July 2012 MLG Summer Arena MLG $26,400 32 TaeJa Alicia July HomeStory Cup V HomeStory $25,000 32 Nerchio YongHwa June 2012 DreamHack Open - Summer DreamHack $29,770 128 MaNa DIMAGA June 2012 MLG Spring Championship MLG $76,000 32 DongRaeGu Alicia May 2012 GSL Season 3 GSL $147,920 32 Seed MC May 2012 MLG Spring Arena 2 MLG $26,400 32 viOLet Symbol
Including MVP and his most recent win at IEM, we have a Grand Total of 3 Terrans out of 16 for Winners and Runner-Ups.
So even using your Data and Ignoring All the Other Tournaments, which still recruit the Best players in the world, and a large number of participants, There aren't many Terrans.
However, if we use TLPD and all the Recent Tournaments since the Patch, we have 34 Terran winners to 240 Zerg and Protoss Tournament Winners.
Guys lets be totally honest with the game play right now. In the history of sc2 there has been many things that have supposibly "broke" the game. If you want to beat a zerg, don't keep doing the same thing you lose with and cry until a patch comes out... take action and develop a new strategy to beat a zerg. Simple as that
On August 20 2012 03:56 U_G_L_Y wrote: Raven range makes them Kamikaze, no matter how fast they are. If they get off HSM vs Zerg, the raven should not live, EVER. That 3 minute investment for 2 (expensive) upgrades, starports, and the raven itself is a huge coinflip.
Creep is free map hack that does HUGE economic damage in the form of forcing scans to eliminate because ravens take too long.
Either the range of HSM needs HUGE buff or T needs the ability to get it much, much sooner/cheaper
Talking about map hack, what about sensor towers? Oh right, those things are really really expensive...
How is this thread not considered a balance gripe, and why is it being kept open? There is a "Balance Discussion Thread", after all, for a reason, I thought.
I bet we could watch your games and point out a number of mistakes you make in your TvZs, avilo. Shit's gotta start at home.
On August 20 2012 02:20 AngryMag wrote: not 100% sure but I think Terran players won the last 4 offline events (Taeja's two tourney wins, Kas won the eastern Euro tournament with Korean participants and now MVP won IEM). I think these successes mean that eventual issues in in TvZ are atleast largely exagerated.
In my lowbob opinion, I do not see issues at all if I watch tournament play, there was only a period of Terrans adjusting to Zerg's multiqueen play postpatch.
Yes but have you looked at how many Terrans have won in the last 200 tournaments? Ok, so they won a few recent tournaments, but that is dwarfed by the results of many, many before it.
The discussion is about the balance right now, which is determined by the latest events. And your arguement is just wrong: Premier Tournaments this year: 21 Terran wins: 11 other races wins: 10
Premier Tournemts last year: 40 Terran wins: 20 other races wins: 20
With 3races, Terran has won >50% of the biggest tournaments in the last one and a half year. Where have you been when you think they are not winning enough tournaments?
Why don't you do everyone a favor and count how many Terrans won the most Recent tournaments (Post-Patch) for pages 1 and 2. But you can even go more if you want....
And yes, I really don't care about those one night 50€ regional online tournaments, played in Bo1s that some random GM player wins, as he is the only one at this level. You could as well just post EU and US Grandmaster race distribution, as it basically says exactly the same.
Actually, your interpretation of the data is still flawed. Given that we are talking about Post-Patch, we would need only reference the Tournaments since the patch in early May. And granted, this is if we accept these tournaments over TLPD numbers, which I do not.
But even using these numbers, we are left with these tournaments:
August IEM Season VII - Global Challenge Cologne IEM $31,800 24 Mvp Nerchio August ASUS ROG Summer 2012 ASUS ROG $30,000 32 TaeJa MC July TeamLiquid StarLeague 4 TSL $34,500 32 July 2012 MLG Summer Arena MLG $26,400 32 TaeJa Alicia July HomeStory Cup V HomeStory $25,000 32 Nerchio YongHwa June 2012 DreamHack Open - Summer DreamHack $29,770 128 MaNa DIMAGA June 2012 MLG Spring Championship MLG $76,000 32 DongRaeGu Alicia May 2012 GSL Season 3 GSL $147,920 32 Seed MC May 2012 MLG Spring Arena 2 MLG $26,400 32 viOLet Symbol
Including MVP and his most recent win at IEM, we have a Grand Total of 3 Terrans out of 16 for Winners and Runner-Ups.
So even using your Data and Ignoring All the Other Tournaments, which still recruit the Best players in the world, and a large number of participants, There aren't many Terrans.
Well, but they are doing better than you say. Of course the patch fucked a ton of stuff up, there is absolutly no denying. I'm not even saying that TvZ imbalanced don't exist at all (though the longer Terrans had time to adapt to the new metagame, the better they seem to perform at the highest level). But you are completly overexaggerating. Even 3/16 is not that bad, considering that statistically you should have 5.3333/16, if the game was perfectly balanced and 16 was a useful statistical size.
On August 19 2012 18:15 Saat wrote: I guess this idea : "Make fungals unstackable. So if infestors hit aready fungaled units with the spell again, it does absolutely nothing, not even refresh the spell duration" may be good.
But i prefer the one of that fungal will not be able anymore to root "massive" units, like Archons, Carriers, BC, Mothership.
It is already the case for ultralisk. And with that solution, archon toilet will become easier to place (and then, zerg who are spamming "split ur viking" will have to split their own units, and positionning better, and carriers / BC will become more common.
That will change nothing for ravens, for sure. But it may help mega late game PvZ and TvZ. And if bli wants to see raven used a little more, (actually, there are no reasons for removing carriers from the game, and keep ravens. I do not see more ravens that carriers), they may decrease the amount of energy needed for the missile, or improve the amount of energy which have ravens when they pop. Or increase the range of the missile, and decrease something else of this spell (damages, splash...)
Damage and splash of the missile are not too low. No way. That's not an issue. Also "helping lategame zvp and zvt" doesn't neccesarily make sense. Does protoss need help also now? So any suggestion that nerfs Z in zvp is, in a way, quite off limits. Buffing archon toilet I also strongly disagree with. It feels more like a freak of nature than an actually intended tactic, considering how much they switched things up; tho' didn't want to remove it, which I guess is ok.
Latest news about the ultra is that in HOTS it will NOT be immune to fungal growth snare. So blizzard is actually thinking about going that route rather than making more units immune to it. Your fungal suggestion is quite silly either way. And again, buffing archon toilet, yeahno, don't see that happening any time soon.
Sorry but I feel like you're wanting to change a perfectly fine game. All I can think of is how casting multiple fungals to cover a larger area becomes a hazard as the "edges" of your individual fungal will start failing as one fungal ends somewhere and your next fungal ends up fungaling 50% of its area and everybody gets confused.
According to blizzard there isn't actually any notable imbalance at any level. Except perhaps at the pro level where terrans went from dominating everything to taking perhaps a backseat for the very first time. Doesn't mean that the metagame can't handle it, and it certainly doesn't mean the game should be drastically altered.
Ravens are super good right now, they are gaining popularity, and I face them often. Blizzard is saying hey use this unit! They might even be OP when in combination with Viking and BC with ups.
While I do agree that the raven change doesnt seem to address the issue in TvZ, after watching MVP use ravens to great effect in multiple games i might be changing my mind. That HSMM looks pretty effective to me and also his ravens werent just getting sacrificed because he was using it it the correct time during the attack. That being said he is MVP and he won those games mainly from great drop harass. im refering to IEM of course.
Look at the cast ranges of the ravens spells..... they are pathetic!
PDD and Auto turret cast range is 3!
Blizzard should buff the cast ranges to 6
Seeker missle cast range should be buffed from 6 to 8
Because right now any time you try yo deploy a spell from a raven(regardless of match up) your more then likey TO LOSE the raven itself.
Because simply the cast range is to short for all the spells.
And on the flip side it's spells are really good after deployed. It seems to work out, so why would you change them that drastically?
lets think about this.
The raven is a support caster... but it will die trying to do the spells that are used to support.
see how flawed that logic is?
Who says it is a support caster? Some blizzard help text?
think about it logically.
also its supposed to be the spiritual sucessor to the science vessel
I think about it logically. Blizzard made a unit called the Raven, gave it a bunch of abilities and gave it to the players of SC2 to develop a role for it and then balance it accordingly. It turned out not to be a support caster, but a unit that is mostly used as lategame antiair unit, used against compositions that can kill it as well.
Look at the cast ranges of the ravens spells..... they are pathetic!
PDD and Auto turret cast range is 3!
Blizzard should buff the cast ranges to 6
Seeker missle cast range should be buffed from 6 to 8
Because right now any time you try yo deploy a spell from a raven(regardless of match up) your more then likey TO LOSE the raven itself.
Because simply the cast range is to short for all the spells.
And on the flip side it's spells are really good after deployed. It seems to work out, so why would you change them that drastically?
lets think about this.
The raven is a support caster... but it will die trying to do the spells that are used to support.
see how flawed that logic is?
Who says it is a support caster? Some blizzard help text?
think about it logically.
also its supposed to be the spiritual sucessor to the science vessel
I think about it logically. Blizzard made a unit called the Raven, gave it a bunch of abilities and gave it to the players of SC2 to develop a role for it and then balance it accordingly. It turned out not to be a support caster, but a unit that is mostly used as lategame antiair unit, used against compositions that can kill it as well.
look at all the ravens spells.
they are supportive in nature.
also look at the tech postion/upgrades of the raven,
Saying its not a supportive caster is like saying the spine crawler is not a defensive structure.
Aww man I want the science vessel back. (and a better model than the campain's)
Anyway, TvZ doesn't seem to be imbalanced, but TvZ is less fun to watch lately, so many games play out the same, terran going for 3 cc, zerg turtling for BL/infestor/corruptor.
Not terran, but I can agree on your fungal point. I'd rather raise fungal damage and SLOWING units or not having any effect at all so you can micro against it like you can against storm.
On August 20 2012 03:56 U_G_L_Y wrote: Raven range makes them Kamikaze, no matter how fast they are. If they get off HSM vs Zerg, the raven should not live, EVER. That 3 minute investment for 2 (expensive) upgrades, starports, and the raven itself is a huge coinflip.
Creep is free map hack that does HUGE economic damage in the form of forcing scans to eliminate because ravens take too long.
Either the range of HSM needs HUGE buff or T needs the ability to get it much, much sooner/cheaper
Talking about map hack, what about sensor towers? Oh right, those things are really really expensive...
Well those cost 100gas. So aren't cheap like you would say spreading creep since 4 queens against T is pretty standard, and still doesn't tell you your enemy army composition.
While the range of raven abilities is limited, pretty much all Zerg anti-air use missile based attacks, so the idea is to cast a few PDDs before trying to dive in for the HSMs. The only non-missile anti-air available to Zerg is the infestor and its infested friends. The idea of giving the raven a speed increase was to allow you to avoid this and to keep up with your medivacs and units a bit better. I'm just not convinced that terran can't beat zerg and I'm not convinced that the raven is broken.
Look at the cast ranges of the ravens spells..... they are pathetic!
PDD and Auto turret cast range is 3!
Blizzard should buff the cast ranges to 6
Seeker missle cast range should be buffed from 6 to 8
Because right now any time you try yo deploy a spell from a raven(regardless of match up) your more then likey TO LOSE the raven itself.
Because simply the cast range is to short for all the spells.
And on the flip side it's spells are really good after deployed. It seems to work out, so why would you change them that drastically?
lets think about this.
The raven is a support caster... but it will die trying to do the spells that are used to support.
see how flawed that logic is?
Who says it is a support caster? Some blizzard help text?
think about it logically.
also its supposed to be the spiritual sucessor to the science vessel
I think about it logically. Blizzard made a unit called the Raven, gave it a bunch of abilities and gave it to the players of SC2 to develop a role for it and then balance it accordingly. It turned out not to be a support caster, but a unit that is mostly used as lategame antiair unit, used against compositions that can kill it as well.
look at all the ravens spells.
they are supportive in nature.
also look at the tech postion/upgrades of the raven,
Saying its not a supportive caster is like saying the spine crawler is not a defensive structure.
and spellcasters by nature are supportive.
No, HSM is not a support spell. It's a biggass damage dealer. PDD defends units around it. Does not mean that you have to use other units that the raven supports. PDD defends the Raven just as well. Auto Turret: many applications, defends or attacks a location. For example the Raven.
And no, spellcasters are not support by nature. Infestor is basically standalone. Science Vessel in BW is basically standalone against Zerg. (that does not mean that either of them should be used on its own. But they can deal quite well with everything) As long as you have enough energy (which you have with vessel, raven, infestor when you mass them), they can fight properly on their own.
On August 20 2012 04:04 Xonix wrote: Guys lets be totally honest with the game play right now. In the history of sc2 there has been many things that have supposibly "broke" the game. If you want to beat a zerg, don't keep doing the same thing you lose with and cry until a patch comes out... take action and develop a new strategy to beat a zerg. Simple as that
This is exactly the issue. also its an avilo thread....
On August 20 2012 03:56 U_G_L_Y wrote: Raven range makes them Kamikaze, no matter how fast they are. If they get off HSM vs Zerg, the raven should not live, EVER. That 3 minute investment for 2 (expensive) upgrades, starports, and the raven itself is a huge coinflip.
Creep is free map hack that does HUGE economic damage in the form of forcing scans to eliminate because ravens take too long.
Either the range of HSM needs HUGE buff or T needs the ability to get it much, much sooner/cheaper
Talking about map hack, what about sensor towers? Oh right, those things are really really expensive...
Well those cost 100gas. So aren't cheap like you would say spreading creep since 4 queens against T is pretty standard, and still doesn't tell you your enemy army composition.
Different stuff is different.
4 Queens are 600 minerals, and one of those is 100 gas, that Terran usually end up with 2000 because they aren't using any gas expensive units? Yeah... I am just sick of people whining how some race got advantage with something while completely ignoring what their race can do and the stuff they have advantage with.
On August 20 2012 04:05 Ramiz1989 wrote: Talking about map hack, what about sensor towers? Oh right, those things are really really expensive...
Apples to apples, oranges to oranges please.
Creep costs neither minerals nor gas. Creep self-replicates in any direction the player wishes. Creep requires detection to eliminate. Creep provides a speed buff to most units (some exceptions). Terran and Protoss cannot build next to a creep tumor. Creep (or rather the tumors) allow for the vision of the exact unit type over it (save for cloaked). Creep does not appear on the minimap without first scouting it with a unit.
Look at the cast ranges of the ravens spells..... they are pathetic!
PDD and Auto turret cast range is 3!
Blizzard should buff the cast ranges to 6
Seeker missle cast range should be buffed from 6 to 8
Because right now any time you try yo deploy a spell from a raven(regardless of match up) your more then likey TO LOSE the raven itself.
Because simply the cast range is to short for all the spells.
And on the flip side it's spells are really good after deployed. It seems to work out, so why would you change them that drastically?
lets think about this.
The raven is a support caster... but it will die trying to do the spells that are used to support.
see how flawed that logic is?
Who says it is a support caster? Some blizzard help text?
think about it logically.
also its supposed to be the spiritual sucessor to the science vessel
I think about it logically. Blizzard made a unit called the Raven, gave it a bunch of abilities and gave it to the players of SC2 to develop a role for it and then balance it accordingly. It turned out not to be a support caster, but a unit that is mostly used as lategame antiair unit, used against compositions that can kill it as well.
look at all the ravens spells.
they are supportive in nature.
also look at the tech postion/upgrades of the raven,
Saying its not a supportive caster is like saying the spine crawler is not a defensive structure.
and spellcasters by nature are supportive.
No, HSM is not a support spell. It's a biggass damage dealer. PDD defends units around it. Does not mean that you have to use other units that the raven supports. PDD defends the Raven just as well. Auto Turret: many applications, defends or attacks a location. For example the Raven.
And no, spellcasters are not support by nature. Infestor is basically standalone. Science Vessel in BW is basically standalone against Zerg. (that does not mean that either of them should be used on its own. But they can deal quite well with everything) As long as you have enough energy (which you have with vessel, raven, infestor when you mass them), they can fight properly on their own.
I'm abit concerned about what you understand about game design 0_o
On August 20 2012 04:04 Xonix wrote: Guys lets be totally honest with the game play right now. In the history of sc2 there has been many things that have supposibly "broke" the game. If you want to beat a zerg, don't keep doing the same thing you lose with and cry until a patch comes out... take action and develop a new strategy to beat a zerg. Simple as that
Its not simple as that. Reactor Hellions were the standard build for a reason. They provide map control because they are so fast and are so strong against lings. You can´t just run around with marines like that to kill creep. Thus the creep gets out of hand and you can´t do anything about it.
I thought Raven use at IEM was pretty damn cool this weekend. I'm quite excited to see if the meta continues to evolve to incorporate them more regularly.
Look at the cast ranges of the ravens spells..... they are pathetic!
PDD and Auto turret cast range is 3!
Blizzard should buff the cast ranges to 6
Seeker missle cast range should be buffed from 6 to 8
Because right now any time you try yo deploy a spell from a raven(regardless of match up) your more then likey TO LOSE the raven itself.
Because simply the cast range is to short for all the spells.
And on the flip side it's spells are really good after deployed. It seems to work out, so why would you change them that drastically?
lets think about this.
The raven is a support caster... but it will die trying to do the spells that are used to support.
see how flawed that logic is?
Who says it is a support caster? Some blizzard help text?
think about it logically.
also its supposed to be the spiritual sucessor to the science vessel
I think about it logically. Blizzard made a unit called the Raven, gave it a bunch of abilities and gave it to the players of SC2 to develop a role for it and then balance it accordingly. It turned out not to be a support caster, but a unit that is mostly used as lategame antiair unit, used against compositions that can kill it as well.
look at all the ravens spells.
they are supportive in nature.
also look at the tech postion/upgrades of the raven,
Saying its not a supportive caster is like saying the spine crawler is not a defensive structure.
and spellcasters by nature are supportive.
No, HSM is not a support spell. It's a biggass damage dealer. PDD defends units around it. Does not mean that you have to use other units that the raven supports. PDD defends the Raven just as well. Auto Turret: many applications, defends or attacks a location. For example the Raven.
And no, spellcasters are not support by nature. Infestor is basically standalone. Science Vessel in BW is basically standalone against Zerg. (that does not mean that either of them should be used on its own. But they can deal quite well with everything) As long as you have enough energy (which you have with vessel, raven, infestor when you mass them), they can fight properly on their own.
I'm abit concerned about what you understand about game design 0_o
OK, so please define what a support unit is. From my understanding, it is a unit that cannot fight properly on it's own, but provides something extra to protect the rest of your army, fill niche roles or just strengthens your army.
The Raven can fight properly on it's own. Not against everything (for example vikings, infestors or ultras), but against a big variety of stuff.
Look at the cast ranges of the ravens spells..... they are pathetic!
PDD and Auto turret cast range is 3!
Blizzard should buff the cast ranges to 6
Seeker missle cast range should be buffed from 6 to 8
Because right now any time you try yo deploy a spell from a raven(regardless of match up) your more then likey TO LOSE the raven itself.
Because simply the cast range is to short for all the spells.
And on the flip side it's spells are really good after deployed. It seems to work out, so why would you change them that drastically?
lets think about this.
The raven is a support caster... but it will die trying to do the spells that are used to support.
see how flawed that logic is?
Who says it is a support caster? Some blizzard help text?
think about it logically.
also its supposed to be the spiritual sucessor to the science vessel
I think about it logically. Blizzard made a unit called the Raven, gave it a bunch of abilities and gave it to the players of SC2 to develop a role for it and then balance it accordingly. It turned out not to be a support caster, but a unit that is mostly used as lategame antiair unit, used against compositions that can kill it as well.
look at all the ravens spells.
they are supportive in nature.
also look at the tech postion/upgrades of the raven,
Saying its not a supportive caster is like saying the spine crawler is not a defensive structure.
and spellcasters by nature are supportive.
No, HSM is not a support spell. It's a biggass damage dealer. PDD defends units around it. Does not mean that you have to use other units that the raven supports. PDD defends the Raven just as well. Auto Turret: many applications, defends or attacks a location. For example the Raven.
And no, spellcasters are not support by nature. Infestor is basically standalone. Science Vessel in BW is basically standalone against Zerg. (that does not mean that either of them should be used on its own. But they can deal quite well with everything) As long as you have enough energy (which you have with vessel, raven, infestor when you mass them), they can fight properly on their own.
I'm abit concerned about what you understand about game design 0_o
OK, so please define what a support unit is. From my understanding, it is a unit that cannot fight properly on it's own, but provides something extra to protect the rest of your army, fill niche roles or just strengthens your army.
The Raven can fight properly on it's own. Not against everything (for example vikings, infestors or ultras), but against a big variety of stuff.
1) the raven is that "cannot fight properly on its own"
2) PDD and auto turrets fill the "something extra to protect your army"
3) as a supportive caster it does "Strengthen your army" if you know how to use it.
also SM and Auto turrets can help fill the offensive need and in auto turrets case possible harassment.
Look at the cast ranges of the ravens spells..... they are pathetic!
PDD and Auto turret cast range is 3!
Blizzard should buff the cast ranges to 6
Seeker missle cast range should be buffed from 6 to 8
Because right now any time you try yo deploy a spell from a raven(regardless of match up) your more then likey TO LOSE the raven itself.
Because simply the cast range is to short for all the spells.
And on the flip side it's spells are really good after deployed. It seems to work out, so why would you change them that drastically?
lets think about this.
The raven is a support caster... but it will die trying to do the spells that are used to support.
see how flawed that logic is?
Who says it is a support caster? Some blizzard help text?
think about it logically.
also its supposed to be the spiritual sucessor to the science vessel
I think about it logically. Blizzard made a unit called the Raven, gave it a bunch of abilities and gave it to the players of SC2 to develop a role for it and then balance it accordingly. It turned out not to be a support caster, but a unit that is mostly used as lategame antiair unit, used against compositions that can kill it as well.
look at all the ravens spells.
they are supportive in nature.
also look at the tech postion/upgrades of the raven,
Saying its not a supportive caster is like saying the spine crawler is not a defensive structure.
and spellcasters by nature are supportive.
No, HSM is not a support spell. It's a biggass damage dealer. PDD defends units around it. Does not mean that you have to use other units that the raven supports. PDD defends the Raven just as well. Auto Turret: many applications, defends or attacks a location. For example the Raven.
And no, spellcasters are not support by nature. Infestor is basically standalone. Science Vessel in BW is basically standalone against Zerg. (that does not mean that either of them should be used on its own. But they can deal quite well with everything) As long as you have enough energy (which you have with vessel, raven, infestor when you mass them), they can fight properly on their own.
I'm abit concerned about what you understand about game design 0_o
OK, so please define what a support unit is. From my understanding, it is a unit that cannot fight properly on it's own, but provides something extra to protect the rest of your army, fill niche roles or just strengthens your army.
The Raven can fight properly on it's own. Not against everything (for example vikings, infestors or ultras), but against a big variety of stuff.
According to your logic then Infestors and HT are NOT supporting units because they can fight properly on their own too. Infestors = Use Infested Terran to attack HT = Storm units that is attacking them and merge them into Archons
If you look at the bigger picture you can see the design intention behind the spellcasters in SC2.
Protoss have a tier 1 spellcaster (Sentry) and a generic land spellcaster with an AoE ability (Templar storm).
Zerg have only a generic land spellcaster with an AoE ability, but does not need to research it's AoE (Infestor fungal).
Terran have a generic land spellcaster with an AoE ability that is mainly effective against protoss at the moment due to the snipe nerf (Ghost) and a tier 3 spellcaster (Raven) which has it's AoE damage ability behind because it's a flying unit (which can be overpowered if they increased the HSM range by only a bit).
To solve the problem, they should just increase Ghost Snipe damage against massive biological units!
This fixes a direct balance issue that is being complained about, though I personally think a good player should be able to rush Ravens.
Another way to 'fix' the problem is slightly reduce the cost of Ravens (from 200 gas down to maybe 175).
If at first you don't succeed, Cry Cry Again. Tell your balance problems to MVP. Suggestion: spend your time studying better players instead of doing the same thing and expecting it to miraculously work.
This threads become another largely Terran whine thread - probably what it was meant to do as, now that I think of it, I don't recall the OP asking for any Zerg opinion. It's good to see so many game designers on TL though. Real refreshing.
On August 20 2012 04:05 Ramiz1989 wrote: Talking about map hack, what about sensor towers? Oh right, those things are really really expensive...
Apples to apples, oranges to oranges please.
Creep costs neither minerals nor gas. Creep self-replicates in any direction the player wishes. Creep requires detection to eliminate. Creep provides a speed buff to most units (some exceptions). Terran and Protoss cannot build next to a creep tumor. Creep (or rather the tumors) allow for the vision of the exact unit type over it (save for cloaked). Creep does not appear on the minimap without first scouting it with a unit.
VS:
The sensor tower does not do any of the above.
They are not the same, not even close.
Best, Niteshade
Exactly what I was talking about in the comment just before yours. You just ignored everything what Sensor Tower can do, while listing everything what Creep is doing and said how they are different. The perfect example of what was I talking about.
I really think the Raven speed buff will do more for pure air tvp than tvz. I used to do a 200 energy raven 4 banshee timing that could destroy expos and tech while letting me expo and tech. This will probably make stuff like that more powerful - and it will allow for easier sniping of observers with pure air builds.
For tvz, I think Avilo is right. Fungal shuts down the Raven very hard. But if you get a good composition with a lot of tanks, thors, vikings and ravens, terran becomes very powerful even against broodlord/infestor. Auto turret spam also lets you be in 2-3 places at once on maps like Antiga or Shakuras, if you've managed to win the first big fight. It's very hard for zerg to deal with a lot of turrets in their main with their reinforcing units. The problem is getting to that composition...
On August 20 2012 05:18 aZealot wrote: This threads become another largely Terran whine thread - probably what it was meant to do as, now that I think of it, I don't recall the OP asking for any Zerg opinion. It's good to see so many game designers on TL though. Real refreshing.
Thread from Avilo, what did you expect? Everyone to agree with him?
And on the flip side it's spells are really good after deployed. It seems to work out, so why would you change them that drastically?
lets think about this.
The raven is a support caster... but it will die trying to do the spells that are used to support.
see how flawed that logic is?
Who says it is a support caster? Some blizzard help text?
think about it logically.
also its supposed to be the spiritual sucessor to the science vessel
I think about it logically. Blizzard made a unit called the Raven, gave it a bunch of abilities and gave it to the players of SC2 to develop a role for it and then balance it accordingly. It turned out not to be a support caster, but a unit that is mostly used as lategame antiair unit, used against compositions that can kill it as well.
look at all the ravens spells.
they are supportive in nature.
also look at the tech postion/upgrades of the raven,
Saying its not a supportive caster is like saying the spine crawler is not a defensive structure.
and spellcasters by nature are supportive.
No, HSM is not a support spell. It's a biggass damage dealer. PDD defends units around it. Does not mean that you have to use other units that the raven supports. PDD defends the Raven just as well. Auto Turret: many applications, defends or attacks a location. For example the Raven.
And no, spellcasters are not support by nature. Infestor is basically standalone. Science Vessel in BW is basically standalone against Zerg. (that does not mean that either of them should be used on its own. But they can deal quite well with everything) As long as you have enough energy (which you have with vessel, raven, infestor when you mass them), they can fight properly on their own.
I'm abit concerned about what you understand about game design 0_o
OK, so please define what a support unit is. From my understanding, it is a unit that cannot fight properly on it's own, but provides something extra to protect the rest of your army, fill niche roles or just strengthens your army.
The Raven can fight properly on it's own. Not against everything (for example vikings, infestors or ultras), but against a big variety of stuff.
According to your logic then Infestors and HT are NOT supporting units because they can fight properly on their own too. Infestors = Use Infested Terran to attack HT = Storm units that is attacking them and merge them into Archons
Infestors aren't support units. If the infestor was a support unit, then noone would be talking about mass infestor. HTs are support units, because storms dont stack. Archons are not support units.
And on the flip side it's spells are really good after deployed. It seems to work out, so why would you change them that drastically?
lets think about this.
The raven is a support caster... but it will die trying to do the spells that are used to support.
see how flawed that logic is?
Who says it is a support caster? Some blizzard help text?
think about it logically.
also its supposed to be the spiritual sucessor to the science vessel
I think about it logically. Blizzard made a unit called the Raven, gave it a bunch of abilities and gave it to the players of SC2 to develop a role for it and then balance it accordingly. It turned out not to be a support caster, but a unit that is mostly used as lategame antiair unit, used against compositions that can kill it as well.
look at all the ravens spells.
they are supportive in nature.
also look at the tech postion/upgrades of the raven,
Saying its not a supportive caster is like saying the spine crawler is not a defensive structure.
and spellcasters by nature are supportive.
No, HSM is not a support spell. It's a biggass damage dealer. PDD defends units around it. Does not mean that you have to use other units that the raven supports. PDD defends the Raven just as well. Auto Turret: many applications, defends or attacks a location. For example the Raven.
And no, spellcasters are not support by nature. Infestor is basically standalone. Science Vessel in BW is basically standalone against Zerg. (that does not mean that either of them should be used on its own. But they can deal quite well with everything) As long as you have enough energy (which you have with vessel, raven, infestor when you mass them), they can fight properly on their own.
I'm abit concerned about what you understand about game design 0_o
OK, so please define what a support unit is. From my understanding, it is a unit that cannot fight properly on it's own, but provides something extra to protect the rest of your army, fill niche roles or just strengthens your army.
The Raven can fight properly on it's own. Not against everything (for example vikings, infestors or ultras), but against a big variety of stuff.
1) the raven is that "cannot fight properly on its own"
2) PDD and auto turrets fill the "something extra to protect your army"
3) as a supportive caster it does "Strengthen your army" if you know how to use it.
also SM and Auto turrets can help fill the offensive need and in auto turrets case possible harassment.
Well, it actually can fight properly on its own, that's why TvZ and TvT lategame is a lot about mass raven. It just is too expensive to go mass raven from the start, but that doesn't mean it's a support unit. You can't go mass Broodlord from the start, and that one is neither a support unit.
The raven is a support caster... but it will die trying to do the spells that are used to support.
see how flawed that logic is?
Who says it is a support caster? Some blizzard help text?
think about it logically.
also its supposed to be the spiritual sucessor to the science vessel
I think about it logically. Blizzard made a unit called the Raven, gave it a bunch of abilities and gave it to the players of SC2 to develop a role for it and then balance it accordingly. It turned out not to be a support caster, but a unit that is mostly used as lategame antiair unit, used against compositions that can kill it as well.
look at all the ravens spells.
they are supportive in nature.
also look at the tech postion/upgrades of the raven,
Saying its not a supportive caster is like saying the spine crawler is not a defensive structure.
and spellcasters by nature are supportive.
No, HSM is not a support spell. It's a biggass damage dealer. PDD defends units around it. Does not mean that you have to use other units that the raven supports. PDD defends the Raven just as well. Auto Turret: many applications, defends or attacks a location. For example the Raven.
And no, spellcasters are not support by nature. Infestor is basically standalone. Science Vessel in BW is basically standalone against Zerg. (that does not mean that either of them should be used on its own. But they can deal quite well with everything) As long as you have enough energy (which you have with vessel, raven, infestor when you mass them), they can fight properly on their own.
I'm abit concerned about what you understand about game design 0_o
OK, so please define what a support unit is. From my understanding, it is a unit that cannot fight properly on it's own, but provides something extra to protect the rest of your army, fill niche roles or just strengthens your army.
The Raven can fight properly on it's own. Not against everything (for example vikings, infestors or ultras), but against a big variety of stuff.
According to your logic then Infestors and HT are NOT supporting units because they can fight properly on their own too. Infestors = Use Infested Terran to attack HT = Storm units that is attacking them and merge them into Archons
Infestors aren't support units. If the infestor was a support unit, then noone would be talking about mass infestor. HTs are support units, because storms dont stack. Archons are not support units.
Infestors are supporting units. If you attack let's say MMM with just Infestors with nothing else, you will lose majority, if not all of your unit However, if you attacked with lings,blings and infestors, then you can demolish other player's unit or lose some of your units.
Who says it is a support caster? Some blizzard help text?
think about it logically.
also its supposed to be the spiritual sucessor to the science vessel
I think about it logically. Blizzard made a unit called the Raven, gave it a bunch of abilities and gave it to the players of SC2 to develop a role for it and then balance it accordingly. It turned out not to be a support caster, but a unit that is mostly used as lategame antiair unit, used against compositions that can kill it as well.
look at all the ravens spells.
they are supportive in nature.
also look at the tech postion/upgrades of the raven,
Saying its not a supportive caster is like saying the spine crawler is not a defensive structure.
and spellcasters by nature are supportive.
No, HSM is not a support spell. It's a biggass damage dealer. PDD defends units around it. Does not mean that you have to use other units that the raven supports. PDD defends the Raven just as well. Auto Turret: many applications, defends or attacks a location. For example the Raven.
And no, spellcasters are not support by nature. Infestor is basically standalone. Science Vessel in BW is basically standalone against Zerg. (that does not mean that either of them should be used on its own. But they can deal quite well with everything) As long as you have enough energy (which you have with vessel, raven, infestor when you mass them), they can fight properly on their own.
I'm abit concerned about what you understand about game design 0_o
OK, so please define what a support unit is. From my understanding, it is a unit that cannot fight properly on it's own, but provides something extra to protect the rest of your army, fill niche roles or just strengthens your army.
The Raven can fight properly on it's own. Not against everything (for example vikings, infestors or ultras), but against a big variety of stuff.
According to your logic then Infestors and HT are NOT supporting units because they can fight properly on their own too. Infestors = Use Infested Terran to attack HT = Storm units that is attacking them and merge them into Archons
Infestors aren't support units. If the infestor was a support unit, then noone would be talking about mass infestor. HTs are support units, because storms dont stack. Archons are not support units.
Infestors are supporting units. If you attack let's say MMM with just Infestors with nothing else, you will lose majority, if not all of your unit However, if you attacked with lings,blings and infestors, then you can demolish other player's unit or lose some of your units.
same thing vis versa; if you only go ling/bling, mass MMM can deal with that. But with infestors, it gets pretty tough. Does that mean that ling/bling is a support? No!
also its supposed to be the spiritual sucessor to the science vessel
I think about it logically. Blizzard made a unit called the Raven, gave it a bunch of abilities and gave it to the players of SC2 to develop a role for it and then balance it accordingly. It turned out not to be a support caster, but a unit that is mostly used as lategame antiair unit, used against compositions that can kill it as well.
look at all the ravens spells.
they are supportive in nature.
also look at the tech postion/upgrades of the raven,
Saying its not a supportive caster is like saying the spine crawler is not a defensive structure.
and spellcasters by nature are supportive.
No, HSM is not a support spell. It's a biggass damage dealer. PDD defends units around it. Does not mean that you have to use other units that the raven supports. PDD defends the Raven just as well. Auto Turret: many applications, defends or attacks a location. For example the Raven.
And no, spellcasters are not support by nature. Infestor is basically standalone. Science Vessel in BW is basically standalone against Zerg. (that does not mean that either of them should be used on its own. But they can deal quite well with everything) As long as you have enough energy (which you have with vessel, raven, infestor when you mass them), they can fight properly on their own.
I'm abit concerned about what you understand about game design 0_o
OK, so please define what a support unit is. From my understanding, it is a unit that cannot fight properly on it's own, but provides something extra to protect the rest of your army, fill niche roles or just strengthens your army.
The Raven can fight properly on it's own. Not against everything (for example vikings, infestors or ultras), but against a big variety of stuff.
According to your logic then Infestors and HT are NOT supporting units because they can fight properly on their own too. Infestors = Use Infested Terran to attack HT = Storm units that is attacking them and merge them into Archons
Infestors aren't support units. If the infestor was a support unit, then noone would be talking about mass infestor. HTs are support units, because storms dont stack. Archons are not support units.
Infestors are supporting units. If you attack let's say MMM with just Infestors with nothing else, you will lose majority, if not all of your unit However, if you attacked with lings,blings and infestors, then you can demolish other player's unit or lose some of your units.
same thing vis versa; if you only go ling/bling, mass MMM can deal with that. But with infestors, it gets pretty tough. Does that mean that ling/bling is a support? No!
Sure, It gets tough, but Infestors aren't necessary to attack other player's unit. However, if you try to attack with Infestor alone then you will get fucked because they aren't meant to be used offensively.
I think about it logically. Blizzard made a unit called the Raven, gave it a bunch of abilities and gave it to the players of SC2 to develop a role for it and then balance it accordingly. It turned out not to be a support caster, but a unit that is mostly used as lategame antiair unit, used against compositions that can kill it as well.
look at all the ravens spells.
they are supportive in nature.
also look at the tech postion/upgrades of the raven,
Saying its not a supportive caster is like saying the spine crawler is not a defensive structure.
and spellcasters by nature are supportive.
No, HSM is not a support spell. It's a biggass damage dealer. PDD defends units around it. Does not mean that you have to use other units that the raven supports. PDD defends the Raven just as well. Auto Turret: many applications, defends or attacks a location. For example the Raven.
And no, spellcasters are not support by nature. Infestor is basically standalone. Science Vessel in BW is basically standalone against Zerg. (that does not mean that either of them should be used on its own. But they can deal quite well with everything) As long as you have enough energy (which you have with vessel, raven, infestor when you mass them), they can fight properly on their own.
I'm abit concerned about what you understand about game design 0_o
OK, so please define what a support unit is. From my understanding, it is a unit that cannot fight properly on it's own, but provides something extra to protect the rest of your army, fill niche roles or just strengthens your army.
The Raven can fight properly on it's own. Not against everything (for example vikings, infestors or ultras), but against a big variety of stuff.
According to your logic then Infestors and HT are NOT supporting units because they can fight properly on their own too. Infestors = Use Infested Terran to attack HT = Storm units that is attacking them and merge them into Archons
Infestors aren't support units. If the infestor was a support unit, then noone would be talking about mass infestor. HTs are support units, because storms dont stack. Archons are not support units.
Infestors are supporting units. If you attack let's say MMM with just Infestors with nothing else, you will lose majority, if not all of your unit However, if you attacked with lings,blings and infestors, then you can demolish other player's unit or lose some of your units.
same thing vis versa; if you only go ling/bling, mass MMM can deal with that. But with infestors, it gets pretty tough. Does that mean that ling/bling is a support? No!
Sure, It gets tough, but Infestors aren't necessary to attack other player's unit. However, if you try to attack with Infestor alone then you will get fucked because they aren't meant to be used offensively.
No you are not fucked. ZvZ tends to come down to mass infestor vs mass infestor a lot, TvZ we see numbers of 15+ infestors in the lategame quite commonly. IT + fungal is standalone. Again, that does not mean that 9.5 range artillery, additional anti air or just cheap stuff that fights quite well, or even better, synergizes with fungal (like blings and ultras) isn't superior. But that doesn't mean that the infestor only has a support role. Look at MMM. Is the marine a support unit? No. Is pure marine superior to MMM? Usually not. It makes your composition more well rounded.
I think it would be cool if they increased the movement speed on ravens, I think We terran players should be happy over ANY buff we get. Finaly it´s not another nerf Happening.
On August 20 2012 05:17 InSpiReZerG wrote: If at first you don't succeed, Cry Cry Again. Tell your balance problems to MVP. Suggestion: spend your time studying better players instead of doing the same thing and expecting it to miraculously work.
So there are no balance issues because there are 2 players doing well?
I guess by that logic the game was completely balanced at release as well. After all, Fruitdealer and Nestea both won the first two GSLs! If anything, Zerg was too strong back then.
Anyone currently arguing that MVP's win at IEM proves balance in TvZ is either a complete idiot or did not watch the games.
Nerchio completely threw away the finals. He played like absolute garbage. It may have been nerves, but he made mistake after mistake, choosing terrible engagements and mismicroing every one (headbutting marauders and tanks with infestors? making unupgraded roaches when he had a greater spire? rallying lings the the fourth straight into tanks and marines?) so terribly that MVP could have had no hands and still won. Same goes for Slikvo vs. MVP. Losing 20+ drones to 4 hellions and 2 banshees when you have 4 queens and multiple spores and spines is absolutely inexcusable. He played like shit.
Please, I implore you, download the replays and watch them. Casters like to make players sound better than they are, and make games seem closer than they are, because it hypes the tournament. MVP won not because he is an amazing terran (although he is,) but because he played against opponents that turned their brains off during the games.
And by the way, does anyone think a Terran who makes mistakes as egregious and easily rectified as these two trashy euro zergs would stand a chance at getting to the finals of a major tournament? Fuck no.
On August 20 2012 05:17 InSpiReZerG wrote: If at first you don't succeed, Cry Cry Again. Tell your balance problems to MVP. Suggestion: spend your time studying better players instead of doing the same thing and expecting it to miraculously work.
So there are no balance issues because there are 2 players doing well?
I guess by that logic the game was completely balanced at release as well. After all, Fruitdealer and Nestea both won the first two GSLs! If anything, Zerg was too strong back then.
Next game just morph your command center into a box of Kleenex for all the tear drops. Terran are winning TvZ all across the board. If you aren't, its not balance. You're builds are flawed. if they werent you'd be GM. Any fix bliz employs will change the overall win rates of tvz by less than 1%. Trust me, it wont change anything in your build and you'll still have some L's to hold. HOLD DAT.
also look at the tech postion/upgrades of the raven,
Saying its not a supportive caster is like saying the spine crawler is not a defensive structure.
and spellcasters by nature are supportive.
No, HSM is not a support spell. It's a biggass damage dealer. PDD defends units around it. Does not mean that you have to use other units that the raven supports. PDD defends the Raven just as well. Auto Turret: many applications, defends or attacks a location. For example the Raven.
And no, spellcasters are not support by nature. Infestor is basically standalone. Science Vessel in BW is basically standalone against Zerg. (that does not mean that either of them should be used on its own. But they can deal quite well with everything) As long as you have enough energy (which you have with vessel, raven, infestor when you mass them), they can fight properly on their own.
I'm abit concerned about what you understand about game design 0_o
OK, so please define what a support unit is. From my understanding, it is a unit that cannot fight properly on it's own, but provides something extra to protect the rest of your army, fill niche roles or just strengthens your army.
The Raven can fight properly on it's own. Not against everything (for example vikings, infestors or ultras), but against a big variety of stuff.
According to your logic then Infestors and HT are NOT supporting units because they can fight properly on their own too. Infestors = Use Infested Terran to attack HT = Storm units that is attacking them and merge them into Archons
Infestors aren't support units. If the infestor was a support unit, then noone would be talking about mass infestor. HTs are support units, because storms dont stack. Archons are not support units.
Infestors are supporting units. If you attack let's say MMM with just Infestors with nothing else, you will lose majority, if not all of your unit However, if you attacked with lings,blings and infestors, then you can demolish other player's unit or lose some of your units.
same thing vis versa; if you only go ling/bling, mass MMM can deal with that. But with infestors, it gets pretty tough. Does that mean that ling/bling is a support? No!
Sure, It gets tough, but Infestors aren't necessary to attack other player's unit. However, if you try to attack with Infestor alone then you will get fucked because they aren't meant to be used offensively.
No you are not fucked. ZvZ tends to come down to mass infestor vs mass infestor a lot, TvZ we see numbers of 15+ infestors in the lategame quite commonly. IT + fungal is standalone. Again, that does not mean that 9.5 range artillery, additional anti air or just cheap stuff that fights quite well, or even better, synergizes with fungal (like blings and ultras) isn't superior. But that doesn't mean that the infestor only has a support role. Look at MMM. Is the marine a support unit? No. Is pure marine superior to MMM? Usually not. It makes your composition more well rounded.
The problem with TvZ atm, at least in my opinion, is that the Queen buff has made all aggression from Terran borderline negligible. Hellions are far weaker at containing and harassing, early bio timings are so much weaker, and banshee openings are so much weaker. Because of this, terrans can't force the zerg to stop making drones - so when terran opens aggresively, and the zerg can just make 80 drones without batting an eyelid anyway, the terran falls wayyyy behind.
The most recent solution to this is for terran to just play stupid greedy - 3 CCs off of 1 rax etc. Again, the problem with this is that because zerg can spam drones so quickly, the moment they scout a double expand they wil stop making anything other than drones, and even then, with the terran on 3 CCs, the zerg will still get to 80 drones before the terran gets to even just 50 SCVs - terrans again fall wayyyyy behind.
It seems to me that no matter whether they are aggresive or passive, terrans just can't get ahead in this matchup anymore (assuming that both players are of equal skill level).
This is why I have starting playing TvZ ForGG style - just suiciding hellions into mineral lines. It's actually what I have also been seeing from a lot of pro terrans as well. I guess the mentality is this: You can't stop the zerg from making drones, so the only other solution is to kill the drones at all costs. I saw SuperNova, MVP, Bomber and more literally suiciding hellions into mineral lines so much during IEM, but the problem with this is that it is such a huge gamble. If there are a lot of queens, 300 resources worth of roaches, spine crawlers etc. that kind of play just falls a part.
On August 20 2012 06:32 InSpiReZerG wrote: ^lmfao. Every, EVERY hellion runby ive ever seen has gotten more than enough drone kills to pay for itself. next point plz.
Hm. You must not be watching good zergs, as it is quite easy with range 5 queens to deny all hellion runbys if the zerg is not absolutely awful. Perhaps you only watch your own games?
Whatever the unit is, there's just little to no control on some units that have a serious influence on the outcome of the game. Let's face it; you're going to want a lot of ravens and to keep them all alive more often than, say, a marine ball, with the latter supposedly being the main army. Yes, this applies to any unit in the game, but this effect is even more noticable when the unit is a spellcaster and when it gets extremely difficult to control the number of those units.
This happened to the HT, Ghost, Collosus, Thor, Siege tank, and any unit with a potentially abusable spell/skillset. All of them got nerfed, some more severely than others. It's too easy to abuse in SC2 because of the AI, and it's ridiculously difficult to kill a large amount of any unit with an abusable spell. Speed buffing spellcasters is the safest bet towards balancing the game, but it is also the one that is least likely to change anything at all. Does anyone even remember or notice the medivac and infestor speed nerfs?
As most people can tell, a giant ball of infestors with a potential 9 range root spell is difficult to touch. A giant ball of spellcasters is usually pretty difficult to kill. There are major issues that need to be addressed (the larvae mechanic, smart cast : ability power ratio, lack of unique micro, map making procedures, the deathball immortallity, just to name a few), but as it stands right now, all Blizzard can do is speed buff anything that needs help because they do not want to tamper with the game until HotS, where they will have another balancing nightmare, moreso than WoL.
On August 20 2012 06:32 InSpiReZerG wrote: ^lmfao. Every, EVERY hellion runby ive ever seen has gotten more than enough drone kills to pay for itself. next point plz.
Hm. You must not be watching good zergs, as it is quite easy with range 5 queens to deny all hellion runbys if the zerg is not absolutely awful. Perhaps you only watch your own games?
TSL is on right now. Keen got 20+ drone kills everytime he went hellions so far. go check it and zip dat lip.
On August 20 2012 05:17 Callynn wrote: If you look at the bigger picture you can see the design intention behind the spellcasters in SC2.
Protoss have a tier 1 spellcaster (Sentry) and a generic land spellcaster with an AoE ability (Templar storm).
Zerg have only a generic land spellcaster with an AoE ability, but does not need to research it's AoE (Infestor fungal).
Terran have a generic land spellcaster with an AoE ability that is mainly effective against protoss at the moment due to the snipe nerf (Ghost) and a tier 3 spellcaster (Raven) which has it's AoE damage ability behind because it's a flying unit (which can be overpowered if they increased the HSM range by only a bit).
To solve the problem, they should just increase Ghost Snipe damage against massive biological units!
This fixes a direct balance issue that is being complained about, though I personally think a good player should be able to rush Ravens.
Another way to 'fix' the problem is slightly reduce the cost of Ravens (from 200 gas down to maybe 175).
Just my 2 cents.
This is the best balance idea ive heard pertaining to this issue. Having snipe do bonus vs massive would only affect TvZ and would give terran an answer to Broods/Ultras in the lategame as well as allowing Terrans to spend thier gas buildup. As for the raven, blizzard either needs to buff it to make in viable or change its abilities entirely. There is a reason that Koreans didnt use it until now.
On August 20 2012 06:32 InSpiReZerG wrote: ^lmfao. Every, EVERY hellion runby ive ever seen has gotten more than enough drone kills to pay for itself. next point plz.
First, that is impossible.
Second, how would you feel if the game was balanced in such a way that the only way zerg could beat terran was by building one very specific unit and suiciding them at one very specific target, when the entire thing is a gamble to begin with?
On August 20 2012 06:32 InSpiReZerG wrote: ^lmfao. Every, EVERY hellion runby ive ever seen has gotten more than enough drone kills to pay for itself. next point plz.
Hm. You must not be watching good zergs, as it is quite easy with range 5 queens to deny all hellion runbys if the zerg is not absolutely awful. Perhaps you only watch your own games?
TSL is on right now. Keen got 20+ drone kills everytime he went hellions so far. go check it and zip dat lip.
I don't care for your argument, but no he hasn't. He gets a good 3-4 but with a decent wall/queen prep. Keen's runbys have been pretty bad
Thats not the only way to win..... macro terran is very powerful as well. But the biggest complaint i hear by you plat league morons is that you cant harrass zerg. when korean terran literally go hellion banshee 90% of the time and have great success with a HARRASS FOCUSSED BUILD.
On August 20 2012 06:32 InSpiReZerG wrote: ^lmfao. Every, EVERY hellion runby ive ever seen has gotten more than enough drone kills to pay for itself. next point plz.
Hm. You must not be watching good zergs, as it is quite easy with range 5 queens to deny all hellion runbys if the zerg is not absolutely awful. Perhaps you only watch your own games?
Your argument is flawed, that depends on the map a lot, and if the Zerg has pushed with the Queens, or is guarding the chokes with them. Queens still do terrible damage, you can destroy the Hellions if they stand there, or if they fight with the Queens, you absolutely can't destroy Hellions if they just run-by. Even on creep, Queens are damn slow. Sure, those Hellions will die if they run-by, but you are going to kill a lot of drones anyway.
On August 20 2012 06:32 InSpiReZerG wrote: ^lmfao. Every, EVERY hellion runby ive ever seen has gotten more than enough drone kills to pay for itself. next point plz.
Hm. You must not be watching good zergs, as it is quite easy with range 5 queens to deny all hellion runbys if the zerg is not absolutely awful. Perhaps you only watch your own games?
Your argument is flawed, that depends on the map a lot, and if the Zerg has pushed with the Queens, or is guarding the chokes with them. Queens still do terrible damage, you can destroy the Hellions if they stand there, or if they fight with the Queens, you absolutely can't destroy Hellions if they just run-by. Even on creep, Queens are damn slow. Sure, those Hellions will die if they run-by, but you are going to kill a lot of drones anyway.
Amen bro. I really feel like most complaints here are coming from Bronze league/ stream watchers. anyone playing the game at current balance knows Terran lategame trouble has nothing to do with queen balance.
I don't know why you would be arguing over whether or not runby's always pay for themselves because they clearly don't. Terrans suicide their hellions and get negligible amounts of drone kills all the time. Plus, once you lose your hellions, you lose map control unless you are building hellions constantly. But if you build that many hellions and the zerg builds roaches you are screwed.
Korean Terrans have been figuring out the matchup again and doing well again lately. It's only the NA/EU Terrans that would rather complain rather than get replays/VODs of those players that are having success and practice using builds and styles that are being developed by the Korean pros.
On August 20 2012 06:32 InSpiReZerG wrote: ^lmfao. Every, EVERY hellion runby ive ever seen has gotten more than enough drone kills to pay for itself. next point plz.
Hm. You must not be watching good zergs, as it is quite easy with range 5 queens to deny all hellion runbys if the zerg is not absolutely awful. Perhaps you only watch your own games?
Your argument is flawed, that depends on the map a lot, and if the Zerg has pushed with the Queens, or is guarding the chokes with them. Queens still do terrible damage, you can destroy the Hellions if they stand there, or if they fight with the Queens, you absolutely can't destroy Hellions if they just run-by. Even on creep, Queens are damn slow. Sure, those Hellions will die if they run-by, but you are going to kill a lot of drones anyway.
Amen bro. I really feel like most complaints here are coming from Bronze league/ stream watchers. anyone playing the game at current balance knows Terran lategame trouble has nothing to do with queen balance.
I really feel like most of the "Zerg defense force" and "everything is fine" crowd are Zergs with under 1k posts.
Getting a return on hellion harassment has a lot more to it than just 2 drones per hellion. Investments are made by both players and risks are taken, and some combinations of strategies require as much as 4 drones per hellion to come out ahead, and some will vault you ahead with a "break even" cost.
On August 20 2012 06:52 KrazyTrumpet wrote: Korean Terrans have been figuring out the matchup again and doing well again lately. It's only the NA/EU Terrans that would rather complain rather than get replays/VODs of those players that are having success and practice using builds and styles that are being developed by the Korean pros.
Again, it's not "Korean pros." It's Taeja, and MVP beating up on foreign Zergs.
On August 20 2012 06:32 InSpiReZerG wrote: ^lmfao. Every, EVERY hellion runby ive ever seen has gotten more than enough drone kills to pay for itself. next point plz.
Hm. You must not be watching good zergs, as it is quite easy with range 5 queens to deny all hellion runbys if the zerg is not absolutely awful. Perhaps you only watch your own games?
I think the queen changes have very little to do with stopping hellion run by's. It's more of the fact that at the time run by's would occur, there are 4 queens that you can position along with 2 evolution chambers to completely block out hellion harass
On August 20 2012 06:42 InSpiReZerG wrote: Thats not the only way to win..... macro terran is very powerful as well. But the biggest complaint i hear by you plat league morons is that you cant harrass zerg. when korean terran literally go hellion banshee 90% of the time and have great success with a HARRASS FOCUSSED BUILD.
The problem is that helion and banshee micro along with macro takes lots of apm and multitasking to do efficiently so it's only seen done effectively at high levels of play whereas good spore crawler placement and sim city can be done at almost any level. Zerg players sit here and say Terran should just l2p, but really when did Zerg do the same? They didn't do anything to innovate against 5 rax reaper, 2 rax bunker pressure against hatch first, bfh helion and marine elevators, and they could have just had better reaction times yet instead medivac speed gets nerfed, etc yet they're allowed to whine and get buffs? Nice double standards there. I'll use your argument against you. Why didn't you just play like Nestea when he went undefeated in one of his Code S runs? Or why weren't you doing what Fruitdealer did when Terran was supposedly OP yet Zerg wins the first GSL? It's a terrible argument as you see.
"A raven speed buff does zero to address these issues because the problem is and never will be raven speed. The problem is how fungal growth pins down "
On August 20 2012 06:32 InSpiReZerG wrote: ^lmfao. Every, EVERY hellion runby ive ever seen has gotten more than enough drone kills to pay for itself. next point plz.
Could you stop posting in this thread? You're like a multiple choice question on exams that contains the word "all" "every time" or "always" that you know you can eliminate because it's a fucking generality that is "never" true. Also, I like how you turned "all" into "90%" in your next post as well. Just drop 10% from it, now you're MUCH more credible. 90% of helion runbys with banshee backup is auto Terran win, yep. I need a way to cross out your posts to read any legitimate discussion. People have to respond to your crap because you're trolling us.
On August 20 2012 02:38 Zoesan wrote: Actually, that is a really dumb argument.
What is relevant should be looking at GSL winrates etc, where a lot of top players compete. As people have already written: nestea won the GSL last year without dropping a map and had a whopping 19-0 record between may and august. Yet everyone was crying about how overpowered terran was. So now the situation is reversed with zergs overall winning and a single terran still at the top and terran is still the overpowered race.
Yeah, nice double standards there.
I dont think terran is overpowered but i think bad terrans think they are underpowered. I would say if you play like mvp does taking bases like he does and cutting of positions terran is op. But bad terrans cant do that.
"I don't think zerg is underpowered but i think bad zergs (sup idra) think they are underpowered. I would say if you play like nestea does taking bases like he does and cutting of positions zerg is op. But bad zergs can't do that."
Still a bullshit argument.
I'm not actually saying terran is anything, but the argumentation is so conceptually flawed and hypocritical it isn't even funny anymore.
On August 20 2012 06:32 InSpiReZerG wrote: ^lmfao. Every, EVERY hellion runby ive ever seen has gotten more than enough drone kills to pay for itself. next point plz.
Hm. You must not be watching good zergs, as it is quite easy with range 5 queens to deny all hellion runbys if the zerg is not absolutely awful. Perhaps you only watch your own games?
Your argument is flawed, that depends on the map a lot, and if the Zerg has pushed with the Queens, or is guarding the chokes with them. Queens still do terrible damage, you can destroy the Hellions if they stand there, or if they fight with the Queens, you absolutely can't destroy Hellions if they just run-by. Even on creep, Queens are damn slow. Sure, those Hellions will die if they run-by, but you are going to kill a lot of drones anyway.
Amen bro. I really feel like most complaints here are coming from Bronze league/ stream watchers. anyone playing the game at current balance knows Terran lategame trouble has nothing to do with queen balance.
I really feel like most of the "Zerg defense force" and "everything is fine" crowd are Zergs with under 1k posts.
Getting a return on hellion harassment has a lot more to it than just 2 drones per hellion. Investments are made by both players and risks are taken, and some combinations of strategies require as much as 4 drones per hellion to come out ahead, and some will vault you ahead with a "break even" cost.
You heard it here first folks, if you have less than 1k posts, your argument is invalid.
I play low-Masters Terran and it always feels like all the pressure is on me to somehow make the Zerg lose or they just get that über army and roll me.
I rage and whine over this injustice all the time while laddering.
Then you'll watch high-level Korean Terrans play and realize you just suck and while equally sucky players may beat you at your skill tier because of race mechanics that really doesn't say much about the actual balance of the game.
Also we have HotS so soon that this entire discussion is just irrelevant.
On August 20 2012 06:32 InSpiReZerG wrote: ^lmfao. Every, EVERY hellion runby ive ever seen has gotten more than enough drone kills to pay for itself. next point plz.
Hm. You must not be watching good zergs, as it is quite easy with range 5 queens to deny all hellion runbys if the zerg is not absolutely awful. Perhaps you only watch your own games?
I think the queen changes have very little to do with stopping hellion run by's. It's more of the fact that at the time run by's would occur, there are 4 queens that you can position along with 2 evolution chambers to completely block out hellion harass
I still think it has to do with the fact that there is little tradeoff with going for a mass queen defensive opening. So much larvae can be dedicated for upfront drone production or recovery drone production while still remaining safe at every stage of the game. It's not like getting extra queens reduce the early or mid game scouting of Zerg, the economy of Zerg, or the tech options of Zerg. It's a no brainer to do.
Even before the buff, you could have gone 4 queen and blocked off the entrance. With good play, you would perfectly counter any hellion opening, but you would have to invest in a few lings or roaches as well. That made it very risky to do blind, and with slower overlords, it required a bit of gambling.
What bothers me about the raven is that it's a luck-based unit. Ghosts were effective If you had the APM to snipe quickly enough. Seeker missile is more of "Okay, I'm in position. Let's hope that he has all of his stuff clumped up!" type of ability.
On August 20 2012 06:32 InSpiReZerG wrote: ^lmfao. Every, EVERY hellion runby ive ever seen has gotten more than enough drone kills to pay for itself. next point plz.
Hm. You must not be watching good zergs, as it is quite easy with range 5 queens to deny all hellion runbys if the zerg is not absolutely awful. Perhaps you only watch your own games?
Your argument is flawed, that depends on the map a lot, and if the Zerg has pushed with the Queens, or is guarding the chokes with them. Queens still do terrible damage, you can destroy the Hellions if they stand there, or if they fight with the Queens, you absolutely can't destroy Hellions if they just run-by. Even on creep, Queens are damn slow. Sure, those Hellions will die if they run-by, but you are going to kill a lot of drones anyway.
Amen bro. I really feel like most complaints here are coming from Bronze league/ stream watchers. anyone playing the game at current balance knows Terran lategame trouble has nothing to do with queen balance.
I really feel like most of the "Zerg defense force" and "everything is fine" crowd are Zergs with under 1k posts.
Getting a return on hellion harassment has a lot more to it than just 2 drones per hellion. Investments are made by both players and risks are taken, and some combinations of strategies require as much as 4 drones per hellion to come out ahead, and some will vault you ahead with a "break even" cost.
You heard it here first folks, if you have less than 1k posts, your argument is invalid.
Yep, if DRG made an account on here to contribute to the discussion, his argument would be invalid too.
On August 20 2012 07:13 IAmMajiC wrote: What bothers me about the raven is that it's a luck-based unit. Ghosts were effective If you had the APM to snipe quickly enough. Seeker missile is more of "Okay, I'm in position. Let's hope that he has all of his stuff clumped up!" type of ability.
Kind of true, but all of the units that you use HSM against are pretty slow, and are quite hard to spread on time in direct engagement. If he spreads it before, you can tear it up, bit by bit with your army. And almost all of the pros have their Infestors clumped up, so it is not that hard to kill them. The real problem is that you can't cast HSM if you get hit by the Fungal, which just means you will have to spread all of your Ravens like people do nowadays with the Vikings, and cast with all of them HSM. Zerg will try to fungal them, because he can't escape the Ravens with Infestors and Brood Lords, but he won't be able to stop all of them if you come from multiple sides.
On August 20 2012 06:32 InSpiReZerG wrote: ^lmfao. Every, EVERY hellion runby ive ever seen has gotten more than enough drone kills to pay for itself. next point plz.
Hm. You must not be watching good zergs, as it is quite easy with range 5 queens to deny all hellion runbys if the zerg is not absolutely awful. Perhaps you only watch your own games?
Your argument is flawed, that depends on the map a lot, and if the Zerg has pushed with the Queens, or is guarding the chokes with them. Queens still do terrible damage, you can destroy the Hellions if they stand there, or if they fight with the Queens, you absolutely can't destroy Hellions if they just run-by. Even on creep, Queens are damn slow. Sure, those Hellions will die if they run-by, but you are going to kill a lot of drones anyway.
Amen bro. I really feel like most complaints here are coming from Bronze league/ stream watchers. anyone playing the game at current balance knows Terran lategame trouble has nothing to do with queen balance.
I really feel like most of the "Zerg defense force" and "everything is fine" crowd are Zergs with under 1k posts.
Getting a return on hellion harassment has a lot more to it than just 2 drones per hellion. Investments are made by both players and risks are taken, and some combinations of strategies require as much as 4 drones per hellion to come out ahead, and some will vault you ahead with a "break even" cost.
You heard it here first folks, if you have less than 1k posts, your argument is invalid.
It's more along the lines that many of us have had this entire discussion before. There are points made and taken, and others refuted. There are very clear arguments that are made by idiots, like "EVERY hellion runby ive ever seen has gotten more than enough drone kills to pay for itself." Your argument isn't automatically "invalid" with a low post count, but does increase the chance your argument is based on lines of one of the following: a) Game is fine. It's just the metagame evolving. Blizzard should just give it time and not make any more changes! b) Players who pick Zerg are just better. c) There are some players who still win against Zerg, so there's nothing wrong with the matchup. d) Marines!
On August 20 2012 07:10 Mylin wrote: I play low-Masters Terran and it always feels like all the pressure is on me to somehow make the Zerg lose or they just get that über army and roll me.
I rage and whine over this injustice all the time while laddering.
Then you'll watch high-level Korean Terrans play and realize you just suck and while equally sucky players may beat you at your skill tier because of race mechanics that really doesn't say much about the actual balance of the game.
Also we have HotS so soon that this entire discussion is just irrelevant.
Such a smart response, props Yeah you watch Taeja or MVP vs Zerg and realize that with proper understanding of the game, Terran is certainly capable of beating any Zerg.
I think the issue is the timing of when the ravens can come out. If you can set up 7/8 ravens with enough energy for 1 HSM each, the ravens with viking/ground force support can rip through most broodlord/infestor/corruptor army even with 3-4 HSM hitting the zerg army.
It feels like TvZ super-late game is beginning to be like the 14-17 min mark for zerg vs protoss if Zerg is trying to press out brood lords after roach. The protoss needs to have done good damage with a strong push before the broods start pounding at the front of the toss's base. If the protoss is sucessful at doing some damage and keep some army alive, it can proceed to getting that archon/mothership setup or MC style mass mass-gateway-constant-aggression to combat the brood/infestor.
The speed/acceleration on the raven will have a significant effect on matchup. The reason is simply: HSM has a short cast range, and it's really hard to micro the missile casts due to their awful accel/movespeed. The implications of this buff would be that less ravens would be required to cast multiple HSM before dying. Right now from pro games of late late TvZ, the raven count has to be 8+ just to be able to cast 3-4 HSM successfully because of fungals and clunkiness of ravens. This change would likely make ravens more maneuverable and squeeze out more successful HSM casts from fewer ravens. In short ravens become more effective even in smaller numbers (3 or 4 with 125 energy.)
I think the issue becomes: "How can terrans transition into late game with 4+ effective ravens with 125 energy before the brood lord infestor ball kills the terran?"
The commonalities of this transition I've observed in pro games so far are:
1) Lots of drops. Switching out marine/marauder drops supply for ravens.
2) Huge maps (Metropolis, Atlanta Spaceship, Daybreak, Whirlwind?). This seems to be almost a given for the ravens to be viable currently, but I hope someone can figure out the transition to ravens in smaller maps.
3) Making the base counterattack-proof. Lots of turrets with excess minerals/planetary fortresses/simcities with good tanks seiged/good posturing of main army.
4) Lots of orbitals to switch out scvs for MULEs for larger effective army size. This also makes counterattacks that kill SCVs less effective.
On August 20 2012 06:42 InSpiReZerG wrote: Thats not the only way to win..... macro terran is very powerful as well. But the biggest complaint i hear by you plat league morons is that you cant harrass zerg. when korean terran literally go hellion banshee 90% of the time and have great success with a HARRASS FOCUSSED BUILD.
The problem is that helion and banshee micro along with macro takes lots of apm and multitasking to do efficiently so it's only seen done effectively at high levels of play whereas good spore crawler placement and sim city can be done at almost any level. Zerg players sit here and say Terran should just l2p, but really when did Zerg do the same? They didn't do anything to innovate against 5 rax reaper, 2 rax bunker pressure against hatch first, bfh helion and marine elevators, and they could have just had better reaction times yet instead medivac speed gets nerfed, etc yet they're allowed to whine and get buffs? Nice double standards there. I'll use your argument against you. Why didn't you just play like Nestea when he went undefeated in one of his Code S runs? Or why weren't you doing what Fruitdealer did when Terran was supposedly OP yet Zerg wins the first GSL? It's a terrible argument as you see.
I never see anyone argue against this for some reason. Go figure.
On August 20 2012 06:32 InSpiReZerG wrote: ^lmfao. Every, EVERY hellion runby ive ever seen has gotten more than enough drone kills to pay for itself. next point plz.
Hm. You must not be watching good zergs, as it is quite easy with range 5 queens to deny all hellion runbys if the zerg is not absolutely awful. Perhaps you only watch your own games?
Your argument is flawed, that depends on the map a lot, and if the Zerg has pushed with the Queens, or is guarding the chokes with them. Queens still do terrible damage, you can destroy the Hellions if they stand there, or if they fight with the Queens, you absolutely can't destroy Hellions if they just run-by. Even on creep, Queens are damn slow. Sure, those Hellions will die if they run-by, but you are going to kill a lot of drones anyway.
Amen bro. I really feel like most complaints here are coming from Bronze league/ stream watchers. anyone playing the game at current balance knows Terran lategame trouble has nothing to do with queen balance.
I really feel like most of the "Zerg defense force" and "everything is fine" crowd are Zergs with under 1k posts.
I agree with avilo,the slight increased speed to ravens alone won't help in real battle situations. It will only make it easier to keep the raven with your army,without it falling behind due to slower speed.
A raven costs 100m/200g,60seconds to build and requires an additional research for HSM. You have to wait another 3minutes for it to fill up enough energy for HSM and be able to be of use. Once you fire a HSM,they are dead flying paper that won't be able to assist in combat for at least 1-3 more minutes. HSM has a casting range of 6,meanwhile an infestor can reach a raven from an 9(11) range away. Both FG and HSM can be devastating if they reach a clumped up group of units,however it is too easy for infestors to deny Ravens from even firing HSMs and killing them without them being able to retreat or fire anything.
We may as well consider Ravens flying banelings at this point,since they are usually only able to fire none or one HSM and then die,making them very inefficient both in resources and time cost for what they provide.
The only reason ravens are considered amazing sometimes,is because zergs clump up their army and are not used to spreading their army like a terran has to do constantly against banelings and infestors.A good zerg player will spread his army while attacking; while also fungaling/NP any ravens that try to get close,making HSM not much of a threat.
I think they should change HSM casting range to 7 or even 8 in addition to the speed buff. This will give a better chance for ravens to cast their HSMs before they are locked down or killed, as well as a chance to escape from combat and live to fight another battle.
On August 20 2012 04:05 Ramiz1989 wrote: Talking about map hack, what about sensor towers? Oh right, those things are really really expensive...
Apples to apples, oranges to oranges please.
Creep costs neither minerals nor gas. Creep self-replicates in any direction the player wishes. Creep requires detection to eliminate. Creep provides a speed buff to most units (some exceptions). Terran and Protoss cannot build next to a creep tumor. Creep (or rather the tumors) allow for the vision of the exact unit type over it (save for cloaked). Creep does not appear on the minimap without first scouting it with a unit.
VS:
The sensor tower does not do any of the above.
They are not the same, not even close.
Best, Niteshade
Exactly what I was talking about in the comment just before yours. You just ignored everything what Sensor Tower can do, while listing everything what Creep is doing and said how they are different. The perfect example of what was I talking about.
It appears that Niteshade seemed to out-logic you. Please study basic logic before trying to refute someone's argument..
On August 20 2012 05:19 Ramiz1989 wrote: Exactly what I was talking about in the comment just before yours. You just ignored everything what Sensor Tower can do, while listing everything what Creep is doing and said how they are different. The perfect example of what was I talking about.
My apologies. I interpreted what you said as a "the sensor tower is an equivalent to creep" statement. I misunderstood. Again, my apologies.
If you would like me to list the differences a tower is to creep I don't think that it would be any different.
I do not feel that broodlords, creep or queens give Zerg an "edge". Certainly the queen gives zerg some "edge", but moreso I feel that it gives them an adequate defence to the was-too-common hellion harrass. Now, you have to harrass differently.
What i do feel is imbalanced, is the infestor; more specifically fungal growth. I feel the infestors ability to control unit movement is a huge edge. How fungals can stop air units from moving is beyond me. Even forcefields can be flown over.
But I've learned to adapt to zerg. Simply put: attack before infestors can have fungals
On August 20 2012 05:01 MrBitter wrote: I thought Raven use at IEM was pretty damn cool this weekend. I'm quite excited to see if the meta continues to evolve to incorporate them more regularly.
I doubt people will incorporate them any more on the basis of that "buff" alone. Your casting is ok mr. Bitter, but your zerg bias is always evident. To be honest, I'd like to hear what Koreans have to say about the Raven and the patch. If anyone has interviews or context, I'd like to see it.
On August 20 2012 07:34 Kwanny wrote: Damn, Keen, Ghosts did really win you the game vs Zerg!
Miracles never cease to exist ^_^
Keen is so much better than people give him credit for.
He was sarcastic, he went ghosts to deal with infestors and killed 3 the entire game and the rest just got destroyed. The ghosts pretty much lost him the game since they were a huge waste of resources.
On August 20 2012 05:01 MrBitter wrote: I thought Raven use at IEM was pretty damn cool this weekend. I'm quite excited to see if the meta continues to evolve to incorporate them more regularly.
I doubt people will incorporate them any more on the basis of that "buff" alone. Your casting is ok mr. Bitter, but your zerg bias is always evident. To be honest, I'd like to hear what Koreans have to say about the Raven and the patch. If anyone has interviews or context, I'd like to see it.
how is he zerg biased, he said the games he saw that terrans used ravens were cool
On August 20 2012 02:20 AngryMag wrote: not 100% sure but I think Terran players won the last 4 offline events (Taeja's two tourney wins, Kas won the eastern Euro tournament with Korean participants and now MVP won IEM). I think these successes mean that eventual issues in in TvZ are atleast largely exagerated.
In my lowbob opinion, I do not see issues at all if I watch tournament play, there was only a period of Terrans adjusting to Zerg's multiqueen play postpatch.
Yes but have you looked at how many Terrans have won in the last 200 tournaments? Ok, so they won a few recent tournaments, but that is dwarfed by the results of many, many before it.
The discussion is about the balance right now, which is determined by the latest events. And your arguement is just wrong: Premier Tournaments this year: 21 Terran wins: 11 other races wins: 10
Premier Tournemts last year: 40 Terran wins: 20 other races wins: 20
With 3races, Terran has won >50% of the biggest tournaments in the last one and a half year. Where have you been when you think they are not winning enough tournaments?
Why don't you do everyone a favor and count how many Terrans won the most Recent tournaments (Post-Patch) for pages 1 and 2. But you can even go more if you want....
And yes, I really don't care about those one night 50€ regional online tournaments, played in Bo1s that some random GM player wins, as he is the only one at this level. You could as well just post EU and US Grandmaster race distribution, as it basically says exactly the same.
Actually, your interpretation of the data is still flawed. Given that we are talking about Post-Patch, we would need only reference the Tournaments since the patch in early May. And granted, this is if we accept these tournaments over TLPD numbers, which I do not. Therefore, I will include both numbers.
But even using these numbers, we are left with these tournaments:
August IEM Season VII - Global Challenge Cologne IEM $31,800 24 Mvp Nerchio August ASUS ROG Summer 2012 ASUS ROG $30,000 32 TaeJa MC July TeamLiquid StarLeague 4 TSL $34,500 32 July 2012 MLG Summer Arena MLG $26,400 32 TaeJa Alicia July HomeStory Cup V HomeStory $25,000 32 Nerchio YongHwa June 2012 DreamHack Open - Summer DreamHack $29,770 128 MaNa DIMAGA June 2012 MLG Spring Championship MLG $76,000 32 DongRaeGu Alicia May 2012 GSL Season 3 GSL $147,920 32 Seed MC May 2012 MLG Spring Arena 2 MLG $26,400 32 viOLet Symbol
Including MVP and his most recent win at IEM, we have a Grand Total of 3 Terrans out of 16 for Winners and Runner-Ups.
So even using your Data and Ignoring All the Other Tournaments, which still recruit the Best players in the world, and a large number of participants, There aren't many Terrans.
However, if we use TLPD and all the Recent Tournaments since the Patch, we have 34 Terran winners to 240 Zerg and Protoss Tournament Winners.
As a purely factual statement, one could say Terrans are under-represented (If we accept a proportion of 1:3 to be representative) in recent tournament results as determined by winners and runner-ups for both "premier" and all other "recorded" tournaments on TLPD. I'm not making any sweeping conclusions here.
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.
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
I think the principal issue is not that TvZ is heavily zerg favored at the top level. In fact, as a low master terran, I don't think it is. If one can make use of the terran race to its full potential, it may very well be the strongest race in the game.
The issue is the skill disparity required. Although one can never provide exact numbers for this sort of thing, I think its sort of like this: at 200 apm Terran can be used to 65% of its potential, while Zerg can be used to 85% of its potential. So two low level, equally skilled players play eachother, the Zerg is heavily favored. However when both races can be played to their full potential, Terran may very well be stronger.
There are so many things that Terran can work on. It has much, much, much more micro potential, much more potential for build variety and innovation. A Terran that plays 12 hours a day and has alot of talent can make use of all of the difficult to realize strengths of the race. A Zerg that plays 12 hours a day runs out of stuff to perfect/practice much sooner. The race is just much simpler in almost every aspect. Mid master Terrans cannot control their armies anywhere near the efficacy Taeja could, but most mid master Zergs can control their army very nearly as well as a pro player. Of course pro zergs are better at many other things, that's why they are pro's, but I think there is a much bigger gap between top level Terrans and just below top, than there is between top level Zergs and just below top, etc.
Does that make any sense?
To add to that:
I think for HOTS, Blizzard should be working on increasing the skill ceiling of Zerg and Protoss, and not in any way decreasing the ceiling for Terran.
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
I wish most people on TL or SC2 players in general would just realise this.
You could argue balance from a passion for the game kinda perspective but 9.9/10 are not. They are just complaining cause they've lost game as a particular race themselves.
On August 20 2012 01:57 Swift118 wrote: Why is everyone jumping on the MVP bandwagon? He's beating Zergs that are a level below himself. pretty sure he could use any number of strats/unit comps to beat those guys...
Well, because the other day people were whining, because some midclass, jetlaged Korean Code A and Code S Terrans were losing to the European Elite playing at home in some very close games, that could have gone either way. And now the stupid quit-pro-quo "I just saw tournament X" mentality of TL is flipping the other way around.
What?
Those same midclass Code-A/Code-S Terrans would stomp the living shit out of the European "Elite" (who aren't anywhere close to Elite) Z players under a more balanced patch. The fact that they are losing is a testament to the idiotic nature of the game; the Terran has to just either be unrealistically superior than his opponent (MVP isn't just a level ahead of Nerchio, he is at least two levels ahead of him) or has to pray the Zerg does something tremendously dumb (see Reality vs Symbol games; despite Symbol making massive blunders, he still could have easily won both games despite all of his dumb plays).
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
I respectfully disagree.
Talking about balance on lower levels of play is not absurd, but this whole idea of "it doesn't matter if the balance sucks for everyone except the top 10 people in the world" seems pretty absurd to me.
Optimally, the game would be perfectly balanced on all levels of play. All three races should take as much time and effort to learn, master, and advance to the next level with. Realistically, the game will never get to that point, but that is still what we should strive for. Having a game that is badly balanced for 99.9 % of all players ("the scrubhood") is bad game design, a bad marketing strategy for blizzard, and in the long run also bad for the highest level of play and e-sports in general. If people at low or mid-levels lose interest in striving to become better players because the balance at their level doesn't work, it will mean fewer potential progamers and a smaller scene overall.
Obviously that doesn't mean we should sacrifice pro-level game balance for, say, Silver League balance, but, again, there's no reason we shouldn't aim to have both.
Of course you aren't wrong when you say that if you just try to improve you will get better. Obviously you will, but if the amount of time and effort required to improve with one race is significantly higher than for the other races, more lower-level players of that race are going to lose interest and stop trying to reach higher.
No disrespect intended, but this whole "just reach arbitrary level x and then you can start talking about balance"-reasoning seems pretty useless since almost noone will ever reach the level you speak of, and because said level is, indeed, arbitrary. What constitutes awful play depends entirely on what you compare with. You could set the bar at Gold, Diamond or Masters (and quite a few people who use the same reasoning as you do just that) or even above the current pro level, and the argument would still be the same. Every player can always improve. Even pros make mistakes and have imperfections in their play. Maybe pro level players shouldn't discuss balance either, but instead just get back to practice and stop missing those injects and clumping up those marines?
So, again, no disrespect intended, but I don't think posting what is essentially a well-written and polite rephrasing of "stop QQ l2p" adds anything to this discussion. Sure, obviously not all losses on the ladder can be chalked down to balance imperfections, but there's still no reason why we shouldn't try to iron out as many of them as we can.
I dont get one thing about some terran whine is when zerg for example is up they suck both at top level and noob level. when terran is up they own at top level and they say suck at noob level. Just crazy to me maybe your race have higher skill cap or maybe they are not up you just change you shit up like zerg have been for 100 years.
On August 20 2012 01:57 Swift118 wrote: Why is everyone jumping on the MVP bandwagon? He's beating Zergs that are a level below himself. pretty sure he could use any number of strats/unit comps to beat those guys...
Well, because the other day people were whining, because some midclass, jetlaged Korean Code A and Code S Terrans were losing to the European Elite playing at home in some very close games, that could have gone either way. And now the stupid quit-pro-quo "I just saw tournament X" mentality of TL is flipping the other way around.
What?
Those same midclass Code-A/Code-S Terrans would stomp the living shit out of the European "Elite" (who aren't anywhere close to Elite) Z players under a more balanced patch. The fact that they are losing is a testament to the idiotic nature of the game; the Terran has to just either be unrealistically superior than his opponent (MVP isn't just a level ahead of Nerchio, he is at least two levels ahead of him) or has to pray the Zerg does something tremendously dumb (see Reality vs Symbol games; despite Symbol making massive blunders, he still could have easily won both games despite all of his dumb plays).
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
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.
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 tmings 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.
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.
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.
Why do you have to show up in every single balance thread and cry like no tomorrow? Do you even have time to play the game between all the complaining you do on the forums?
-It doesn't make any sense to talk about one race being easier, at all. -Really? Map size? Are you still beating that dead horse? Did you really prefer the game when it potentially ended in the first 5 alot of the time? -What does it matter that the game revolves around three bases and then becomes a game of trying to prevent the fourth? It basically just means that we will have longer and greater games. Also if you can't handle that the races play out differently and don't have exactly the same advantage at a given time in the game then this game is probably not for you.
You are so biased it just blows my mind reading your posts. Another thing I can't understand is how you have managed to stay unbanned for all this time...
The guy you quoted had a really nice and motivating post and you just had to smash through it with all your balance complaints. Even if you must complain, please make the effort to sound abit nice and preferably more objective as well. That would be really nice for those of us trying to read it
RaZorwire basically just showed you how you can disagree very respectfully and hence his post comes across much better and is much more pleasant to read
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
I wish more people would accept this statement. It would make them so much better.
Honestly, it's not just ravens. All the air casters in WOL are stupid units, for different reasons. Raven,Mothership,overseer, all screwy units. I miss Arbiter, Science vessel, Queen, they are just so much better.
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 01:57 Swift118 wrote: Why is everyone jumping on the MVP bandwagon? He's beating Zergs that are a level below himself. pretty sure he could use any number of strats/unit comps to beat those guys...
Well, because the other day people were whining, because some midclass, jetlaged Korean Code A and Code S Terrans were losing to the European Elite playing at home in some very close games, that could have gone either way. And now the stupid quit-pro-quo "I just saw tournament X" mentality of TL is flipping the other way around.
What?
Those same midclass Code-A/Code-S Terrans would stomp the living shit out of the European "Elite" (who aren't anywhere close to Elite) Z players under a more balanced patch. The fact that they are losing is a testament to the idiotic nature of the game; the Terran has to just either be unrealistically superior than his opponent (MVP isn't just a level ahead of Nerchio, he is at least two levels ahead of him) or has to pray the Zerg does something tremendously dumb (see Reality vs Symbol games; despite Symbol making massive blunders, he still could have easily won both games despite all of his dumb plays).
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
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.
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 tmings 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.
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.
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.
Why do you have to show up in every single balance thread and cry like no tomorrow? Do you even have time to play the game between all the complaining you do on the forums?
-It doesn't make any sense to talk about one race being easier, at all. -Really? Map size? Are you still beating that dead horse? Did you really prefer the game when it potentially ended in the first 5 alot of the time? -What does it matter that the game revolves around three bases and then becomes a game of trying to prevent the fourth? It basically just means that we will have longer and greater games. Also if you can't handle that the races play out differently and don't have exactly the same advantage at a given time in the game then this game is probably not for you.
You are so biased it just blows my mind reading your posts. Another thing I can't understand is how you have managed to stay unbanned for all this time...
The guy you quoted had a really nice and motivating post and you just had to smash through it with all your balance complaints. Even if you must complain, please make the effort to sound abit nice and preferably more objective as well. That would be really nice for those of us trying to read it
RaZorwire basically just showed you how you can disagree very respectfully and hence his post comes across much better and is much more pleasant to read
Because you don't get better against a race that gets free economic, map control, and vision advantages over you. That's not how proper RTS gameplay works. And if you have to play that way, you better have a card in your hand that actually is legitimately deadly, such as BW Mech that would literally smash any army on the planet if you were positioned properly. No one bitched or moaned and groaned in BW about Terran other than Idra, because everyone understood that if Terran was allowed to deathball up, they would go over and kill you and there's jack shit you can do about it (unless you properly flank and use casters to their full potential). This is especially true on alot of maps where there are narrow attack paths that really heavily favor Mech play in BW.
SC2, Terran not only is playing from behind from a tech, economy, and map control stand point, they have virtually no options that are better than Z's late game. So between not having any kind of all-ins, no deadly late game army, and virtually no ability to contest the map other than for a short window (Helion/Banshee, which gets shut down badly by 8 Mutas), Terran is left with basically no option but to virtually all-in every game or play very risky in some form or fashion.
Z players that tell Terran players to get better aren't doing themselves any favor, because they simply bitch moaned and groaned until they got all the changes they wanted and now they believe the game is completely fine. Any Z player that tells you to "get better" is pretty much being a jackass, whether he means to or not, because Z players did not magically become better; they got free buffs that gave them alot more options, and alot more tools. Alot of it was direct, but also indirect such as map size, free OL parking spots, etc. etc. If people didn't "bitch" back then, we'd still have 3 rax Speedreapers, terrible maps, etc. etc. and right now we're in a bad spot in the game where almost every TvZ and PvZ is watching both T and P make huge risky gambles that only pay off because Z's are being ultra greedy.
"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.
i would much rather have fungal be a slow rather than a trap, idk i just hate how fungals are such boring spells
but after seeing keen lose the game on daybreak to jrecco in tsl4, it just felt like its so easy for zerg to come back, and so hard for a terran to stop late game zerg
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.
Interesting fact, the 2 maps in TSL4 that are GSL maps have TvZ winrates of roughly 40% a piece.
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.
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.
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.
Are you a protoss player having a hard time taking a 3rd? PvZ Got you down with all those alien shenannigens? Have I got a deal for you! 2 base immortal sentry all in! It works for pros and it can work for you! Why even take a 3rd when it's hard to hold, just fucking KILL THEM!
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.
I assume by 'fixed' you mean 'completely fucking broken' Brood lord would be the new carrier without infestor support. Ultras would get destroyed by split bio. Are you not paying attention? The only thing that makes either of those tier 3 units work is fungals. And by fungals i mean FUNgals.
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.
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.
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 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
Your problem is that you assume that what is true at the highest levels of play (in your own words, 'slightly Zerg favored'), is true of all other levels of play. And of course, this 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.
Khanrnage, you are talking as if the suggestion is that infestors be done away with. The suggestion is that root becomes a very severe slow (mainly so that chain fungals are harder and your commands would not be cancelled).
I understand you are a zerg player frustred by getting immortal all in'ed everygame, which is another issue, but you are really overstating what would happen if the infestor was changed.
Right now, for zerg its FUN gals For Terran its FUCK gals It should be just plain Fungals.
Zerg units in BW were extremely cost efficient to those saying otherwise hence why they were always 40~50 supply below the opposing players.
And to this "reactionary" race argument, all races are "reactionary"! If I dont have map control and I dont have a lead advantage with me, whatever race I am I will be reactionary to what the opposing player do. The player with the map control and army advantage or whatnot will dictate the other player irrelevant of race.
Due to the given designs, T can often control the tempo of early game but eventually lose out this due to superior lategame compositions of P and Z. However this isn't the case all the time because its always up to the players to establish such control over the pace of the game to their liking.
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
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.
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 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
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.
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.
Agreed. We're all bad when it comes down to it ^_^
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.
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.
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.
Terrans will continue competing and winning because the only Terran players doing any sort of winning are beating Z players that are doing the worst shit ever. Symbol being a top Z is a complete embarrassment and should actually demonstrate to everyone that Z is OP as fuck in relation to TvZ. Symbol has some of the worst unit control, decision making, and macro I've seen from a pro Korean Z player (even worse unit control than Nestea, who doesn't exactly have the best micro, especially when compared to someone like DRG), and yet he is somehow consistently heralded as a top 3 Z player in Korea.
All you say is "ALL I EVER SEE IS PEOPLE WHINE AND BITCH" except that's exactly what YOU (yes you, I looked through your entire post history) and every other Z player were doing in the beta and early on in retail. So please, don't give me this shit that I should get better. It's stupid that a Terran player has to play this far behind. All you say is "deal with it." No; I'm not going to sit here and deal with it, because I actually want to play a remotely balanced match-up. As fucked up as TvP is in alot of ways, it's still better than this shitshow of TvZ where I'm watching Terran make huge gambles that should end in failure, but don't only because the opposing Z player is a completely oblivious as to what the Terran is doing despite the fact that he has all the vision and map control in the world.
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
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.
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.
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.
ravens should require 100energy to activate the bombs, other than that ravens are balanced, i think their pdd is really good and their auto cannons are okay, the spider bombs need a buff
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
Yes but not being pro level and believing you are better than your opponent is the biggest problem. To use your basketball analogy, its like trying to get past the defender and when he steals the ball from you, you blame him for having better shoes than you as the reason why you lost the ball. People have this strange belief that they are better than their opponents and when they lose they always blame imbalance instead of this things they did wrong.
There is no way you could find a replay where one player lost and didn't make some kind of big error either in macro / micro or decision making / scouting.
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.
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.
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.
Replying to a several paragraph with 4 sentences and essentially saying NO! is whats really stupid.
I love how all the zergs come out now and say "stop whining" but zerg was famous for most of the beta and early release for "zerg tears" lol and how terran is told to innovate after zerg bitched and moaned about countless styles of gameplay and blizz eventually caved and nerfed so zergs could just keep using the same builds over and over.
Hey, want some food for thought? Mothership is getting a snare in HotS. Picture this. Storm and Snare. Yeeeaaah baby. Fungal on roids.
@Iron_ in principle I agree with you. Fungals compelte dominance of phoenix play / VR harass is stupid, however balancing the 'snare' component would be really difficult. If the snare is too slow then effectly there is no difference. Even slowing as much as concussive shell you're still going to lose everything since SC2 is a game of seconds when it comes to large engagements.
I really hate how there are all these abilities that control the movement of your opponents units. It dumbs down the game and makes it boring to watch. Where is the fun in watching a battle where a player lost because half of his units were trapped or pulled away from the fight? It seems that the most epic battles these days are the maxed-out fights in TvP where both players have to have perfect spellcaster micro and the end result is a pretty even exchange. TvZ and PvZ lategame fights are usually "Oh shit here comes the zerg's BL/Infestor army better run away." Really kind of boring to watch frankly.
The raven buff is comparable to the warpprism buff. Blizzard -know- the raven is a useful support unit for lategame terran, they are just giving a slight buff to say "use it more!".
Personally I don't think a buff is even necessary, terran's will be able to recognise when their economy can support 2 or more starports for ravens. Usually after 3 bases and starting their 3/3 upgrades for which ever composition they are utilizing.
On August 20 2012 10:53 Kharnage wrote: Hey, want some food for thought? Mothership is getting a snare in HotS. Picture this. Storm and Snare. Yeeeaaah baby. Fungal on roids.
@Iron_ in principle I agree with you. Fungals compelte dominance of phoenix play / VR harass is stupid, however balancing the 'snare' component would be really difficult. If the snare is too slow then effectly there is no difference. Even slowing as much as concussive shell you're still going to lose everything since SC2 is a game of seconds when it comes to large engagements.
lol storm and snare, u dont have 15 mothership running around who will be able to snare indefinitely though
On August 20 2012 11:13 Raggamuffinoo wrote: The raven buff is comparable to the warpprism buff. Blizzard -know- the raven is a useful support unit for lategame terran, they are just giving a slight buff to say "use it more!".
Personally I don't think a buff is even necessary, terran's will be able to recognise when their economy can support 2 or more starports for ravens. Usually after 3 bases and starting their 3/3 upgrades for which ever composition they are utilizing.
Except the Raven isn't useful in its current iteration. 200 gas unit that requires 2-3 upgrades (150/150 each) to be considered useful. Hell, even the energy upgrade for the Raven doesn't let you use any abilities when it pops out of the starport. It just makes it so you only have to wait ~90s instead of ~130s for HSM, and ~45s instead of ~90s for PDDs. No matter how you compare it to other casters, it sucks balls with or without these buffs under test.
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.
Interesting fact, the 2 maps in TSL4 that are GSL maps have TvZ winrates of roughly 40% a piece.
Yeah, but consider that it takes into consideration all games since the patch. For a while after the patch, it was a lot worse that 40%, but, as I said, terrans are figuring out how to play the late game, and things are balancing out slowly.
On August 20 2012 11:13 Raggamuffinoo wrote: The raven buff is comparable to the warpprism buff. Blizzard -know- the raven is a useful support unit for lategame terran, they are just giving a slight buff to say "use it more!".
Personally I don't think a buff is even necessary, terran's will be able to recognise when their economy can support 2 or more starports for ravens. Usually after 3 bases and starting their 3/3 upgrades for which ever composition they are utilizing.
How is a 42% increase in health comparable to a 10% increase in movement speed?
The difference is that a warp prism comes out of a robo, something protoss all ready have from making obs and colossi. To make ravens require a starport with a tech lab.
So Terran have a building entirely dedicated to making ravens which costs 200/125. This cost is akin to zerg making a single macro hatchery to make a single unit from at a time, never using larva inject on it. You could imagine how it would be if zerg needed to create an entirely new hatchery just to make one unit at a time.
Ravens also take 60 seconds to build and an eternity more to have enough energy to do anything useful. All this to just help fight against broodlord infestor only.
If terran somehow survive the massive timing window that making ravens opens them up to, then he needs to rely on his opponent being stupid and creating a massive clump with his broodlords and corruptors.
Another point is that once you kill the broodlords and corruptors, what will the ravens do about an ultralisk switch? Absolutely nothing, lol.
On August 20 2012 11:13 Raggamuffinoo wrote: The raven buff is comparable to the warpprism buff. Blizzard -know- the raven is a useful support unit for lategame terran, they are just giving a slight buff to say "use it more!".
Personally I don't think a buff is even necessary, terran's will be able to recognise when their economy can support 2 or more starports for ravens. Usually after 3 bases and starting their 3/3 upgrades for which ever composition they are utilizing.
Except the Raven isn't useful in its current iteration. 200 gas unit that requires 2-3 upgrades (150/150 each) to be considered useful. Hell, even the energy upgrade for the Raven doesn't let you use any abilities when it pops out of the starport. It just makes it so you only have to wait ~90s instead of ~130s for HSM, and ~45s instead of ~90s for PDDs. No matter how you compare it to other casters, it sucks balls with or without these buffs under test.
I don't deny it's cost and time requirements, what I am saying is: a carefully planned transition to ravens during the mid/lategame is a very viable counter to zerg broodlord corruptor mix.
I would assume most terrans admit that they bank alot of gas after 3 bases and starting 3/3. As long as terran has been expanding or adding macro orbitals during the midgame, the transition to raven is very affordable and even helpful to burn off some gas for a supply efficient support unit.
How I percieve many of these "but you can't use it right away" arguments is a lack of patience in the lategame, all this talk of "having to kill zerg before..." gets players anxious.
Ravens are the opposite. They are the terran players' way of saying "let zerg come to me".
On August 20 2012 06:47 a_flayer wrote: Both major and keen have now played games vs jonnyrecco that they lost where they had a massive excess of gas and did not make any ravens.
Just saying.
You are supposed to spend your resources. All of them. This is a very basic concept in StarCraft.
The problem with ravens is the time it takes to get them out, even if you have the gas to do it, you need units to stay alive and keep some sort of presence in the game. You can't instantly turn 2k gas into 10 ravens, you'd need 5 minutes to do that. And what can a zerg do in 5 minutes late game? kill you, and take every expo on the map.
On August 20 2012 06:47 a_flayer wrote: Both major and keen have now played games vs jonnyrecco that they lost where they had a massive excess of gas and did not make any ravens.
Just saying.
You are supposed to spend your resources. All of them. This is a very basic concept in StarCraft.
The problem with ravens is the time it takes to get them out, even if you have the gas to do it, you need units to stay alive and keep some sort of presence in the game. You can't instantly turn 2k gas into 10 ravens, you'd need 5 minutes to do that. And what can a zerg do in 5 minutes late game? kill you, and take every expo on the map.
I heard Ultras take time to get out too, oh and Broodlords take time.. Need a spire+hive then a greater spire.. Then a WHOLE other unit and then after that you need to convert that unit into a broodlord.
If times the issue, make fucking time for it. This may be my last post here, I'll start getting angry at all of the stupid comments. The only true arguments in TvZ one could make are directly related to fungal and the Zerg remax Broodlord to Ultralisk, but even that has been proven to be counterable by Terran so I don't see it as much of a problem. This "ravens take so long to build" bullshit needs to get thrown right out the door.
On August 20 2012 11:13 Raggamuffinoo wrote: The raven buff is comparable to the warpprism buff. Blizzard -know- the raven is a useful support unit for lategame terran, they are just giving a slight buff to say "use it more!".
Personally I don't think a buff is even necessary, terran's will be able to recognise when their economy can support 2 or more starports for ravens. Usually after 3 bases and starting their 3/3 upgrades for which ever composition they are utilizing.
How is a 42% increase in health comparable to a 10% increase in movement speed?
The difference is that a warp prism comes out of a robo, something protoss all ready have from making obs and colossi. To make ravens require a starport with a tech lab.
So Terran have a building entirely dedicated to making ravens which costs 200/125. This cost is akin to zerg making a single macro hatchery to make a single unit from at a time, never using larva inject on it. You could imagine how it would be if zerg needed to create an entirely new hatchery just to make one unit at a time.
Ravens also take 60 seconds to build and an eternity more to have enough energy to do anything useful. All this to just help fight against broodlord infestor only.
If terran somehow survive the massive timing window that making ravens opens them up to, then he needs to rely on his opponent being stupid and creating a massive clump with his broodlords and corruptors.
Another point is that once you kill the broodlords and corruptors, what will the ravens do about an ultralisk switch? Absolutely nothing, lol.
It is comparable in regard to it being a subtle message from Blizzard saying "try to use this more often".
I do not agree with your argument about having to dedicate starports to ravens, with an aggressively expanding terran midgame, you should have ample resources to afford 2 or more starports.
Also, terran have the options to buy time. Drops are quite efficient for cost, tanks, bunkers and planetary fortresses with repair also make it a nightmare for zerg to want to commit across the map.
theorycraft
In regards to zerg splitting, PDD + upgraded vikings give terran the advantage in the air. So long as you are able to avoid gamechanging fungals, you can trade vikings for corruptors all day.
If zerg switches to ultras, you already have the infrastructure to deal with it and zerg gives up air superiority so you can go BC or banshee for a clean win.
I wish we could just get irradiate back to replace HSM. Terran's only aoe spell is HSM which is a projectile costs a lot and takes time blah blah etc. Protoss has storm which is instant and DOT zerg's spell is also instant DOT and root.
replacing hsm with irradiate would make it more in line with the other races/useful overall/easier to balance and also more interesting to watch in general (mass hsm is like KABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMM, well, game over).
@Avilo, TvZ is fine. If you spent all that time practising instead of whining on the internet. You might actually become slightly better. Mvp makes good use of the raven and doesn't complain about TvZ Balance so your entire post is irrelevant.
On August 20 2012 11:13 Raggamuffinoo wrote: The raven buff is comparable to the warpprism buff. Blizzard -know- the raven is a useful support unit for lategame terran, they are just giving a slight buff to say "use it more!".
Personally I don't think a buff is even necessary, terran's will be able to recognise when their economy can support 2 or more starports for ravens. Usually after 3 bases and starting their 3/3 upgrades for which ever composition they are utilizing.
How is a 42% increase in health comparable to a 10% increase in movement speed?
The difference is that a warp prism comes out of a robo, something protoss all ready have from making obs and colossi. To make ravens require a starport with a tech lab.
So Terran have a building entirely dedicated to making ravens which costs 200/125. This cost is akin to zerg making a single macro hatchery to make a single unit from at a time, never using larva inject on it. You could imagine how it would be if zerg needed to create an entirely new hatchery just to make one unit at a time.
Ravens also take 60 seconds to build and an eternity more to have enough energy to do anything useful. All this to just help fight against broodlord infestor only.
If terran somehow survive the massive timing window that making ravens opens them up to, then he needs to rely on his opponent being stupid and creating a massive clump with his broodlords and corruptors.
Another point is that once you kill the broodlords and corruptors, what will the ravens do about an ultralisk switch? Absolutely nothing, lol.
It is comparable in regard to it being a subtle message from Blizzard saying "try to use this more often".
I do not agree with your argument about having to dedicate starports to ravens, with an aggressively expanding terran midgame, you should have ample resources to afford 2 or more starports.
Also, terran have the options to buy time. Drops are quite efficient for cost, tanks, bunkers and planetary fortresses with repair also make it a nightmare for zerg to want to commit across the map.
theorycraft
In regards to zerg splitting, PDD + upgraded vikings give terran the advantage in the air. So long as you are able to avoid gamechanging fungals, you can trade vikings for corruptors all day.
If zerg switches to ultras, you already have the infrastructure to deal with it and zerg gives up air superiority so you can go BC or banshee for a clean win.
/theorycraft
42% increase in health isn't subtle. Do you even know what that word means?
I'm giving solid numbers and actual events. I.e building ravens opens you up for a massive timing window. Ravens take 60 seconds to build from infrastructure that costs more than a hatchery.
While you are here spewing your stupidity and claiming everything that disagrees with you is theory crafting. Are you dense?
On August 20 2012 12:12 BgSBendeR wrote: @Avilo, TvZ is fine. If you spent all that time practising instead of whining on the internet. You might actually become slightly better. Mvp makes good use of the raven and doesn't complain about TvZ Balance so your entire post is irrelevant.
Koreans are actually horribly bad balance whiners. They just still practice and figure out ways to win anyway. Western players seem content to wait on Blizzard to fix things while throwing their hands up in the air and claiming OP.
On August 20 2012 12:12 BgSBendeR wrote: @Avilo, TvZ is fine. If you spent all that time practising instead of whining on the internet. You might actually become slightly better. Mvp makes good use of the raven and doesn't complain about TvZ Balance so your entire post is irrelevant.
Lack of whining from the best SC2 player to date, when he never really says anything in the first place, doesn't say much.
TvZ isn't broken. Terran is just UP. We have no late game, and therein lies the problem. This buff does not help the late game. Ravens are still not worth what they cost.
If Zerg is going to be uncontested, make sure Terran has a viable late game. That solves the TvP issue as well.
On August 20 2012 12:12 BgSBendeR wrote: @Avilo, TvZ is fine. If you spent all that time practising instead of whining on the internet. You might actually become slightly better. Mvp makes good use of the raven and doesn't complain about TvZ Balance so your entire post is irrelevant.
Lack of whining from the best SC2 player to date, when he never really says anything in the first place, doesn't say much.
TvZ isn't broken. Terran is just UP. We have no late game, and therein lies the problem. This buff does not help the late game. Ravens are still not worth what they cost.
If Zerg is going to be uncontested, make sure Terran has a viable late game. That solves the TvP issue as well.
I don't think it's because Terran doesn't have a late game at all, it's because Zerg gets their ultimate t3 army so much easier and earlier than we do. Typical timing for infestor/corruptor/BL timing now is what 17:00ish minutes? Assuming high level play of course. Now imagine if Terran could realistically have a mass bc/raven/viking composition at the 17:00 minute mark. It would even out the playing field in the late game. So maybe the problem is Zerg just needs to somehow get their late game composition in the actual late game like Terran does.
On August 20 2012 12:12 BgSBendeR wrote: @Avilo, TvZ is fine. If you spent all that time practising instead of whining on the internet. You might actually become slightly better. Mvp makes good use of the raven and doesn't complain about TvZ Balance so your entire post is irrelevant.
Lack of whining from the best SC2 player to date, when he never really says anything in the first place, doesn't say much.
TvZ isn't broken. Terran is just UP. We have no late game, and therein lies the problem. This buff does not help the late game. Ravens are still not worth what they cost.
If Zerg is going to be uncontested, make sure Terran has a viable late game. That solves the TvP issue as well.
Terran has no late game? What in the actual fuck. Terran actually has the best late game army of the 3 races. Mvp beats zerg late game. so yes You guys are whining for no reason. Start actually practising and maybe you won't be as bad.
1) the timing of ravens should be looked at in context as it takes zerg 200 seconds for greater spire to complete (then assuming they have corrupters ready) another 34 seconds. If they dont have corruptors out then it will take 74 seconds assuming corruptor production begins when the greater spire is done. The alsso has to stockpile gas in order to make broodlords or have a very high rate of gas income.
2) probly could be controlled by terran map presense and contesting the space this would also force the zerg to make units as they will not be able to make a substantial creep spread unless they remove the units that you have out on the map from the immediate vicinity. This makes map presence and control more important with the zerg spreading the creep while the terran seeks to deny it.
3) The composition you describe is dependant on 2 factors creep spread (an infestor cant out run a HSM) and gas income. (Additionally this composition is good when kept togethor and some drops could be part of late game tactics.) Both of these two factors will be decided in the mid game as the zeerg needs to able to take enough expansions to afford such a gas heavy composition and spread creep in order to maximise its effectivness.
The main issue as i see it is that terrans do not have a plan for the late game other then whats the zerg doing and how do i deal with it. Rather than saying what can i do to reduce its effecice or conversly have enough economy to win a battle of attrition.
Finally i dont accept the idea that because of clumping of units + fungal growth = overpowered especially when its not that hard to declump your units as well as using more than one control group for vikings (radical concept).
On August 20 2012 12:12 BgSBendeR wrote: @Avilo, TvZ is fine. If you spent all that time practising instead of whining on the internet. You might actually become slightly better. Mvp makes good use of the raven and doesn't complain about TvZ Balance so your entire post is irrelevant.
Lack of whining from the best SC2 player to date, when he never really says anything in the first place, doesn't say much.
TvZ isn't broken. Terran is just UP. We have no late game, and therein lies the problem. This buff does not help the late game. Ravens are still not worth what they cost.
If Zerg is going to be uncontested, make sure Terran has a viable late game. That solves the TvP issue as well.
I don't think it's because Terran doesn't have a late game at all, it's because Zerg gets their ultimate t3 army so much easier and earlier than we do. Typical timing for infestor/corruptor/BL timing now is what 17:00ish minutes? Assuming high level play of course. Now imagine if Terran could realistically have a mass bc/raven/viking composition at the 17:00 minute mark. It would even out the playing field in the late game. So maybe the problem is Zerg just needs to somehow get their late game composition in the actual late game like Terran does.
I agree. One of the better posts of the last 15 or so pages.
On August 20 2012 11:13 Raggamuffinoo wrote: The raven buff is comparable to the warpprism buff. Blizzard -know- the raven is a useful support unit for lategame terran, they are just giving a slight buff to say "use it more!".
Personally I don't think a buff is even necessary, terran's will be able to recognise when their economy can support 2 or more starports for ravens. Usually after 3 bases and starting their 3/3 upgrades for which ever composition they are utilizing.
How is a 42% increase in health comparable to a 10% increase in movement speed?
The difference is that a warp prism comes out of a robo, something protoss all ready have from making obs and colossi. To make ravens require a starport with a tech lab.
So Terran have a building entirely dedicated to making ravens which costs 200/125. This cost is akin to zerg making a single macro hatchery to make a single unit from at a time, never using larva inject on it. You could imagine how it would be if zerg needed to create an entirely new hatchery just to make one unit at a time.
Ravens also take 60 seconds to build and an eternity more to have enough energy to do anything useful. All this to just help fight against broodlord infestor only.
If terran somehow survive the massive timing window that making ravens opens them up to, then he needs to rely on his opponent being stupid and creating a massive clump with his broodlords and corruptors.
Another point is that once you kill the broodlords and corruptors, what will the ravens do about an ultralisk switch? Absolutely nothing, lol.
It is comparable in regard to it being a subtle message from Blizzard saying "try to use this more often".
I do not agree with your argument about having to dedicate starports to ravens, with an aggressively expanding terran midgame, you should have ample resources to afford 2 or more starports.
Also, terran have the options to buy time. Drops are quite efficient for cost, tanks, bunkers and planetary fortresses with repair also make it a nightmare for zerg to want to commit across the map.
theorycraft
In regards to zerg splitting, PDD + upgraded vikings give terran the advantage in the air. So long as you are able to avoid gamechanging fungals, you can trade vikings for corruptors all day.
If zerg switches to ultras, you already have the infrastructure to deal with it and zerg gives up air superiority so you can go BC or banshee for a clean win.
/theorycraft
42% increase in health isn't subtle. Do you even know what that word means?
I'm giving solid numbers and actual events. I.e building ravens opens you up for a massive timing window. Ravens take 60 seconds to build from infrastructure that costs more than a hatchery.
While you are here spewing your stupidity and claiming everything that disagrees with you is theory crafting. Are you dense?
I am engaging in discussion, not judging anyones opinion. If you feel the need to insult me, it shows your lack of a well reasoned argument. Yes, ravens are expensive. Yes, they take a long time to build. Are they worth it? Much like any spell caster, it is up to the player to use them effectively.
the theorycraft tags were referring to my own words, no one elses.
On August 20 2012 12:12 BgSBendeR wrote: @Avilo, TvZ is fine. If you spent all that time practising instead of whining on the internet. You might actually become slightly better. Mvp makes good use of the raven and doesn't complain about TvZ Balance so your entire post is irrelevant.
Lack of whining from the best SC2 player to date, when he never really says anything in the first place, doesn't say much.
TvZ isn't broken. Terran is just UP. We have no late game, and therein lies the problem. This buff does not help the late game. Ravens are still not worth what they cost.
If Zerg is going to be uncontested, make sure Terran has a viable late game. That solves the TvP issue as well.
Terran has no late game? What in the actual fuck. Terran actually has the best late game army of the 3 races. Mvp beats zerg late game. so yes You guys are whining for no reason. Start actually practising and maybe you won't be as bad.
Fruitdealer won the first GSL. Why was reaper and medivac nerfed right after? Fruitdealer beat Terran players so why didn't Zerg players just do what he did? Maybe they should have just practiced more so they wouldn't be so bad.
You see how using a small sample size to make your point makes you ignorant? When the majority of Terran players (pros included) haven an issue with something it should be addressed. You can't just sit here and be like "hey one guy beat it, wth is everyone else complaining about." And yes, Mvp does lose to late game zerg too. He played late game TvZ beautifully at IEM, yet players he is significantly better than (I will give credit to Vortix and Nerchio, but they are not even close to Mvp's level) gave him a much harder time than he should have.
On August 20 2012 12:12 BgSBendeR wrote: @Avilo, TvZ is fine. If you spent all that time practising instead of whining on the internet. You might actually become slightly better. Mvp makes good use of the raven and doesn't complain about TvZ Balance so your entire post is irrelevant.
Lack of whining from the best SC2 player to date, when he never really says anything in the first place, doesn't say much.
TvZ isn't broken. Terran is just UP. We have no late game, and therein lies the problem. This buff does not help the late game. Ravens are still not worth what they cost.
If Zerg is going to be uncontested, make sure Terran has a viable late game. That solves the TvP issue as well.
I don't think it's because Terran doesn't have a late game at all, it's because Zerg gets their ultimate t3 army so much easier and earlier than we do. Typical timing for infestor/corruptor/BL timing now is what 17:00ish minutes? Assuming high level play of course. Now imagine if Terran could realistically have a mass bc/raven/viking composition at the 17:00 minute mark. It would even out the playing field in the late game. So maybe the problem is Zerg just needs to somehow get their late game composition in the actual late game like Terran does.
I agree. One of the better posts of the last 15 or so pages.
Yeah... this makes so much sense. It feels like Zergs get their "late-game" composition in the mid-game atm'.
On August 20 2012 12:12 BgSBendeR wrote: @Avilo, TvZ is fine. If you spent all that time practising instead of whining on the internet. You might actually become slightly better. Mvp makes good use of the raven and doesn't complain about TvZ Balance so your entire post is irrelevant.
Lack of whining from the best SC2 player to date, when he never really says anything in the first place, doesn't say much.
TvZ isn't broken. Terran is just UP. We have no late game, and therein lies the problem. This buff does not help the late game. Ravens are still not worth what they cost.
If Zerg is going to be uncontested, make sure Terran has a viable late game. That solves the TvP issue as well.
Terran has no late game? What in the actual fuck. Terran actually has the best late game army of the 3 races. Mvp beats zerg late game. so yes You guys are whining for no reason. Start actually practising and maybe you won't be as bad.
Fruitdealer won the first GSL. Why was reaper and medivac nerfed right after? Fruitdealer beat Terran players so why didn't Zerg players just do what he did? Maybe they should have just practiced more so they wouldn't be so bad.
You see how using a small sample size to make your point makes you ignorant? When the majority of Terran players (pros included) haven an issue with something it should be addressed. You can't just sit here and be like "hey one guy beat it, wth is everyone else complaining about." And yes, Mvp does lose to late game zerg too. He played late game TvZ beautifully at IEM, yet players he is significantly better than (I will give credit to Vortix and Nerchio, but they are not even close to Mvp's level) gave him a much harder time than he should have.
If one player is doing it, It simply means that it's possible. Perfection comes from practice. Mvp did not get to where he is today by whining on the internet with every patch.
On August 20 2012 12:12 BgSBendeR wrote: @Avilo, TvZ is fine. If you spent all that time practising instead of whining on the internet. You might actually become slightly better. Mvp makes good use of the raven and doesn't complain about TvZ Balance so your entire post is irrelevant.
Lack of whining from the best SC2 player to date, when he never really says anything in the first place, doesn't say much.
TvZ isn't broken. Terran is just UP. We have no late game, and therein lies the problem. This buff does not help the late game. Ravens are still not worth what they cost.
If Zerg is going to be uncontested, make sure Terran has a viable late game. That solves the TvP issue as well.
Terran has no late game? What in the actual fuck. Terran actually has the best late game army of the 3 races. Mvp beats zerg late game. so yes You guys are whining for no reason. Start actually practising and maybe you won't be as bad.
Fruitdealer won the first GSL. Why was reaper and medivac nerfed right after? Fruitdealer beat Terran players so why didn't Zerg players just do what he did? Maybe they should have just practiced more so they wouldn't be so bad.
You see how using a small sample size to make your point makes you ignorant? When the majority of Terran players (pros included) haven an issue with something it should be addressed. You can't just sit here and be like "hey one guy beat it, wth is everyone else complaining about." And yes, Mvp does lose to late game zerg too. He played late game TvZ beautifully at IEM, yet players he is significantly better than (I will give credit to Vortix and Nerchio, but they are not even close to Mvp's level) gave him a much harder time than he should have.
If one player is doing it, It simply means that it's possible. Perfection comes from practice. Mvp did not get to where he is today by whining on the internet with every patch.
*Edit typo.
Right, he only came out and said he was getting destroyed in every TvZ practice game in an interview shortly after the patch.
And your point is still absolutely terrible. TvZ was imbalanced in 2010 (mostly due to horrible maps) and Fruitdealer and Nestea went back to back in GSL, proving Zergs could win. Does that mean Zergs needed to shut up and get better at playing on Steppes/Jungle Basin/Lost Temple? Of course not. One player performing exceptionally well proves nothing, especially when the player in question is the best player in the history of SC2 hands down playing foreigner Zergs.
On August 20 2012 12:12 BgSBendeR wrote: @Avilo, TvZ is fine. If you spent all that time practising instead of whining on the internet. You might actually become slightly better. Mvp makes good use of the raven and doesn't complain about TvZ Balance so your entire post is irrelevant.
Lack of whining from the best SC2 player to date, when he never really says anything in the first place, doesn't say much.
TvZ isn't broken. Terran is just UP. We have no late game, and therein lies the problem. This buff does not help the late game. Ravens are still not worth what they cost.
If Zerg is going to be uncontested, make sure Terran has a viable late game. That solves the TvP issue as well.
Terran has no late game? What in the actual fuck. Terran actually has the best late game army of the 3 races. Mvp beats zerg late game. so yes You guys are whining for no reason. Start actually practising and maybe you won't be as bad.
Fruitdealer won the first GSL. Why was reaper and medivac nerfed right after? Fruitdealer beat Terran players so why didn't Zerg players just do what he did? Maybe they should have just practiced more so they wouldn't be so bad.
You see how using a small sample size to make your point makes you ignorant? When the majority of Terran players (pros included) haven an issue with something it should be addressed. You can't just sit here and be like "hey one guy beat it, wth is everyone else complaining about." And yes, Mvp does lose to late game zerg too. He played late game TvZ beautifully at IEM, yet players he is significantly better than (I will give credit to Vortix and Nerchio, but they are not even close to Mvp's level) gave him a much harder time than he should have.
If one player is doing it, It simply means that it's possible. Perfection comes from practice. Mvp did not get to where he is today by whining on the internet with every patch.
*Edit typo.
You completely ignored the fact that Zerg players whined and moaned even though they were winning so don't sit here and say it's wrong for Terran to do the same. We learned best from our Zerg friends that whining to Blizzard will end up making the game easier for you
And btw, if guys like drewbie, Cloud, TLO (idk if he even plays Terran anymore) come out and start giving Nestea, Violet, DRG, etc a hard time every Zerg player would have something to say about it.
On August 20 2012 11:13 Raggamuffinoo wrote: The raven buff is comparable to the warpprism buff. Blizzard -know- the raven is a useful support unit for lategame terran, they are just giving a slight buff to say "use it more!".
Personally I don't think a buff is even necessary, terran's will be able to recognise when their economy can support 2 or more starports for ravens. Usually after 3 bases and starting their 3/3 upgrades for which ever composition they are utilizing.
How is a 42% increase in health comparable to a 10% increase in movement speed?
The difference is that a warp prism comes out of a robo, something protoss all ready have from making obs and colossi. To make ravens require a starport with a tech lab.
So Terran have a building entirely dedicated to making ravens which costs 200/125. This cost is akin to zerg making a single macro hatchery to make a single unit from at a time, never using larva inject on it. You could imagine how it would be if zerg needed to create an entirely new hatchery just to make one unit at a time.
Ravens also take 60 seconds to build and an eternity more to have enough energy to do anything useful. All this to just help fight against broodlord infestor only.
If terran somehow survive the massive timing window that making ravens opens them up to, then he needs to rely on his opponent being stupid and creating a massive clump with his broodlords and corruptors.
Another point is that once you kill the broodlords and corruptors, what will the ravens do about an ultralisk switch? Absolutely nothing, lol.
It is comparable in regard to it being a subtle message from Blizzard saying "try to use this more often".
I do not agree with your argument about having to dedicate starports to ravens, with an aggressively expanding terran midgame, you should have ample resources to afford 2 or more starports.
Also, terran have the options to buy time. Drops are quite efficient for cost, tanks, bunkers and planetary fortresses with repair also make it a nightmare for zerg to want to commit across the map.
theorycraft
In regards to zerg splitting, PDD + upgraded vikings give terran the advantage in the air. So long as you are able to avoid gamechanging fungals, you can trade vikings for corruptors all day.
If zerg switches to ultras, you already have the infrastructure to deal with it and zerg gives up air superiority so you can go BC or banshee for a clean win.
/theorycraft
42% increase in health isn't subtle. Do you even know what that word means?
I'm giving solid numbers and actual events. I.e building ravens opens you up for a massive timing window. Ravens take 60 seconds to build from infrastructure that costs more than a hatchery.
While you are here spewing your stupidity and claiming everything that disagrees with you is theory crafting. Are you dense?
I am engaging in discussion, not judging anyones opinion. If you feel the need to insult me, it shows your lack of a well reasoned argument. Yes, ravens are expensive. Yes, they take a long time to build. Are they worth it? Much like any spell caster, it is up to the player to use them effectively.
the theorycraft tags were referring to my own words, no one elses.
With regards to your theory crafting...
Ultra switch will kill you if you commit to ravens as they do NOTHING to ultras (and won't have any energy anyway) and even though you have the infrastructure to deal with ultras, you won't have the supply (nor the time to rebuild either) considering you actually have to know which T3 he's building by seeing it before you can build the units to counter it.
BC is unrealistic as they take the timespan of 3 games to build and they get shut down easily once zerg decides they want the air back.
IMO fungal range should be decreased by 1 or 2. The problem with TvZ (and PvZ from what I've heard) is that fungal >>>>> everything else and makes zergs other units exponentially stronger (banelings, broodlords, etc.) by locking down units.
The only problem I could see with decreasing fungal range would be that tanks MIGHT POSSIBLY become too strong in TvZ. But it would be worth testing out imo...
I can see the buff being useful for Mech Terrans. As we know, the general way to play mech is: reactor hellions banshee (with or without cloak) then mech-ing hard with expo etc
We also know that with the queen buff, the hellions will do less damage and less likely to kill off creep. The main problem is banshee. because now zerg uses more queens and banshees are kind of useless when there are that much queens around. But with a raven, banshee could be used for cleaning up creep just like the void ray+obs in PvZ
Right now the problem with TvZ is how fast Z can get to the hive tech, and terrans are delaying it previously via reactor hellion opening to now bunker rush with hellion support. From what I see, Mech is as strong if not stronger than the Z deathball, however it takes longer to build and remax and so it is extremely map specific.
On August 20 2012 11:13 Raggamuffinoo wrote: The raven buff is comparable to the warpprism buff. Blizzard -know- the raven is a useful support unit for lategame terran, they are just giving a slight buff to say "use it more!".
Personally I don't think a buff is even necessary, terran's will be able to recognise when their economy can support 2 or more starports for ravens. Usually after 3 bases and starting their 3/3 upgrades for which ever composition they are utilizing.
How is a 42% increase in health comparable to a 10% increase in movement speed?
The difference is that a warp prism comes out of a robo, something protoss all ready have from making obs and colossi. To make ravens require a starport with a tech lab.
So Terran have a building entirely dedicated to making ravens which costs 200/125. This cost is akin to zerg making a single macro hatchery to make a single unit from at a time, never using larva inject on it. You could imagine how it would be if zerg needed to create an entirely new hatchery just to make one unit at a time.
Ravens also take 60 seconds to build and an eternity more to have enough energy to do anything useful. All this to just help fight against broodlord infestor only.
If terran somehow survive the massive timing window that making ravens opens them up to, then he needs to rely on his opponent being stupid and creating a massive clump with his broodlords and corruptors.
Another point is that once you kill the broodlords and corruptors, what will the ravens do about an ultralisk switch? Absolutely nothing, lol.
It is comparable in regard to it being a subtle message from Blizzard saying "try to use this more often".
I do not agree with your argument about having to dedicate starports to ravens, with an aggressively expanding terran midgame, you should have ample resources to afford 2 or more starports.
Also, terran have the options to buy time. Drops are quite efficient for cost, tanks, bunkers and planetary fortresses with repair also make it a nightmare for zerg to want to commit across the map.
theorycraft
In regards to zerg splitting, PDD + upgraded vikings give terran the advantage in the air. So long as you are able to avoid gamechanging fungals, you can trade vikings for corruptors all day.
If zerg switches to ultras, you already have the infrastructure to deal with it and zerg gives up air superiority so you can go BC or banshee for a clean win.
/theorycraft
42% increase in health isn't subtle. Do you even know what that word means?
I'm giving solid numbers and actual events. I.e building ravens opens you up for a massive timing window. Ravens take 60 seconds to build from infrastructure that costs more than a hatchery.
While you are here spewing your stupidity and claiming everything that disagrees with you is theory crafting. Are you dense?
I am engaging in discussion, not judging anyones opinion. If you feel the need to insult me, it shows your lack of a well reasoned argument. Yes, ravens are expensive. Yes, they take a long time to build. Are they worth it? Much like any spell caster, it is up to the player to use them effectively.
the theorycraft tags were referring to my own words, no one elses.
With regards to your theory crafting...
Ultra switch will kill you if you commit to ravens as they do NOTHING to ultras (and won't have any energy anyway) and even though you have the infrastructure to deal with ultras, you won't have the supply (nor the time to rebuild either) considering you actually have to know which T3 he's building by seeing it before you can build the units to counter it.
BC is unrealistic as they take the timespan of 3 games to build and they get shut down easily once zerg decides they want the air back.
IMO fungal range should be decreased by 1 or 2. The problem with TvZ (and PvZ from what I've heard) is that fungal >>>>> everything else and makes zergs other units exponentially stronger (banelings, broodlords, etc.) by locking down units.
The only problem I could see with decreasing fungal range would be that tanks MIGHT POSSIBLY become too strong in TvZ. But it would be worth testing out imo...
You should always have a core army for ravens to support, they are a support unit afterall.
Every occasion MVP started raven production he would burn minerals on orbitals, having enough supply is not a problem once you sac 30+ scvs.
BC is just an option.
The infestor is a hot topic at the moment, with news of balance discussion with David Kim at GamesCom (WhiteRa posted on facebook). I believe infestors will recieve a tweak in the next balance patch, be it increased energy requirement per infested terran OR some kind of adjustment to the root effect of fungal.
I do not disagree that ravens are somewhat awkward to fit into a build but, with them only recently being explored in high level matches, I have high hopes for the future of terran lategame.
As someone who doesn't know shit about tvz from a player perspective, could i ask, what is wrong with tvz atm if you play it the same way mvp does ? Is there a "fix" needed ? isn't the speed buff enough to simply allow that MVP style to work perfectly ( since ravens will be faster than infestors... right ?, i don't remember what the speed increase was ;p ).
On August 20 2012 14:17 Aterons_toss wrote: As someone who doesn't know shit about tvz from a player perspective, could i ask, what is wrong with tvz atm if you play it the same way mvp does ? Is there a "fix" needed ? isn't the speed buff enough to simply allow that MVP style to work perfectly ( since ravens will be faster than infestors... right ?, i don't remember what the speed increase was ;p ).
Mvp's Raven transitions in IEM involved adding 2 Starports with 2 tech labs in the mid game, getting Raven starting energy and seeker missile upgrades and slowly building up his Raven count 2 at a time while still playing with his mid game army. This allowed him to have Ravens ready for the late game as they were building up for a while, I think It's definitely something worth looking into. ( Watch Mvp vs Nerchio on Atlantis Spaceship as a prime example of this )
I don't think adding 2 ravens at a time while still producing your marine/marauder/medivac/tank is that punishable at all if you know how to defend properly. It would need to be tested in more than one tournament to see if it can consistently work though.
I feel I've figured out TvZ recently.. Usually when I lose its because I make a mistake w/ an engagement, or I let them get their brood/infestor combo without being prepared. I feel its rather even, BUT TvP is a different story...
Ravens is horrible to manage and this slight will make them easier to control, how does that adress the problem?
Easier to control, easier to dodge fungals or get away. Does this adress the issue you see in a real way that doesn't make T get 100% win rate? Yes, it does.
On August 20 2012 11:56 KawaiiRice wrote: I wish we could just get irradiate back to replace HSM. Terran's only aoe spell is HSM which is a projectile costs a lot and takes time blah blah etc. Protoss has storm which is instant and DOT zerg's spell is also instant DOT and root.
replacing hsm with irradiate would make it more in line with the other races/useful overall/easier to balance and also more interesting to watch in general (mass hsm is like KABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMM, well, game over).
The problem with zerg is the infestor. It a "one unit to kill them all", which is problematic. Fungal Growth does an insane amount of damage and keeps the unit in place. Infested Terran spell suddenly increases the zerg army size by a ton.
Edit: Giving Terran their 60 damage siege TANKS back would solve a lot of problems. I don't think zerg would still be able to do that double FE stuff.
We had irradiate. It was renamed Snipe (spell: Choose target zerg unit. End it's life) with the exception that it wasn't aoe and instead of having a set duration the actual duration was 'as fast as you could shift click'. We all know what happened to that.
And Kawaii is totally wrong, Ghosts have hte single most damaging ability in the game: Launch Nuclear Missile! Jeez do you even play Terran at a high level?
On August 20 2012 06:32 InSpiReZerG wrote: ^lmfao. Every, EVERY hellion runby ive ever seen has gotten more than enough drone kills to pay for itself. next point plz.
Hm. You must not be watching good zergs, as it is quite easy with range 5 queens to deny all hellion runbys if the zerg is not absolutely awful. Perhaps you only watch your own games?
I think the queen changes have very little to do with stopping hellion run by's. It's more of the fact that at the time run by's would occur, there are 4 queens that you can position along with 2 evolution chambers to completely block out hellion harass
I still think it has to do with the fact that there is little tradeoff with going for a mass queen defensive opening. So much larvae can be dedicated for upfront drone production or recovery drone production while still remaining safe at every stage of the game. It's not like getting extra queens reduce the early or mid game scouting of Zerg, the economy of Zerg, or the tech options of Zerg. It's a no brainer to do.
Even before the buff, you could have gone 4 queen and blocked off the entrance. With good play, you would perfectly counter any hellion opening, but you would have to invest in a few lings or roaches as well. That made it very risky to do blind, and with slower overlords, it required a bit of gambling.
Very good post, the main thing is that zergs these days do not need to gamble anymore, they can defend pretty much everything, while if Terran wants to get greedy, we are extremely susceptible to early attacks or baneling busts
On August 20 2012 17:00 iaguz wrote: We had irradiate. It was renamed Snipe (spell: Choose target zerg unit. End it's life) with the exception that it wasn't aoe and instead of having a set duration the actual duration was 'as fast as you could shift click'. We all know what happened to that.
And Kawaii is totally wrong, Ghosts have hte single most damaging ability in the game: Launch Nuclear Missile! Jeez do you even play Terran at a high level?
Can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not with the part of Nukes~
Look basically, Tanks, were nerfed~ Ghost Snipe, nerfed~
On August 20 2012 17:00 iaguz wrote: We had irradiate. It was renamed Snipe (spell: Choose target zerg unit. End it's life) with the exception that it wasn't aoe and instead of having a set duration the actual duration was 'as fast as you could shift click'. We all know what happened to that.
And Kawaii is totally wrong, Ghosts have hte single most damaging ability in the game: Launch Nuclear Missile! Jeez do you even play Terran at a high level?
Well, im pretty sure snipe was nerfed because it dealt with both ultra and broods at the same time. Yet fungal continues to be good against both air and ground... Double standards from blizzard is mindblowing.
I find that HSM is flawed mainly because you often will blow up your own guys due to its range. Acceleration has something to do with also, when I cast HSM I usually - shift run backwards away from the aoe but ravens still move forward after they cast it before they turn around and turning around (acceleration) is slow and clunky. Also the units you cast it on move towards you. This means any subsequent ravens that move in to cast HSM become more and more likely to get caught in the blast radius.
I would happily sacrifice some of the damage or aoe for an increase in range.
Avilo is right, but in my opinion it is a good change, because if the raven gets a little bit faster you can micro it easier and that's good for the late-late-game in TvZ, but the patch won't do anything more than that.
On August 20 2012 14:17 Aterons_toss wrote: As someone who doesn't know shit about tvz from a player perspective, could i ask, what is wrong with tvz atm if you play it the same way mvp does ? Is there a "fix" needed ? isn't the speed buff enough to simply allow that MVP style to work perfectly ( since ravens will be faster than infestors... right ?, i don't remember what the speed increase was ;p ).
not all map allow to turtle like mvp did on metropolis.
On August 20 2012 04:05 Ramiz1989 wrote: Talking about map hack, what about sensor towers? Oh right, those things are really really expensive...
Apples to apples, oranges to oranges please.
Creep costs neither minerals nor gas. Creep self-replicates in any direction the player wishes. Creep requires detection to eliminate. Creep provides a speed buff to most units (some exceptions). Terran and Protoss cannot build next to a creep tumor. Creep (or rather the tumors) allow for the vision of the exact unit type over it (save for cloaked). Creep does not appear on the minimap without first scouting it with a unit.
VS:
The sensor tower does not do any of the above.
They are not the same, not even close.
Best, Niteshade
Exactly what I was talking about in the comment just before yours. You just ignored everything what Sensor Tower can do, while listing everything what Creep is doing and said how they are different. The perfect example of what was I talking about.
It appears that Niteshade seemed to out-logic you. Please study basic logic before trying to refute someone's argument..
Oh damn, hahahaha he out-logic me. He even apologized in the next post and said how he misunderstood my post. But I didn't even think you would understand it, so I won't even waste my time to explain it.
On August 20 2012 17:00 iaguz wrote: We had irradiate. It was renamed Snipe (spell: Choose target zerg unit. End it's life) with the exception that it wasn't aoe and instead of having a set duration the actual duration was 'as fast as you could shift click'. We all know what happened to that.
And Kawaii is totally wrong, Ghosts have hte single most damaging ability in the game: Launch Nuclear Missile! Jeez do you even play Terran at a high level?
Well, im pretty sure snipe was nerfed because it dealt with both ultra and broods at the same time. Yet fungal continues to be good against both air and ground... Double standards from blizzard is mindblowing.
Yes, because these abilities are the same right? You can minimize the fungal damage and effect by spreading units, you can't minimize snipe effect, you just killed everything what was in your sight with them. The way you think is really mindblowing...
On August 20 2012 06:32 InSpiReZerG wrote: ^lmfao. Every, EVERY hellion runby ive ever seen has gotten more than enough drone kills to pay for itself. next point plz.
Hm. You must not be watching good zergs, as it is quite easy with range 5 queens to deny all hellion runbys if the zerg is not absolutely awful. Perhaps you only watch your own games?
I think the queen changes have very little to do with stopping hellion run by's. It's more of the fact that at the time run by's would occur, there are 4 queens that you can position along with 2 evolution chambers to completely block out hellion harass
I still think it has to do with the fact that there is little tradeoff with going for a mass queen defensive opening. So much larvae can be dedicated for upfront drone production or recovery drone production while still remaining safe at every stage of the game. It's not like getting extra queens reduce the early or mid game scouting of Zerg, the economy of Zerg, or the tech options of Zerg. It's a no brainer to do.
Even before the buff, you could have gone 4 queen and blocked off the entrance. With good play, you would perfectly counter any hellion opening, but you would have to invest in a few lings or roaches as well. That made it very risky to do blind, and with slower overlords, it required a bit of gambling.
Very good post, the main thing is that zergs these days do not need to gamble anymore, they can defend pretty much everything, while if Terran wants to get greedy, we are extremely susceptible to early attacks or baneling busts
Are you telling me that having to guess which all in the Terran was doing from a range of about 25 different ones was good balanced gameplay?
I can't tell you how many times I'd been in a situation wondering if it was going to be Hellion or Banshee and I sacked an Overlord just to nothing to end up finding out the guys doing something completely different which I auto lose to
Judging from MVP's performance vs Vortix in the Semi-Finals and Nerchio in the Finals, it's not a game balance problem but a player skill problem that Terreans are facing. As MVP demonstrated, even tho' Queens are capable of defending the main base and the natural base from Hellion and Banshee harrassment, the 7:00 minute third base is vulnerable to a direct attack from Hellions and Banshees and the Zerg have to either A) move out with 2+ Queens and Zergling to defend it or B) sacrifice it in order to counter the opponent's main base or army with Mutalisks. In case of A) Terrans can now harass Zerg's natural with Hellions when the Queens come out to defend the 3rd vs the Banshees, and in the case of B) Terrans can expand behind the attack and end one base up on Zerg.
Even MVPs openings took advantage of Vortix and Nerchio's early predictable and passive styles, with Command Center first and Barracks Expand into a 3rd Command Center openings gaining the economic advantage vs Vortix repeatedly in their match up. In both end games vs Vortix and Nerchio, MVP demolished the Zerg end game compositions with Ravens and Hunter Seeker Missiles with relative ease, so it appears Terrand don't have a significant end game disadvantage vs Broodlord, Corrupter, Infestor at all and I'm doubtful Ravens need a speed increase considering the immobility of Broodlords to begin with.
The match up seems fine, MVP managed to dismantle both Vortix and Nerchio in rapid secession, and I think it's Zerg, not Terran, who need to reconsider their strategies, tactics and build orders in the match up because the 15 Hatchery, 16 Spawning Pool, 4 Queens and 2+ Gas at 40 supply has absolutely no dynamicism vs Terrans and you can freely harass the opponents 3rd while taking your own 3rd and have a chance either kill the opponents 3rd or draw out the Queens and suicide into Zerg mineral lines ... all of this while taking your 3rd unppposed ...
And altho' MVP beat Vortix and Nerchio decisively, I'm not even certain he played optimally to do it, because the Terrans are investing 200/200 into Banshee Cloack that I think is for all intents and purposes unnecessary, because tactically your only using Banshees to either kill the 3rd or draw out the Queens and Zerg have no problem dealing with Cloak when they have easy access to Spore Crawlers and a Lair -> Overseer(s) so it's 200/200 resources that could be better spent elsewhere (a faster 2nd Factory, a faster Stim Pack, or an unorthodox 2nd Starport perhaps)
I'm not convinced the Creep Spread is the issue, the ability to spread Creep pre-patch was the same as it is now post-patch and the only difference is that small numbers of Hellion's can't deny Creep Spreed as easily vs 2+ Queens. Strategically, I think this is fine, because now Terrans have to choose between committing to Hellions at 6+ or expend Scans in order to eliminate the Creep Tumors the Queens leave behind. This doesn't mean that Creep Spread is OP, it means that Terrans can't /faceroll their keyboards and deny creep without having to make trade offs between their map position and their economy.
If it's a question of "balancing" Zerg Queens, I think the main problem Zerg Queens pose is that they don't have any Armor Type. In the interests of giving Terran more opening chances vs Zerg, I think it'd be interesting to change the Queen's Armor Type to Armored and allow Marauders to attack them for 10 (+10) damage, then Terrans have a reason to include Marauders into their Hellion mixtures and directly push the front or for Zerg to have a reason to actually build other units than Queens (or more than 4xQueens?)
In short, watch MLG Germany's MVP semi-final and finals match up vs Vortix and Nerchio and take notes, because MVP destroyed both of them handedly and if I were a Zerg player I'd be seriously reconsidering my Spawning Pool and Vespene Gas timings in order to either pose the threat of Speedlings, Baneling Busts, Roach Rushes or 2 Base Speedling, Baneling, Roach all ins or 2 Base + Macro Hatch and Roach Expand builds instead of turtling on 2 bases, hanging 3rd bases and betting the house on a Mutalisk counter attack or 11 minute Hives into Greater Spires that depend on having a 4th when you can't even guarantee your 3rd ...
All I have to say is earlier Gas and Roach Warrens are looking a hell of a lot better than they did before, and TERRANS OP :p
On August 20 2012 14:17 Aterons_toss wrote: As someone who doesn't know shit about tvz from a player perspective, could i ask, what is wrong with tvz atm if you play it the same way mvp does ? Is there a "fix" needed ? isn't the speed buff enough to simply allow that MVP style to work perfectly ( since ravens will be faster than infestors... right ?, i don't remember what the speed increase was ;p ).
Why do people do things like this? Why do people point to MVP and TaeJa and just say 'play like they do, TvZ is fine.'
Have you maybe, just maybe considered that MVP and TaeJa are beating zergs regularly becasue THEY ARE JUST BETTER PLAYERS THAN THEIR OPPONENTS. God, how can you expect Master's players to play like MVP and TaeJa? It isn't the style that makes them strong, it is their exceptional macro, unit control and map awareness that allows them to beat anyone. This exact same thing happened in the first GSL with FruitDealer, but nobody told zerg players to 'Just play like FruitDealer' becasue not everyone is freaking fruitdealer. Jesus this is such a stupid argument.
Now that I've vented my annoyance at some idiocy, I want to clarify something that I said earlier:
'The problem with TvZ atm, at least in my opinion, is that the Queen buff has made all aggression from Terran borderline negligible. Hellions are far weaker at containing and harassing, early bio timings are so much weaker, and banshee openings are so much weaker. Because of this, terrans can't force the zerg to stop making drones - so when terran opens aggresively, and the zerg can just make 80 drones without batting an eyelid anyway, the terran falls wayyyy behind.
The most recent solution to this is for terran to just play stupid greedy - 3 CCs off of 1 rax etc. Again, the problem with this is that because zerg can spam drones so quickly, the moment they scout a double expand they wil stop making anything other than drones, and even then, with the terran on 3 CCs, the zerg will still get to 80 drones before the terran gets to even just 50 SCVs - terrans again fall wayyyyy behind.
It seems to me that no matter whether they are aggresive or passive, terrans just can't get ahead in this matchup anymore (assuming that both players are of equal skill level).
This is why I have starting playing TvZ ForGG style - just suiciding hellions into mineral lines. It's actually what I have also been seeing from a lot of pro terrans as well. I guess the mentality is this: You can't stop the zerg from making drones, so the only other solution is to kill the drones at all costs. I saw SuperNova, MVP, Bomber and more literally suiciding hellions into mineral lines so much during IEM, but the problem with this is that it is such a huge gamble. If there are a lot of queens, 300 resources worth of roaches, spine crawlers etc. that kind of play just falls a part.'
^^My point here is that the problems with TvZ lategame have arisen becasue of the queen buff. It is so hard to pressure the zerg early now, that their drone count hits 80 by 10 minutes and Broodlords are killing your bio before you've had the change to build one thor. There is potential, however for this to be balanced by a lategame terran buff, such as that to the Raven, but to be honest, a MS buff won't really do much.
Either make zerg more vulnerable early, or make terran stronger late. Blizzard brought this rubbish upon themselves when they decided that the Queen needed to have it's utility and power doubled in a matchup that was essentially balanced up until that point. I think that Dustin went out drinking and was recovering from a hangover on the day that the devs decided that a queen buff was a fantastic idea.
Edit: At the above poster; MVP beat both Nerchio and Vortix becasue he is better than them, not becasue terran has somehow in your post gone from UP to OP. How can you even consider current zerg play styles weak when the winrate sits at 45/55 in favour of zerg internationally? MVP is just BETTER than those two. Honestly, Vortix is just bad - his teching patterns are predictable, his unit control is pretty bad, and he constantly gets into terrible engagements where he just 1a moves his entire ultralisk infestor ling army into sieged tanks and marauders. On top of this, his desicion making is so poor when looking at expansions. Even Day9 pointed out in one of his games against SuperNova (I think it was SN), he constantly fails to expand when he has the oppotunity, and he seems to always take the worst expansion avaliable. The guy is just a scrub benefiting from the current metagame which has zergs sitting on top.
On August 19 2012 11:26 pwnopotamus wrote: I reserve judgement on Raven usefulness until after I see Terrans use Ghosts more to counter Infestors. Ghosts can 2x snipe or EMP to take care of Infestors, then Ravens are free to HSM. Increased speed/acceleration should give Ravens the ability to run away a bit more easily than before.
Actually...I think Ravens are still largely useless due to the time it takes to get just one HSM (as you mentioned). I really just wanted to comment on the lack of good Ghost usage vs. Infestors in the TvZ matchup.
The problem with ghost is that they really not that great for anything other than this role even if your going pure bio with 3/3 they slow your bio down a good deal good zerg will just bring 2-3 overseers or FG the cloaked ghosts.
scanning and sniping a obs is great in tvp as most times they will not have more than one with there army but vs zerg every OL has the potental to be a OS makes using stealth units hard in a major battle and ghost need to be at the front.
infestors on the other hand are good vs every thing the only time that having infestors is bad is when they are out of energy
ghost could be good for the mid game before BL or ultra's but in a late game its just to much supply minreals and gas in your army to be missing (plus vs infestors EMP is just to short a radius to emp all the guys infestors you need to be damn lucky or he has to mess up bad any strat that is based on the other guy messing up is not a good one)
Comparing how fast Zerg gets their top late game units and how fast other races get their top late game units is not really relevant. Every race works very differently and requires different transitions at different times for a variety of reasons.
It's quite clear right now that if you are good enough, you can make Ravens work very well on certain maps. They might not be the one unit to rule them all or to use in every single game, but they have a role, they perform it well and while the transition to them can be difficult or require smart planning, it certainly is possible.
The proposed speed boost for Ravens will make them even more useful and it would be wise for Blizzard to not go beyond this without seeing the effects. Small changes are often all that's required to nudge players into new strategies and get them exploring new ideas.
The Infestor is obviously a strong unit, there are lots of complaints over it hitting both ground and air, as well as it being too energy efficient and all manner of other complaints. It's become the poster child for Terran complaints and even Protoss players are in on the act too. The Infestor is used so frequently because it's incredibly important for any Zerg army to have some kind of AoE damage/control in order to have a chance at an efficient engagement, or to force a trade. The Zerg army is heavily melee oriented and melee vs. ranged is something that's impossible to balance. Without some kind of root to force engagements and allow the melee units to close the gap and deal some damage, these melee units would be even less cost effective and it would be far harder for the Zerg player to take advantage of mistakes. As the race with the weakest anti air in the game, the Infestors abilities are also very important and any change to them in a negative way will likely give aerial play against Zerg a huge boost when it's already excellent. This last fact shouldn't be forgotten when people are throwing around potential nerfs to the unit.
I personally dislike the Infestor being such an important unit for Zerg because it's not that fun always having to build the same thing if you want to have the best chance at winning, or at least not losing. If you take something away from the Infestor, then something else will need to be replacing it in order for the Zerg army to work. If you remove the root aspect of fungal for example, you'll now need to improve the ability of some Zerg melee units and anti air units at performing their roles, or they will simply be too weak without the root.
Once again I'd also like to mention the Ghost. Infestors have become such a common sight in ZvT and you see so many pro players with poor and/or sloppy Infestor control. They frequently send them into dangerous situations at the head of the army, or leave them unattended in vulnerable positions. This behaviour has become more and more prevalent since Terran players unilaterally decided to dump the Ghost. It's like in nature when the natural predator for a certain creature reduces in numbers, that creature suddenly becomes dominant and out of control. By never building Ghosts, Zerg players have become cocky and confident with their Infestors. I can tell you it's far easier to use Infestors when you never have to worry about Emp or Snipe, when you never have to build Overseers to take with your army so you can deal with Ghosts. The burden of actions you place on another player when you have a threatening cloaked unit like the Ghost around is quite high, particularly when that person is taking maximum advantage of units that Ghosts can and should be directly countering.
It's quite ridiculous for so many Terran players to incessantly complain about Infestors when they completely refuse to use Ghosts. It's like Zerg complaining about Dark Templar and refusing to build Overseers, or Protoss complaining about mass bio but never building Colossi. I feel you lose some of the right to complain about a unit if you flat out refuse to try and use one of the best counters to it. Even if you feel the Ghost wont instantly beat every Infestor army out there (there's no reason why it should, or why you should expect that) it certainly can have a profound effect on the game by simply being there and if you ask most Zerg players they will tell you this. It's also nice to remember that multi pronged Nuke harass is fantastic when done correctly, particularly against a Broodlord army. In fact, any kind of multi pronged, run by/drop play can be immensely powerful against such an army while you try to establish your Raven count (Mvp has shown this repeatedly this weekend).
Starcraft 2 is an interesting game with a lot of variety. It's never going to be truly balanced for so many reasons. Instead of always looking for one solution or one build that deals with everything you should be using your heads to think of a variety of strategies that can be employed on different maps, against different races using various strategies. What works on Metropolis or Atlantis Spaceship (Mvp's excellent Raven/BC/PF usage) wont necessarily work on Ohana (a good place for Mech!).
ZvT may be slightly tilted towards Zerg now, but it has been quite substantially tilted towards Terran for a long time previously and while I don't believe there should be 'turns' when one race is favoured over another, it does make me wonder at what point you guys will stop complaining. Are you just here to get things as close to 50% as possible? Are you here to get things back to the way they were, with Terran clearly on top? Do you simply want to get it close to 50%, but with a slight Terran edge? It can be hard to judge the motives of some of the loudest complainers as they seem to be the least rational.
On August 20 2012 14:17 Aterons_toss wrote: As someone who doesn't know shit about tvz from a player perspective, could i ask, what is wrong with tvz atm if you play it the same way mvp does ? Is there a "fix" needed ? isn't the speed buff enough to simply allow that MVP style to work perfectly ( since ravens will be faster than infestors... right ?, i don't remember what the speed increase was ;p ).
Why do people do things like this? Why do people point to MVP and TaeJa and just say 'play like they do, TvZ is fine.'
Have you maybe, just maybe considered that MVP and TaeJa are beating zergs regularly becasue THEY ARE JUST BETTER PLAYERS THAN THEIR OPPONENTS.
Have you ever considered, that the other Terrans lose to the same zergs, because THEY ARE JUST WORSE PLAYERS THAN THEIR OPPONENTS?
On August 20 2012 14:17 Aterons_toss wrote: As someone who doesn't know shit about tvz from a player perspective, could i ask, what is wrong with tvz atm if you play it the same way mvp does ? Is there a "fix" needed ? isn't the speed buff enough to simply allow that MVP style to work perfectly ( since ravens will be faster than infestors... right ?, i don't remember what the speed increase was ;p ).
Why do people do things like this? Why do people point to MVP and TaeJa and just say 'play like they do, TvZ is fine.'
Have you maybe, just maybe considered that MVP and TaeJa are beating zergs regularly becasue THEY ARE JUST BETTER PLAYERS THAN THEIR OPPONENTS. God, how can you expect Master's players to play like MVP and TaeJa? It isn't the style that makes them strong, it is their exceptional macro, unit control and map awareness that allows them to beat anyone. This exact same thing happened in the first GSL with FruitDealer, but nobody told zerg players to 'Just play like FruitDealer' becasue not everyone is freaking fruitdealer. Jesus this is such a stupid argument.
Now that I've vented my annoyance at some idiocy, I want to clarify something that I said earlier:
'The problem with TvZ atm, at least in my opinion, is that the Queen buff has made all aggression from Terran borderline negligible. Hellions are far weaker at containing and harassing, early bio timings are so much weaker, and banshee openings are so much weaker. Because of this, terrans can't force the zerg to stop making drones - so when terran opens aggresively, and the zerg can just make 80 drones without batting an eyelid anyway, the terran falls wayyyy behind.
The most recent solution to this is for terran to just play stupid greedy - 3 CCs off of 1 rax etc. Again, the problem with this is that because zerg can spam drones so quickly, the moment they scout a double expand they wil stop making anything other than drones, and even then, with the terran on 3 CCs, the zerg will still get to 80 drones before the terran gets to even just 50 SCVs - terrans again fall wayyyyy behind.
It seems to me that no matter whether they are aggresive or passive, terrans just can't get ahead in this matchup anymore (assuming that both players are of equal skill level).
This is why I have starting playing TvZ ForGG style - just suiciding hellions into mineral lines. It's actually what I have also been seeing from a lot of pro terrans as well. I guess the mentality is this: You can't stop the zerg from making drones, so the only other solution is to kill the drones at all costs. I saw SuperNova, MVP, Bomber and more literally suiciding hellions into mineral lines so much during IEM, but the problem with this is that it is such a huge gamble. If there are a lot of queens, 300 resources worth of roaches, spine crawlers etc. that kind of play just falls a part.'
^^My point here is that the problems with TvZ lategame have arisen becasue of the queen buff. It is so hard to pressure the zerg early now, that their drone count hits 80 by 10 minutes and Broodlords are killing your bio before you've had the change to build one thor. There is potential, however for this to be balanced by a lategame terran buff, such as that to the Raven, but to be honest, a MS buff won't really do much.
Either make zerg more vulnerable early, or make terran stronger late. Blizzard brought this rubbish upon themselves when they decided that the Queen needed to have it's utility and power doubled in a matchup that was essentially balanced up until that point. I think that Dustin went out drinking and was recovering from a hangover on the day that the devs decided that a queen buff was a fantastic idea.
Edit: At the above poster; MVP beat both Nerchio and Vortix becasue he is better than them, not becasue terran has somehow in your post gone from UP to OP. How can you even consider current zerg play styles weak when the winrate sits at 45/55 in favour of zerg internationally? MVP is just BETTER than those two. Honestly, Vortix is just bad - his teching patterns are predictable, his unit control is pretty bad, and he constantly gets into terrible engagements where he just 1a moves his entire ultralisk infestor ling army into sieged tanks and marauders. On top of this, his desicion making is so poor when looking at expansions. Even Day9 pointed out in one of his games against SuperNova (I think it was SN), he constantly fails to expand when he has the oppotunity, and he seems to always take the worst expansion avaliable. The guy is just a scrub benefiting from the current metagame which has zergs sitting on top.
I think your making a point thats pretty valid
the problem is its not balance thats the issue, its the level of difficulty which this is the reason that Taeja and MVP win cause they are really good players they can do the really hard stuff well and thus the disparity in difficulty in the TVZ match up is not there.
with regard to Vortix he is not bad thats a farse to say about any one competing at this level however you are right that he is predictable but thats cause he really does not have to be anything else how many times did he lose he 3rd on second to last day and still win the game loads but why well thats simple he was doing the same build over and over to kill the 3rd the terran invested in hellions and Banshees even if the 3rd dies and the terran loses nothing both them units have one thing in common they cannot shoot air and every game he was going spire at the time the 3rd dies the muta's are almost out soon as they are 2 things happen either the terran has little to no anti air and loses lot in his base (worse case) or he straight up lose's map control. from this point Vortix just went on the offence bane bursts and lings (vs supernova he pretty much caught him with his pants down 2 games nothing to defend this type of attack) from this point the terran is mostly having to rebuild or is going in to the next stage of his build why Vortix was going low amount of infestors and going fast hive BL he almost always skipped the mid game and put gas in to corruptor BL and won thats why we saw MPV and SN fighting BL with thors tanks and hellions not cause its planned cause the quick BL exploit the fact that if terran goes mass air with no ground army they straight up lose to so many things.
If vs vortix any terran had gone for a 2 base all in he would of been dead due to what he skipped. The problem with this is as always from the Terrans POV if the zerg hold just barely by the skin of there teeth the BL pop and its game.
So according to you Big J: All Zergs have become better than lots of Terrans who were beating them before patch ?
I'm not whinning, i have a pretty decent winrates versus Zerg: but's it's a fact that a simple patch radically changes the TvZ winrates in favor of Zergs, it has NOTHING to do with Zerg suddenly getting better, all by magic.
Now, a few months of disapearance of Terrans in internationnal Tournaments, and a blizzard statement of Terrans getting suddenly smashed by Zergs in Ladder is blatly revelant than the queen patch changes a lot. And that Terran need a buff, whether or not the changes must be on the raven is a good question but your post is stupid, is biaised and don't solves anything. MVP is one of the best player in the world, Nerchio is wonderful but isn't a progamer, and Vortix haven't made anything really great before IEM.
On August 20 2012 14:17 Aterons_toss wrote: As someone who doesn't know shit about tvz from a player perspective, could i ask, what is wrong with tvz atm if you play it the same way mvp does ? Is there a "fix" needed ? isn't the speed buff enough to simply allow that MVP style to work perfectly ( since ravens will be faster than infestors... right ?, i don't remember what the speed increase was ;p ).
Why do people do things like this? Why do people point to MVP and TaeJa and just say 'play like they do, TvZ is fine.'
Have you maybe, just maybe considered that MVP and TaeJa are beating zergs regularly becasue THEY ARE JUST BETTER PLAYERS THAN THEIR OPPONENTS.
Have you ever considered, that the other Terrans lose to the same zergs, because THEY ARE JUST WORSE PLAYERS THAN THEIR OPPONENTS?
So your saying that the 45/55 win rate in TvZ has come about becasue somehow, on that exact day that patch 1.4.3 was introduced, all zerg players on average just became better than all terran players? Yeah smart. Real logical.
Learn to use that big mass of flesh sitting inside of your skull.
Exceptional skill explains just that, the exceptions (MVP and TaeJa).
On August 19 2012 11:32 Ozell wrote: As a spectator, I find tvz to be effing boring since the queen buff... TvZ now equals no rush 20 minutes.
You watching silver league games, so much more early-mid game pressure from terran as they feel zerg has an easy time since the queen change, drones, creep etc.
On August 20 2012 19:25 DuckNuked wrote: So according to you Big J: All Zergs have become better than lots of Terrans who were beating them before patch ?
The only balance issues in this matchup are mainly in EU, and I think it's not because T being bad, but because european zergs are just becoming too good(there are way more Z in EU than terran) The top terrans, in both EU, Korea and US are doing really well in TvZ still.
And saying raven are only good if Z makes mistake is the most wrong thing I have ever heard. With perfect spreads, raven are still cost-effictive, but if Z clumbs up it's an instant loss vs HSM. People also forget that HSM is not the only unit, you have PDD that you can use, making corrupters useless so that vikings can attack blords freely. If you're vs ultralisk compostion, it's even stronger being able to HSM on all the lings and blings instead, the infestors will always be a bit in the back, so it's easy to hit before ravens get fungal
More important than anything, people forget that auto turrets are also insanely good, you don't get as many of them but they are better than infested terrans and they start to attack instantly...
On August 20 2012 17:00 iaguz wrote: We had irradiate. It was renamed Snipe (spell: Choose target zerg unit. End it's life) with the exception that it wasn't aoe and instead of having a set duration the actual duration was 'as fast as you could shift click'. We all know what happened to that.
And Kawaii is totally wrong, Ghosts have hte single most damaging ability in the game: Launch Nuclear Missile! Jeez do you even play Terran at a high level?
Well, im pretty sure snipe was nerfed because it dealt with both ultra and broods at the same time. Yet fungal continues to be good against both air and ground... Double standards from blizzard is mindblowing.
Yes, because these abilities are the same right? You can minimize the fungal damage and effect by spreading units, you can't minimize snipe effect, you just killed everything what was in your sight with them. The way you think is really mindblowing...
because i really claimed the abilities are the same. right? its the fact that snipe was in a sense too good against everything that it was nerfed, but fungal is being kept the same when its also too good against everything. it took about 60 ghosts to "kill everything in your sight with them", maybe you should look at ghost cost first before you talk.
On August 20 2012 19:43 Cinim wrote: The only balance issues in this matchup are mainly in EU, and I think it's not because T being bad, but because european zergs are just becoming too good(there are way more Z in EU than terran) The top terrans, in both EU, Korea and US are doing really well in TvZ still.
And saying raven are only good if Z makes mistake is the most wrong thing I have ever heard. With perfect spreads, raven are still cost-effictive, but if Z clumbs up it's an instant loss vs HSM. People also forget that HSM is not the only unit, you have PDD that you can use, making corrupters useless so that vikings can attack blords freely. If you're vs ultralisk compostion, it's even stronger being able to HSM on all the lings and blings instead, the infestors will always be a bit in the back, so it's easy to hit before ravens get fungal
More important than anything, people forget that auto turrets are also insanely good, you don't get as many of them but they are better than infested terrans and they start to attack instantly...
firstly, no one in their right mind would spend their energy that they took the past 3 minutes to gather to use HSM on zerglings. secondly, no one has ever argued that PDD was bad. thirdly, auto turrets are rubbish. infested terrans scale with armor and range attack upgrades, auto turrets require 4 hexes and nothing below them to throw down, whereas infested terrans can be clicked on units and it would automatically go to the side of it. maybe if auto turrets was actually good it would be worth spending the 3 minutes worth of energy you just took the time to gather.
Lol, the reduced creep spread and raven buff is a very good move by blizzard and exactly address the problem with zvt atm (that is inefficiency of mid game pushes bcoz of creep spread and a lategame deathball by zerg). If you think that the queen range buff should be reverted so you can again control the game since 5 min with 4 helions then its time for you to wake up and start thinking about new strategies instead of making xXx qq topics on forum about balance.
On August 20 2012 19:58 syriuszonito wrote: Lol, the reduced creep spread and raven buff is a very good move by blizzard and exactly address the problem with zvt atm (that is inefficiency of mid game pushes bcoz of creep spread and a lategame deathball by zerg). If you think that the queen range buff should be reverted so you can again control the game since 5 min with 4 helions then its time for you to wake up and start thinking about new strategies instead of making xXx qq topics on forum about balance.
In all seriousness I wonder why Avilo makes these topics instead of trying to improve and incorperate the new changes into his game play. It's not going to change anything.
On August 20 2012 19:58 syriuszonito wrote: Lol, the reduced creep spread and raven buff is a very good move by blizzard and exactly address the problem with zvt atm (that is inefficiency of mid game pushes bcoz of creep spread and a lategame deathball by zerg). If you think that the queen range buff should be reverted so you can again control the game since 5 min with 4 helions then its time for you to wake up and start thinking about new strategies instead of making xXx qq topics on forum about balance.
In all seriousness I wonder why Avilo makes these topics instead of trying to improve and incorperate the new changes into his game play. It's not going to change anything.
You wonder why because you have likely never played terran. Queen buff should not be reverted completely, but a jump from 3-5 range was too much. It should go back to 4. The creep change is a step in the right direction, but ravens are just a completely different tech path from anything useful in the TvZ early game so that is not the right area to address for this matchup.
On August 20 2012 19:58 syriuszonito wrote: Lol, the reduced creep spread and raven buff is a very good move by blizzard and exactly address the problem with zvt atm (that is inefficiency of mid game pushes bcoz of creep spread and a lategame deathball by zerg). If you think that the queen range buff should be reverted so you can again control the game since 5 min with 4 helions then its time for you to wake up and start thinking about new strategies instead of making xXx qq topics on forum about balance.
In all seriousness I wonder why Avilo makes these topics instead of trying to improve and incorperate the new changes into his game play. It's not going to change anything.
You wonder why because you have likely never played terran. Queen buff should not be reverted completely, but a jump from 3-5 range was too much. It should go back to 4. The creep change is a step in the right direction, but ravens are just a completely different tech path from anything useful in the TvZ early game so that is not the right area to address for this matchup.
0 terrans remain in the winners bracket of WCG korea- it's nice that Blizzard intends to tweak TvZ lategame, but they haven't done a thing to help out in TvP lategame. Terran is already the hardest of the 3 races by far overall, it would be nice to see some acknowledgment in the form of a balance tweak... and not a crappy speed bonus to the raven. The raven, to come into regular use, needs more than .25 speed...
On August 20 2012 17:00 iaguz wrote: We had irradiate. It was renamed Snipe (spell: Choose target zerg unit. End it's life) with the exception that it wasn't aoe and instead of having a set duration the actual duration was 'as fast as you could shift click'. We all know what happened to that.
And Kawaii is totally wrong, Ghosts have hte single most damaging ability in the game: Launch Nuclear Missile! Jeez do you even play Terran at a high level?
Well, im pretty sure snipe was nerfed because it dealt with both ultra and broods at the same time. Yet fungal continues to be good against both air and ground... Double standards from blizzard is mindblowing.
Yes, because these abilities are the same right? You can minimize the fungal damage and effect by spreading units, you can't minimize snipe effect, you just killed everything what was in your sight with them. The way you think is really mindblowing...
because i really claimed the abilities are the same. right? its the fact that snipe was in a sense too good against everything that it was nerfed, but fungal is being kept the same when its also too good against everything. it took about 60 ghosts to "kill everything in your sight with them", maybe you should look at ghost cost first before you talk.
You didn't need 60 Ghost, you needed like ~20 of them, and in the late game, 20 Ghosts are nothing when only other things you were making back then are few Siege Tanks and Medivacs that cost gas, and were just massing Marines. On the other hand, any late game composition consisting of Brood Lords/Corruptors/Infestors/Banelings/Ultras were more costly than those Ghosts, and was fully countered by them.
And Fungal was changed a lot, it was even nerfed. It wasn't huge nerf, but it was a nerf. The Fungal works that way that it forces you to micro and spread your units before the engagements to minimize its effect. It is supposed to be good vs. tons of clumped units. While Snipe couldn't be evaded in any possible way.
In the end, those are not double standards, you just aren't looking from every angle. And if you are going to compare any abilities with Fungal, it should be Seeker Missile from Raven, since it is the only ability that does AoE damage and that is somehow comparable to Fungal/Psi storm.
On August 20 2012 19:58 syriuszonito wrote: Lol, the reduced creep spread and raven buff is a very good move by blizzard and exactly address the problem with zvt atm (that is inefficiency of mid game pushes bcoz of creep spread and a lategame deathball by zerg). If you think that the queen range buff should be reverted so you can again control the game since 5 min with 4 helions then its time for you to wake up and start thinking about new strategies instead of making xXx qq topics on forum about balance.
In all seriousness I wonder why Avilo makes these topics instead of trying to improve and incorperate the new changes into his game play. It's not going to change anything.
You wonder why because you have likely never played terran. Queen buff should not be reverted completely, but a jump from 3-5 range was too much. It should go back to 4. The creep change is a step in the right direction, but ravens are just a completely different tech path from anything useful in the TvZ early game so that is not the right area to address for this matchup.
Like banshees?
They can give a terran an edge, but again, with that queen buff they are more of a gimmick than anything dangerous. They can kill a few drones before zerg defends but then they are useless unless the army moves out with no AA. Then once infestors hit they are beyond useless, at that point its kinda like making hydras in a TvZ.
On August 20 2012 19:58 syriuszonito wrote: Lol, the reduced creep spread and raven buff is a very good move by blizzard and exactly address the problem with zvt atm (that is inefficiency of mid game pushes bcoz of creep spread and a lategame deathball by zerg). If you think that the queen range buff should be reverted so you can again control the game since 5 min with 4 helions then its time for you to wake up and start thinking about new strategies instead of making xXx qq topics on forum about balance.
In all seriousness I wonder why Avilo makes these topics instead of trying to improve and incorperate the new changes into his game play. It's not going to change anything.
You wonder why because you have likely never played terran. Queen buff should not be reverted completely, but a jump from 3-5 range was too much. It should go back to 4. The creep change is a step in the right direction, but ravens are just a completely different tech path from anything useful in the TvZ early game so that is not the right area to address for this matchup.
Unless you're GM or high master I highly doubt a Queen having 2 extra range is the reason you're losing.
go improve your macro go improve your game sense go switch up some builds
whining about a change that isn't ridiculous seems silly (i'm talking colossus 22 range silly) when you have so many other aspects you can improve to get the win through those means
Does Avilo have amazing gamesense? Does he have amazing macro? Has he switched up his builds and tried new things and timings? I can guess the answer to these based on how many times he's written out posts such as these addressing things that don't really matter to him.(don't get me wrong he's a decent semi-pro) Perhaps he should go practice and aquire these things through practicing and working hard instead of writing a new balance post every 3 weeks.
Watching IdrA v Bomber at one of the MLGs I can't remember (it was a while ago but still relevant) proved the power of Terran macro and never missing cycles where everytime idrA just managed to destroy the army Bomber had 1 almost surpassing the previous' size ready to send, and the main reason why IdrA managed to deal with it was because of how on with his injects he was and matching Bomber's macro
Don't blame an extra 2 range on something that is really irrelevant when you can just improve other aspects and win regardless. Korean Terrans sucked it up and did the above. The result? They're winning.
On August 20 2012 19:25 DuckNuked wrote: So according to you Big J: All Zergs have become better than lots of Terrans who were beating them before patch ?
No. Where did I write something like this?
Look, both of you are construing rather than arguing, but there's no point in feigning ignorance. This and other threads are full of people saying: look at Mvp and Taeja, and you'll see dozens if not hundreds of posts arguing why that's not a valid point. So to expect that now your one line (all caps) statement will somehow erase all that discussion is pretty naive. And I do not think you are that naive.
On August 20 2012 14:17 Aterons_toss wrote: As someone who doesn't know shit about tvz from a player perspective, could i ask, what is wrong with tvz atm if you play it the same way mvp does ? Is there a "fix" needed ? isn't the speed buff enough to simply allow that MVP style to work perfectly ( since ravens will be faster than infestors... right ?, i don't remember what the speed increase was ;p ).
Why do people do things like this? Why do people point to MVP and TaeJa and just say 'play like they do, TvZ is fine.'
Have you maybe, just maybe considered that MVP and TaeJa are beating zergs regularly becasue THEY ARE JUST BETTER PLAYERS THAN THEIR OPPONENTS. God, how can you expect Master's players to play like MVP and TaeJa? It isn't the style that makes them strong, it is their exceptional macro, unit control and map awareness that allows them to beat anyone. This exact same thing happened in the first GSL with FruitDealer, but nobody told zerg players to 'Just play like FruitDealer' becasue not everyone is freaking fruitdealer. Jesus this is such a stupid argument.
Now that I've vented my annoyance at some idiocy, I want to clarify something that I said earlier:
'The problem with TvZ atm, at least in my opinion, is that the Queen buff has made all aggression from Terran borderline negligible. Hellions are far weaker at containing and harassing, early bio timings are so much weaker, and banshee openings are so much weaker. Because of this, terrans can't force the zerg to stop making drones - so when terran opens aggresively, and the zerg can just make 80 drones without batting an eyelid anyway, the terran falls wayyyy behind.
The most recent solution to this is for terran to just play stupid greedy - 3 CCs off of 1 rax etc. Again, the problem with this is that because zerg can spam drones so quickly, the moment they scout a double expand they wil stop making anything other than drones, and even then, with the terran on 3 CCs, the zerg will still get to 80 drones before the terran gets to even just 50 SCVs - terrans again fall wayyyyy behind.
It seems to me that no matter whether they are aggresive or passive, terrans just can't get ahead in this matchup anymore (assuming that both players are of equal skill level).
This is why I have starting playing TvZ ForGG style - just suiciding hellions into mineral lines. It's actually what I have also been seeing from a lot of pro terrans as well. I guess the mentality is this: You can't stop the zerg from making drones, so the only other solution is to kill the drones at all costs. I saw SuperNova, MVP, Bomber and more literally suiciding hellions into mineral lines so much during IEM, but the problem with this is that it is such a huge gamble. If there are a lot of queens, 300 resources worth of roaches, spine crawlers etc. that kind of play just falls a part.'
^^My point here is that the problems with TvZ lategame have arisen becasue of the queen buff. It is so hard to pressure the zerg early now, that their drone count hits 80 by 10 minutes and Broodlords are killing your bio before you've had the change to build one thor. There is potential, however for this to be balanced by a lategame terran buff, such as that to the Raven, but to be honest, a MS buff won't really do much.
Either make zerg more vulnerable early, or make terran stronger late. Blizzard brought this rubbish upon themselves when they decided that the Queen needed to have it's utility and power doubled in a matchup that was essentially balanced up until that point. I think that Dustin went out drinking and was recovering from a hangover on the day that the devs decided that a queen buff was a fantastic idea.
Edit: At the above poster; MVP beat both Nerchio and Vortix becasue he is better than them, not becasue terran has somehow in your post gone from UP to OP. How can you even consider current zerg play styles weak when the winrate sits at 45/55 in favour of zerg internationally? MVP is just BETTER than those two. Honestly, Vortix is just bad - his teching patterns are predictable, his unit control is pretty bad, and he constantly gets into terrible engagements where he just 1a moves his entire ultralisk infestor ling army into sieged tanks and marauders. On top of this, his desicion making is so poor when looking at expansions. Even Day9 pointed out in one of his games against SuperNova (I think it was SN), he constantly fails to expand when he has the oppotunity, and he seems to always take the worst expansion avaliable. The guy is just a scrub benefiting from the current metagame which has zergs sitting on top.
MVP and Taeja being better than everyone is not an excuse. They set the example and build orders, and if other Terrans cant keep up, thats their fault, not the game balance or patch changes.
On August 20 2012 19:58 syriuszonito wrote: Lol, the reduced creep spread and raven buff is a very good move by blizzard and exactly address the problem with zvt atm (that is inefficiency of mid game pushes bcoz of creep spread and a lategame deathball by zerg). If you think that the queen range buff should be reverted so you can again control the game since 5 min with 4 helions then its time for you to wake up and start thinking about new strategies instead of making xXx qq topics on forum about balance.
In all seriousness I wonder why Avilo makes these topics instead of trying to improve and incorperate the new changes into his game play. It's not going to change anything.
You wonder why because you have likely never played terran. Queen buff should not be reverted completely, but a jump from 3-5 range was too much. It should go back to 4. The creep change is a step in the right direction, but ravens are just a completely different tech path from anything useful in the TvZ early game so that is not the right area to address for this matchup.
Unless you're GM or high master I highly doubt a Queen having 2 extra range is the reason you're losing.
go improve your macro go improve your game sense go switch up some builds
whining about a change that isn't ridiculous seems silly (i'm talking colossus 22 range silly) when you have so many other aspects you can improve to get the win through those means
Does Avilo have amazing gamesense? Does he have amazing macro? Has he switched up his builds and tried new things and timings? I can guess the answer to these based on how many times he's written out posts such as these addressing things that don't really matter to him.(don't get me wrong he's a decent semi-pro) Perhaps he should go practice and aquire these things through practicing and working hard instead of writing a new balance post every 3 weeks.
Watching IdrA v Bomber at one of the MLGs I can't remember (it was a while ago but still relevant) proved the power of Terran macro and never missing cycles where everytime idrA just managed to destroy the army Bomber had 1 almost surpassing the previous' size ready to send, and the main reason why IdrA managed to deal with it was because of how on with his injects he was and matching Bomber's macro
Don't blame an extra 2 range on something that is really irrelevant when you can just improve other aspects and win regardless. Korean Terrans sucked it up and did the above. The result? They're winning.
Well now i've seen you defend zerg in every thread containing the word Terran, and all you've basicly said is that terran should get better and questioning peoples skill in every form. I gotta ask, what rank GM are you and how many years have you been pro?
On August 20 2012 19:58 syriuszonito wrote: Lol, the reduced creep spread and raven buff is a very good move by blizzard and exactly address the problem with zvt atm (that is inefficiency of mid game pushes bcoz of creep spread and a lategame deathball by zerg). If you think that the queen range buff should be reverted so you can again control the game since 5 min with 4 helions then its time for you to wake up and start thinking about new strategies instead of making xXx qq topics on forum about balance.
In all seriousness I wonder why Avilo makes these topics instead of trying to improve and incorperate the new changes into his game play. It's not going to change anything.
You wonder why because you have likely never played terran. Queen buff should not be reverted completely, but a jump from 3-5 range was too much. It should go back to 4. The creep change is a step in the right direction, but ravens are just a completely different tech path from anything useful in the TvZ early game so that is not the right area to address for this matchup.
Unless you're GM or high master I highly doubt a Queen having 2 extra range is the reason you're losing.
go improve your macro go improve your game sense go switch up some builds
whining about a change that isn't ridiculous seems silly (i'm talking colossus 22 range silly) when you have so many other aspects you can improve to get the win through those means
Does Avilo have amazing gamesense? Does he have amazing macro? Has he switched up his builds and tried new things and timings? I can guess the answer to these based on how many times he's written out posts such as these addressing things that don't really matter to him.(don't get me wrong he's a decent semi-pro) Perhaps he should go practice and aquire these things through practicing and working hard instead of writing a new balance post every 3 weeks.
Watching IdrA v Bomber at one of the MLGs I can't remember (it was a while ago but still relevant) proved the power of Terran macro and never missing cycles where everytime idrA just managed to destroy the army Bomber had 1 almost surpassing the previous' size ready to send, and the main reason why IdrA managed to deal with it was because of how on with his injects he was and matching Bomber's macro
Don't blame an extra 2 range on something that is really irrelevant when you can just improve other aspects and win regardless. Korean Terrans sucked it up and did the above. The result? They're winning.
Well now i've seen you defend zerg in every thread containing the word Terran, and all you've basicly said is that terran should get better and questioning peoples skill in every form. I gotta ask, what rank GM are you and how many years have you been pro?
Every thread as in this one and the one where I defend JRecco's improvement in form as he left school?
I'll question your credentials on stating there is a problem first before I show you mine for defending the whine
On August 20 2012 20:56 Natespank wrote: 0 terrans remain in the winners bracket of WCG korea- it's nice that Blizzard intends to tweak TvZ lategame, but they haven't done a thing to help out in TvP lategame. Terran is already the hardest of the 3 races by far overall, it would be nice to see some acknowledgment in the form of a balance tweak... and not a crappy speed bonus to the raven. The raven, to come into regular use, needs more than .25 speed...
Actually, that is WCS Korea. For WCG qualifiers, terrans actually have the most qualifiers (plus MVP). If anything, it is the Korean zergs who are struggling (mainly vs vP).
On August 20 2012 19:58 syriuszonito wrote: Lol, the reduced creep spread and raven buff is a very good move by blizzard and exactly address the problem with zvt atm (that is inefficiency of mid game pushes bcoz of creep spread and a lategame deathball by zerg). If you think that the queen range buff should be reverted so you can again control the game since 5 min with 4 helions then its time for you to wake up and start thinking about new strategies instead of making xXx qq topics on forum about balance.
In all seriousness I wonder why Avilo makes these topics instead of trying to improve and incorperate the new changes into his game play. It's not going to change anything.
You wonder why because you have likely never played terran. Queen buff should not be reverted completely, but a jump from 3-5 range was too much. It should go back to 4. The creep change is a step in the right direction, but ravens are just a completely different tech path from anything useful in the TvZ early game so that is not the right area to address for this matchup.
Unless you're GM or high master I highly doubt a Queen having 2 extra range is the reason you're losing.
go improve your macro go improve your game sense go switch up some builds
whining about a change that isn't ridiculous seems silly (i'm talking colossus 22 range silly) when you have so many other aspects you can improve to get the win through those means
Does Avilo have amazing gamesense? Does he have amazing macro? Has he switched up his builds and tried new things and timings? I can guess the answer to these based on how many times he's written out posts such as these addressing things that don't really matter to him.(don't get me wrong he's a decent semi-pro) Perhaps he should go practice and aquire these things through practicing and working hard instead of writing a new balance post every 3 weeks.
Watching IdrA v Bomber at one of the MLGs I can't remember (it was a while ago but still relevant) proved the power of Terran macro and never missing cycles where everytime idrA just managed to destroy the army Bomber had 1 almost surpassing the previous' size ready to send, and the main reason why IdrA managed to deal with it was because of how on with his injects he was and matching Bomber's macro
Don't blame an extra 2 range on something that is really irrelevant when you can just improve other aspects and win regardless. Korean Terrans sucked it up and did the above. The result? They're winning.
Actually, MVP mentioned a lot of times he was struggling with vZ. Funny thing is, when the TOP pros complain or comment on balance, people always say they that of course they will complain so their race gets buffed and can win more money. So, non top players can't comment on balance and top players can't comment on balance.
On August 20 2012 19:58 syriuszonito wrote: Lol, the reduced creep spread and raven buff is a very good move by blizzard and exactly address the problem with zvt atm (that is inefficiency of mid game pushes bcoz of creep spread and a lategame deathball by zerg). If you think that the queen range buff should be reverted so you can again control the game since 5 min with 4 helions then its time for you to wake up and start thinking about new strategies instead of making xXx qq topics on forum about balance.
In all seriousness I wonder why Avilo makes these topics instead of trying to improve and incorperate the new changes into his game play. It's not going to change anything.
You wonder why because you have likely never played terran. Queen buff should not be reverted completely, but a jump from 3-5 range was too much. It should go back to 4. The creep change is a step in the right direction, but ravens are just a completely different tech path from anything useful in the TvZ early game so that is not the right area to address for this matchup.
Unless you're GM or high master I highly doubt a Queen having 2 extra range is the reason you're losing.
go improve your macro go improve your game sense go switch up some builds
whining about a change that isn't ridiculous seems silly (i'm talking colossus 22 range silly) when you have so many other aspects you can improve to get the win through those means
Does Avilo have amazing gamesense? Does he have amazing macro? Has he switched up his builds and tried new things and timings? I can guess the answer to these based on how many times he's written out posts such as these addressing things that don't really matter to him.(don't get me wrong he's a decent semi-pro) Perhaps he should go practice and aquire these things through practicing and working hard instead of writing a new balance post every 3 weeks.
Watching IdrA v Bomber at one of the MLGs I can't remember (it was a while ago but still relevant) proved the power of Terran macro and never missing cycles where everytime idrA just managed to destroy the army Bomber had 1 almost surpassing the previous' size ready to send, and the main reason why IdrA managed to deal with it was because of how on with his injects he was and matching Bomber's macro
Don't blame an extra 2 range on something that is really irrelevant when you can just improve other aspects and win regardless. Korean Terrans sucked it up and did the above. The result? They're winning.
Actually, MVP mentioned a lot of times he was struggling with vZ. Funny thing is, when the TOP pros complain or comment on balance, people always say they that of course they will complain so their race gets buffed and can win more money. So, non top players can't comment on balance and top players can't comment on balance.
A lot of Korean Terrans mentioned they were struggling vZ as I expect they would when they answer isn't clear, when they start seriously implying it's flat out impossible thats when to get worried. I expect the same happened in Brood War when a metagame shift happened there except a lot of them didn't get interviewed and thus get a chance to express their thoughts on Brood War balance. On a side note Leenock recently said that he was struggling as Zerg, therefore who to believe?
On August 20 2012 19:58 syriuszonito wrote: Lol, the reduced creep spread and raven buff is a very good move by blizzard and exactly address the problem with zvt atm (that is inefficiency of mid game pushes bcoz of creep spread and a lategame deathball by zerg). If you think that the queen range buff should be reverted so you can again control the game since 5 min with 4 helions then its time for you to wake up and start thinking about new strategies instead of making xXx qq topics on forum about balance.
In all seriousness I wonder why Avilo makes these topics instead of trying to improve and incorperate the new changes into his game play. It's not going to change anything.
You wonder why because you have likely never played terran. Queen buff should not be reverted completely, but a jump from 3-5 range was too much. It should go back to 4. The creep change is a step in the right direction, but ravens are just a completely different tech path from anything useful in the TvZ early game so that is not the right area to address for this matchup.
Like banshees?
They can give a terran an edge, but again, with that queen buff they are more of a gimmick than anything dangerous. They can kill a few drones before zerg defends but then they are useless unless the army moves out with no AA. Then once infestors hit they are beyond useless, at that point its kinda like making hydras in a TvZ.
As a Terran player, you have no idea what you're talking about. Banshees are great throughout the game. You can use them to snipe infestors. Especially if infestors are undefended, and you split properly on banshees, they have to fungal + IT (aka removing energy) to get rid of them.
The Queen buff was stupid cause it made Zergs able to be super greedy AND super economic. I think it's absolutely stupid that Zergs think they should get 3 bases essentially for free, and any kind of pressure that tries to deny that shut off by queens. With that being said, an early raven doesn't work cause it's so much gas that's essentially wasted to clear out creep when gas is the sole limiting factor of Terrans trying to get upgrades/tech up. The difference between a Raven and a Banshee is simply cause even if the Banshee is deflected, the banshee can still not be deadweight, which I can't really say the same about the raven until super late game.
On August 20 2012 19:58 syriuszonito wrote: Lol, the reduced creep spread and raven buff is a very good move by blizzard and exactly address the problem with zvt atm (that is inefficiency of mid game pushes bcoz of creep spread and a lategame deathball by zerg). If you think that the queen range buff should be reverted so you can again control the game since 5 min with 4 helions then its time for you to wake up and start thinking about new strategies instead of making xXx qq topics on forum about balance.
In all seriousness I wonder why Avilo makes these topics instead of trying to improve and incorperate the new changes into his game play. It's not going to change anything.
You wonder why because you have likely never played terran. Queen buff should not be reverted completely, but a jump from 3-5 range was too much. It should go back to 4. The creep change is a step in the right direction, but ravens are just a completely different tech path from anything useful in the TvZ early game so that is not the right area to address for this matchup.
Unless you're GM or high master I highly doubt a Queen having 2 extra range is the reason you're losing.
go improve your macro go improve your game sense go switch up some builds
whining about a change that isn't ridiculous seems silly (i'm talking colossus 22 range silly) when you have so many other aspects you can improve to get the win through those means
Does Avilo have amazing gamesense? Does he have amazing macro? Has he switched up his builds and tried new things and timings? I can guess the answer to these based on how many times he's written out posts such as these addressing things that don't really matter to him.(don't get me wrong he's a decent semi-pro) Perhaps he should go practice and aquire these things through practicing and working hard instead of writing a new balance post every 3 weeks.
Watching IdrA v Bomber at one of the MLGs I can't remember (it was a while ago but still relevant) proved the power of Terran macro and never missing cycles where everytime idrA just managed to destroy the army Bomber had 1 almost surpassing the previous' size ready to send, and the main reason why IdrA managed to deal with it was because of how on with his injects he was and matching Bomber's macro
Don't blame an extra 2 range on something that is really irrelevant when you can just improve other aspects and win regardless. Korean Terrans sucked it up and did the above. The result? They're winning.
Well now i've seen you defend zerg in every thread containing the word Terran, and all you've basicly said is that terran should get better and questioning peoples skill in every form. I gotta ask, what rank GM are you and how many years have you been pro?
Every thread as in this one and the one where I defend JRecco's improvement in form as he left school?
I'll question your credentials on stating there is a problem first before I show you mine for defending the whine
So in other words you arent high rated, woudent that be easier to say? And stop saying other people should just play better when you arent pro yourself.
On August 20 2012 19:58 syriuszonito wrote: Lol, the reduced creep spread and raven buff is a very good move by blizzard and exactly address the problem with zvt atm (that is inefficiency of mid game pushes bcoz of creep spread and a lategame deathball by zerg). If you think that the queen range buff should be reverted so you can again control the game since 5 min with 4 helions then its time for you to wake up and start thinking about new strategies instead of making xXx qq topics on forum about balance.
In all seriousness I wonder why Avilo makes these topics instead of trying to improve and incorperate the new changes into his game play. It's not going to change anything.
You wonder why because you have likely never played terran. Queen buff should not be reverted completely, but a jump from 3-5 range was too much. It should go back to 4. The creep change is a step in the right direction, but ravens are just a completely different tech path from anything useful in the TvZ early game so that is not the right area to address for this matchup.
Unless you're GM or high master I highly doubt a Queen having 2 extra range is the reason you're losing.
go improve your macro go improve your game sense go switch up some builds
whining about a change that isn't ridiculous seems silly (i'm talking colossus 22 range silly) when you have so many other aspects you can improve to get the win through those means
Does Avilo have amazing gamesense? Does he have amazing macro? Has he switched up his builds and tried new things and timings? I can guess the answer to these based on how many times he's written out posts such as these addressing things that don't really matter to him.(don't get me wrong he's a decent semi-pro) Perhaps he should go practice and aquire these things through practicing and working hard instead of writing a new balance post every 3 weeks.
Watching IdrA v Bomber at one of the MLGs I can't remember (it was a while ago but still relevant) proved the power of Terran macro and never missing cycles where everytime idrA just managed to destroy the army Bomber had 1 almost surpassing the previous' size ready to send, and the main reason why IdrA managed to deal with it was because of how on with his injects he was and matching Bomber's macro
Don't blame an extra 2 range on something that is really irrelevant when you can just improve other aspects and win regardless. Korean Terrans sucked it up and did the above. The result? They're winning.
Actually, MVP mentioned a lot of times he was struggling with vZ. Funny thing is, when the TOP pros complain or comment on balance, people always say they that of course they will complain so their race gets buffed and can win more money. So, non top players can't comment on balance and top players can't comment on balance.
A lot of Korean Terrans mentioned they were struggling vZ as I expect they would when they answer isn't clear, when they start seriously implying it's flat out impossible thats when to get worried. I expect the same happened in Brood War when a metagame shift happened there except a lot of them didn't get interviewed and thus get a chance to express their thoughts on Brood War balance. On a side note Leenock recently said that he was struggling as Zerg, therefore who to believe?
Just because something is beatable doesn't mean it's balanced. Blizzard could give a +1 attack and range buff along with combat shield not needing a research to the marine and it would be beatable early game, but pretty difficult. I'm willing to bet Zerg players would start whining to no end about it though. Zerg would cry they can't hatch first anymore even though it'd be the same situation you and other people point out that Terran is just upset they can't do the same builds anymore.
I said it before. 5 rax reaper on Steppes of War was beatable. Proxy 2 rax bunker pressure was beatable. Bfh and marine elevator in the main was beatable. Where were your Zerg innovations then? Why didn't Zerg adapt to the game? Why did pro Zerg players (Nestea even claimed T was imba even though he won a GSL) complain about stuff like that? They could have just gotten better but no they did exactly what Terran is doing now.
Innovation is Protoss getting smashed by 1-1-1 in PvT and learning the proper scouting method, unit compositions, and positioning to deal with it. An even decently executed 1-1-1 in TvP is pretty much unstoppable in anything lower than masters. Zerg never did anything of the sort. So I completely disregard any Zerg telling Terran to stop whining and innovate because Terran has innovated much more than Zerg ever has, but gets nerfed everytime they do.
On August 20 2012 19:58 syriuszonito wrote: Lol, the reduced creep spread and raven buff is a very good move by blizzard and exactly address the problem with zvt atm (that is inefficiency of mid game pushes bcoz of creep spread and a lategame deathball by zerg). If you think that the queen range buff should be reverted so you can again control the game since 5 min with 4 helions then its time for you to wake up and start thinking about new strategies instead of making xXx qq topics on forum about balance.
In all seriousness I wonder why Avilo makes these topics instead of trying to improve and incorperate the new changes into his game play. It's not going to change anything.
You wonder why because you have likely never played terran. Queen buff should not be reverted completely, but a jump from 3-5 range was too much. It should go back to 4. The creep change is a step in the right direction, but ravens are just a completely different tech path from anything useful in the TvZ early game so that is not the right area to address for this matchup.
Like banshees?
They can give a terran an edge, but again, with that queen buff they are more of a gimmick than anything dangerous. They can kill a few drones before zerg defends but then they are useless unless the army moves out with no AA. Then once infestors hit they are beyond useless, at that point its kinda like making hydras in a TvZ.
Queen buff didn't affect their anti-air attack at all.... Only their ground one. Banshees becoming less useful has to do with the change in timings, and zergs getting better at defending.
About the topic at hand, I am not good enough to comment much.
Although I have the *feeling* zerg may be a BIT strong in the match up. BUT, at the same time I don't see enough variation in Terran playstyles to say that these balance problems are real or just an adaptation problem.
BCs + Yamato, Banshees + HS, Ghosts + Nukes should be tested more before any heavy balance changes.
On August 20 2012 19:58 syriuszonito wrote: Lol, the reduced creep spread and raven buff is a very good move by blizzard and exactly address the problem with zvt atm (that is inefficiency of mid game pushes bcoz of creep spread and a lategame deathball by zerg). If you think that the queen range buff should be reverted so you can again control the game since 5 min with 4 helions then its time for you to wake up and start thinking about new strategies instead of making xXx qq topics on forum about balance.
In all seriousness I wonder why Avilo makes these topics instead of trying to improve and incorperate the new changes into his game play. It's not going to change anything.
You wonder why because you have likely never played terran. Queen buff should not be reverted completely, but a jump from 3-5 range was too much. It should go back to 4. The creep change is a step in the right direction, but ravens are just a completely different tech path from anything useful in the TvZ early game so that is not the right area to address for this matchup.
Like banshees?
They can give a terran an edge, but again, with that queen buff they are more of a gimmick than anything dangerous. They can kill a few drones before zerg defends but then they are useless unless the army moves out with no AA. Then once infestors hit they are beyond useless, at that point its kinda like making hydras in a TvZ.
I wouldn't say useless... If all else fails, they are a great way to control the map, and expand behind.
I think terrans should go back to try using more ghosts against zerg. I understand that the ghost is alot worse than it was a few patches go, but emp'ing infestors is really important when playing against broodlord infestor. The tricky part would probobly be ultra transitions, but emp'ing infestors would make it alot easier. There also would be the utility of nukes as well as snipe that u can use on overseers to remain cloaked.
Ravens are really hard to get to and im not sure what Blizzard could to make them worth it without making it op. Perhapps try a reasonable health buff?
On August 20 2012 19:58 syriuszonito wrote: Lol, the reduced creep spread and raven buff is a very good move by blizzard and exactly address the problem with zvt atm (that is inefficiency of mid game pushes bcoz of creep spread and a lategame deathball by zerg). If you think that the queen range buff should be reverted so you can again control the game since 5 min with 4 helions then its time for you to wake up and start thinking about new strategies instead of making xXx qq topics on forum about balance.
In all seriousness I wonder why Avilo makes these topics instead of trying to improve and incorperate the new changes into his game play. It's not going to change anything.
You wonder why because you have likely never played terran. Queen buff should not be reverted completely, but a jump from 3-5 range was too much. It should go back to 4. The creep change is a step in the right direction, but ravens are just a completely different tech path from anything useful in the TvZ early game so that is not the right area to address for this matchup.
Unless you're GM or high master I highly doubt a Queen having 2 extra range is the reason you're losing.
go improve your macro go improve your game sense go switch up some builds
whining about a change that isn't ridiculous seems silly (i'm talking colossus 22 range silly) when you have so many other aspects you can improve to get the win through those means
Does Avilo have amazing gamesense? Does he have amazing macro? Has he switched up his builds and tried new things and timings? I can guess the answer to these based on how many times he's written out posts such as these addressing things that don't really matter to him.(don't get me wrong he's a decent semi-pro) Perhaps he should go practice and aquire these things through practicing and working hard instead of writing a new balance post every 3 weeks.
Watching IdrA v Bomber at one of the MLGs I can't remember (it was a while ago but still relevant) proved the power of Terran macro and never missing cycles where everytime idrA just managed to destroy the army Bomber had 1 almost surpassing the previous' size ready to send, and the main reason why IdrA managed to deal with it was because of how on with his injects he was and matching Bomber's macro
Don't blame an extra 2 range on something that is really irrelevant when you can just improve other aspects and win regardless. Korean Terrans sucked it up and did the above. The result? They're winning.
Well now i've seen you defend zerg in every thread containing the word Terran, and all you've basicly said is that terran should get better and questioning peoples skill in every form. I gotta ask, what rank GM are you and how many years have you been pro?
Every thread as in this one and the one where I defend JRecco's improvement in form as he left school?
I'll question your credentials on stating there is a problem first before I show you mine for defending the whine
So in other words you arent high rated, woudent that be easier to say? And stop saying other people should just play better when you arent pro yourself.
In e-sports involving team play people blame teammates when they lose, in Starcraft 2 since it's 1v1, people will rather blame balance before trying to improve themselves because it's a natural human reaction. Having that said blizzard is doing a good job at balancing the game, only long-term bad results would prove anything wrong with any match-ups and seems like 51% vs 49% isnt something to blame your lose over.
On August 20 2012 19:58 syriuszonito wrote: Lol, the reduced creep spread and raven buff is a very good move by blizzard and exactly address the problem with zvt atm (that is inefficiency of mid game pushes bcoz of creep spread and a lategame deathball by zerg). If you think that the queen range buff should be reverted so you can again control the game since 5 min with 4 helions then its time for you to wake up and start thinking about new strategies instead of making xXx qq topics on forum about balance.
In all seriousness I wonder why Avilo makes these topics instead of trying to improve and incorperate the new changes into his game play. It's not going to change anything.
You wonder why because you have likely never played terran. Queen buff should not be reverted completely, but a jump from 3-5 range was too much. It should go back to 4. The creep change is a step in the right direction, but ravens are just a completely different tech path from anything useful in the TvZ early game so that is not the right area to address for this matchup.
Like banshees?
They can give a terran an edge, but again, with that queen buff they are more of a gimmick than anything dangerous. They can kill a few drones before zerg defends but then they are useless unless the army moves out with no AA. Then once infestors hit they are beyond useless, at that point its kinda like making hydras in a TvZ.
Queen buff didn't affect their anti-air attack at all.... Only their ground one. Banshees becoming less useful has to do with the change in timings, and zergs getting better at defending.
About the topic at hand, I am not good enough to comment much.
Although I have the *feeling* zerg may be a BIT strong in the match up. BUT, at the same time I don't see enough variation in Terran playstyles to say that these balance problems are real or just an adaptation problem.
BCs + Yamato, Banshees + HS, Ghosts + Nukes should be tested more before any heavy balance changes.
Queen buff didn't affect their anti-air. But since they are much better at holding ground aggressive. Zergs are making more queens and less lings/spines so in effect, zerg opening are MUCH better vs banshees.
As for your BC, Ghosts, etc. No one has every claimed that super late game terran army is not good. It is just very HARD to make that transition without dying first. The reason why there have been more complaints about infestor/BL from terrans is that the queen changes made zergs able to drone harder in the early game thus earlier tech, more queens for creep spread which makes the terran pre BL tank marine push much easier to hold. The BL/Corrupter/Infestor combo wasn't changed at all in the patch, but GETTING there is a lot easier.
Things snowball a lot in RTS games. Even being able to have 3 more drones on gas early game just speeds up everything so much.
On August 20 2012 23:00 Radament wrote:Ravens are really hard to get to and im not sure what Blizzard could to make them worth it without making it op. Perhapps try a reasonable health buff?
Imo the best would be to buff the launch range of HSM while nerfing it's speed (and maybe it's lifespan). That way Ravens are no suicide commandos anymore. The HSM being quite slow would let most units out-run it, but that's also an effect. Picking just 1 unit out of your army and sending it away, because it's got the HSM lock isn't that easy. Atleast players would profit from good micro skills. For the not so good players it's run away with the whole army, which can be a tactical advantage for the Terran. The only unit that couldn't out-run is probably the Broodlord. But then you can spread them and/or guard them properly.
On August 20 2012 19:58 syriuszonito wrote: Lol, the reduced creep spread and raven buff is a very good move by blizzard and exactly address the problem with zvt atm (that is inefficiency of mid game pushes bcoz of creep spread and a lategame deathball by zerg). If you think that the queen range buff should be reverted so you can again control the game since 5 min with 4 helions then its time for you to wake up and start thinking about new strategies instead of making xXx qq topics on forum about balance.
In all seriousness I wonder why Avilo makes these topics instead of trying to improve and incorperate the new changes into his game play. It's not going to change anything.
You wonder why because you have likely never played terran. Queen buff should not be reverted completely, but a jump from 3-5 range was too much. It should go back to 4. The creep change is a step in the right direction, but ravens are just a completely different tech path from anything useful in the TvZ early game so that is not the right area to address for this matchup.
Unless you're GM or high master I highly doubt a Queen having 2 extra range is the reason you're losing.
go improve your macro go improve your game sense go switch up some builds
whining about a change that isn't ridiculous seems silly (i'm talking colossus 22 range silly) when you have so many other aspects you can improve to get the win through those means
Does Avilo have amazing gamesense? Does he have amazing macro? Has he switched up his builds and tried new things and timings? I can guess the answer to these based on how many times he's written out posts such as these addressing things that don't really matter to him.(don't get me wrong he's a decent semi-pro) Perhaps he should go practice and aquire these things through practicing and working hard instead of writing a new balance post every 3 weeks.
Watching IdrA v Bomber at one of the MLGs I can't remember (it was a while ago but still relevant) proved the power of Terran macro and never missing cycles where everytime idrA just managed to destroy the army Bomber had 1 almost surpassing the previous' size ready to send, and the main reason why IdrA managed to deal with it was because of how on with his injects he was and matching Bomber's macro
Don't blame an extra 2 range on something that is really irrelevant when you can just improve other aspects and win regardless. Korean Terrans sucked it up and did the above. The result? They're winning.
Well now i've seen you defend zerg in every thread containing the word Terran, and all you've basicly said is that terran should get better and questioning peoples skill in every form. I gotta ask, what rank GM are you and how many years have you been pro?
Every thread as in this one and the one where I defend JRecco's improvement in form as he left school?
I'll question your credentials on stating there is a problem first before I show you mine for defending the whine
So in other words you arent high rated, woudent that be easier to say? And stop saying other people should just play better when you arent pro yourself.
In e-sports involving team play people blame teammates when they lose, in Starcraft 2 since it's 1v1, people will rather blame balance before trying to improve themselves because it's a natural human reaction. Having that said blizzard is doing a good job at balancing the game, only long-term bad results would prove anything wrong with any match-ups and seems like 51% vs 49% isnt something to blame your lose over.
It is not just Blizzard balancing. It is also the maps. I think if you bought back Steppes of War, T will still do will even with the queen patch.
And I don't agree that you can't complain because there are still improvements you can make to your game. EVERYONE can still make improves including MVP, Taeja, MKP, DRG, MC, Seed. I think it comes down to the difficulty in execution for the attacking and defending player. One good example of this would be the 1-1-1. It was pretty abusive. It was possible to hold it off but the margin for error was much less. Many protoss players complained. It was not like they were facing a PuMa 1-1-1 on ladder. I am sure that if you are in Platinum, you can hold off a 1-1-1 with better play. Doesn that mean they don't have a right to complain?
On August 20 2012 19:58 syriuszonito wrote: Lol, the reduced creep spread and raven buff is a very good move by blizzard and exactly address the problem with zvt atm (that is inefficiency of mid game pushes bcoz of creep spread and a lategame deathball by zerg). If you think that the queen range buff should be reverted so you can again control the game since 5 min with 4 helions then its time for you to wake up and start thinking about new strategies instead of making xXx qq topics on forum about balance.
In all seriousness I wonder why Avilo makes these topics instead of trying to improve and incorperate the new changes into his game play. It's not going to change anything.
You wonder why because you have likely never played terran. Queen buff should not be reverted completely, but a jump from 3-5 range was too much. It should go back to 4. The creep change is a step in the right direction, but ravens are just a completely different tech path from anything useful in the TvZ early game so that is not the right area to address for this matchup.
Unless you're GM or high master I highly doubt a Queen having 2 extra range is the reason you're losing.
go improve your macro go improve your game sense go switch up some builds
whining about a change that isn't ridiculous seems silly (i'm talking colossus 22 range silly) when you have so many other aspects you can improve to get the win through those means
Does Avilo have amazing gamesense? Does he have amazing macro? Has he switched up his builds and tried new things and timings? I can guess the answer to these based on how many times he's written out posts such as these addressing things that don't really matter to him.(don't get me wrong he's a decent semi-pro) Perhaps he should go practice and aquire these things through practicing and working hard instead of writing a new balance post every 3 weeks.
Watching IdrA v Bomber at one of the MLGs I can't remember (it was a while ago but still relevant) proved the power of Terran macro and never missing cycles where everytime idrA just managed to destroy the army Bomber had 1 almost surpassing the previous' size ready to send, and the main reason why IdrA managed to deal with it was because of how on with his injects he was and matching Bomber's macro
Don't blame an extra 2 range on something that is really irrelevant when you can just improve other aspects and win regardless. Korean Terrans sucked it up and did the above. The result? They're winning.
Actually, MVP mentioned a lot of times he was struggling with vZ. Funny thing is, when the TOP pros complain or comment on balance, people always say they that of course they will complain so their race gets buffed and can win more money. So, non top players can't comment on balance and top players can't comment on balance.
A lot of Korean Terrans mentioned they were struggling vZ as I expect they would when they answer isn't clear, when they start seriously implying it's flat out impossible thats when to get worried. I expect the same happened in Brood War when a metagame shift happened there except a lot of them didn't get interviewed and thus get a chance to express their thoughts on Brood War balance. On a side note Leenock recently said that he was struggling as Zerg, therefore who to believe?
Just because something is beatable doesn't mean it's balanced. Blizzard could give a +1 attack and range buff along with combat shield not needing a research to the marine and it would be beatable early game, but pretty difficult. I'm willing to bet Zerg players would start whining to no end about it though. Zerg would cry they can't hatch first anymore even though it'd be the same situation you and other people point out that Terran is just upset they can't do the same builds anymore.
I said it before. 5 rax reaper on Steppes of War was beatable. Proxy 2 rax bunker pressure was beatable. Bfh and marine elevator in the main was beatable. Where were your Zerg innovations then? Why didn't Zerg adapt to the game? Why did pro Zerg players (Nestea even claimed T was imba even though he won a GSL) complain about stuff like that? They could have just gotten better but no they did exactly what Terran is doing now.
Innovation is Protoss getting smashed by 1-1-1 in PvT and learning the proper scouting method, unit compositions, and positioning to deal with it. An even decently executed 1-1-1 in TvP is pretty much unstoppable in anything lower than masters. Zerg never did anything of the sort. So I completely disregard any Zerg telling Terran to stop whining and innovate because Terran has innovated much more than Zerg ever has, but gets nerfed everytime they do.
OT but Protoss got +1 to Immortal range and Terran +5 seconds to barracks build time. Protoss got patched out of 1/1/1
On August 20 2012 19:58 syriuszonito wrote: Lol, the reduced creep spread and raven buff is a very good move by blizzard and exactly address the problem with zvt atm (that is inefficiency of mid game pushes bcoz of creep spread and a lategame deathball by zerg). If you think that the queen range buff should be reverted so you can again control the game since 5 min with 4 helions then its time for you to wake up and start thinking about new strategies instead of making xXx qq topics on forum about balance.
In all seriousness I wonder why Avilo makes these topics instead of trying to improve and incorperate the new changes into his game play. It's not going to change anything.
You wonder why because you have likely never played terran. Queen buff should not be reverted completely, but a jump from 3-5 range was too much. It should go back to 4. The creep change is a step in the right direction, but ravens are just a completely different tech path from anything useful in the TvZ early game so that is not the right area to address for this matchup.
Unless you're GM or high master I highly doubt a Queen having 2 extra range is the reason you're losing.
go improve your macro go improve your game sense go switch up some builds
whining about a change that isn't ridiculous seems silly (i'm talking colossus 22 range silly) when you have so many other aspects you can improve to get the win through those means
Does Avilo have amazing gamesense? Does he have amazing macro? Has he switched up his builds and tried new things and timings? I can guess the answer to these based on how many times he's written out posts such as these addressing things that don't really matter to him.(don't get me wrong he's a decent semi-pro) Perhaps he should go practice and aquire these things through practicing and working hard instead of writing a new balance post every 3 weeks.
Watching IdrA v Bomber at one of the MLGs I can't remember (it was a while ago but still relevant) proved the power of Terran macro and never missing cycles where everytime idrA just managed to destroy the army Bomber had 1 almost surpassing the previous' size ready to send, and the main reason why IdrA managed to deal with it was because of how on with his injects he was and matching Bomber's macro
Don't blame an extra 2 range on something that is really irrelevant when you can just improve other aspects and win regardless. Korean Terrans sucked it up and did the above. The result? They're winning.
Actually, MVP mentioned a lot of times he was struggling with vZ. Funny thing is, when the TOP pros complain or comment on balance, people always say they that of course they will complain so their race gets buffed and can win more money. So, non top players can't comment on balance and top players can't comment on balance.
A lot of Korean Terrans mentioned they were struggling vZ as I expect they would when they answer isn't clear, when they start seriously implying it's flat out impossible thats when to get worried. I expect the same happened in Brood War when a metagame shift happened there except a lot of them didn't get interviewed and thus get a chance to express their thoughts on Brood War balance. On a side note Leenock recently said that he was struggling as Zerg, therefore who to believe?
Just because something is beatable doesn't mean it's balanced. Blizzard could give a +1 attack and range buff along with combat shield not needing a research to the marine and it would be beatable early game, but pretty difficult. I'm willing to bet Zerg players would start whining to no end about it though. Zerg would cry they can't hatch first anymore even though it'd be the same situation you and other people point out that Terran is just upset they can't do the same builds anymore.
I said it before. 5 rax reaper on Steppes of War was beatable. Proxy 2 rax bunker pressure was beatable. Bfh and marine elevator in the main was beatable. Where were your Zerg innovations then? Why didn't Zerg adapt to the game? Why did pro Zerg players (Nestea even claimed T was imba even though he won a GSL) complain about stuff like that? They could have just gotten better but no they did exactly what Terran is doing now.
Innovation is Protoss getting smashed by 1-1-1 in PvT and learning the proper scouting method, unit compositions, and positioning to deal with it. An even decently executed 1-1-1 in TvP is pretty much unstoppable in anything lower than masters. Zerg never did anything of the sort. So I completely disregard any Zerg telling Terran to stop whining and innovate because Terran has innovated much more than Zerg ever has, but gets nerfed everytime they do.
OT but Protoss got +1 to Immortal range and Terran +5 seconds to barracks build time. Protoss got patched out of 1/1/1
I think it was a bit of both. Protosses were getting better at holding it and of course the patch help. A lot of map changes as well (cross spawns, removal of some maps in tournaments).
This thread is a disgrace to TL. We have gold leaguers saying Zerg is an easy race and ad hominim everywhere. The few that say practice is more important than whining are actually the minority in this thread. What happened to banning people for this stuff? Is this meant to be the quarantine thread for everyone's bullshit balance whining?
On August 20 2012 19:58 syriuszonito wrote: Lol, the reduced creep spread and raven buff is a very good move by blizzard and exactly address the problem with zvt atm (that is inefficiency of mid game pushes bcoz of creep spread and a lategame deathball by zerg). If you think that the queen range buff should be reverted so you can again control the game since 5 min with 4 helions then its time for you to wake up and start thinking about new strategies instead of making xXx qq topics on forum about balance.
In all seriousness I wonder why Avilo makes these topics instead of trying to improve and incorperate the new changes into his game play. It's not going to change anything.
You wonder why because you have likely never played terran. Queen buff should not be reverted completely, but a jump from 3-5 range was too much. It should go back to 4. The creep change is a step in the right direction, but ravens are just a completely different tech path from anything useful in the TvZ early game so that is not the right area to address for this matchup.
Unless you're GM or high master I highly doubt a Queen having 2 extra range is the reason you're losing.
go improve your macro go improve your game sense go switch up some builds
whining about a change that isn't ridiculous seems silly (i'm talking colossus 22 range silly) when you have so many other aspects you can improve to get the win through those means
Does Avilo have amazing gamesense? Does he have amazing macro? Has he switched up his builds and tried new things and timings? I can guess the answer to these based on how many times he's written out posts such as these addressing things that don't really matter to him.(don't get me wrong he's a decent semi-pro) Perhaps he should go practice and aquire these things through practicing and working hard instead of writing a new balance post every 3 weeks.
Watching IdrA v Bomber at one of the MLGs I can't remember (it was a while ago but still relevant) proved the power of Terran macro and never missing cycles where everytime idrA just managed to destroy the army Bomber had 1 almost surpassing the previous' size ready to send, and the main reason why IdrA managed to deal with it was because of how on with his injects he was and matching Bomber's macro
Don't blame an extra 2 range on something that is really irrelevant when you can just improve other aspects and win regardless. Korean Terrans sucked it up and did the above. The result? They're winning.
Actually, MVP mentioned a lot of times he was struggling with vZ. Funny thing is, when the TOP pros complain or comment on balance, people always say they that of course they will complain so their race gets buffed and can win more money. So, non top players can't comment on balance and top players can't comment on balance.
A lot of Korean Terrans mentioned they were struggling vZ as I expect they would when they answer isn't clear, when they start seriously implying it's flat out impossible thats when to get worried. I expect the same happened in Brood War when a metagame shift happened there except a lot of them didn't get interviewed and thus get a chance to express their thoughts on Brood War balance. On a side note Leenock recently said that he was struggling as Zerg, therefore who to believe?
Just because something is beatable doesn't mean it's balanced. Blizzard could give a +1 attack and range buff along with combat shield not needing a research to the marine and it would be beatable early game, but pretty difficult. I'm willing to bet Zerg players would start whining to no end about it though. Zerg would cry they can't hatch first anymore even though it'd be the same situation you and other people point out that Terran is just upset they can't do the same builds anymore.
I said it before. 5 rax reaper on Steppes of War was beatable. Proxy 2 rax bunker pressure was beatable. Bfh and marine elevator in the main was beatable. Where were your Zerg innovations then? Why didn't Zerg adapt to the game? Why did pro Zerg players (Nestea even claimed T was imba even though he won a GSL) complain about stuff like that? They could have just gotten better but no they did exactly what Terran is doing now.
Innovation is Protoss getting smashed by 1-1-1 in PvT and learning the proper scouting method, unit compositions, and positioning to deal with it. An even decently executed 1-1-1 in TvP is pretty much unstoppable in anything lower than masters. Zerg never did anything of the sort. So I completely disregard any Zerg telling Terran to stop whining and innovate because Terran has innovated much more than Zerg ever has, but gets nerfed everytime they do.
OT but Protoss got +1 to Immortal range and Terran +5 seconds to barracks build time. Protoss got patched out of 1/1/1
I think it was a bit of both. Protosses were getting better at holding it and of course the patch help. A lot of map changes as well (cross spawns, removal of some maps in tournaments).
I think it was more the patch turned the situation around and made immortal pushs suddenly really strong against bunkers of a terran. Where before tosses started to not lose their natural anymore, which was also map based though. But I think it turned out fine that way. Doesn't even bothers me anymore that they are now way to easy to control, gives me time for other things. But it affected mech actually quiet heavily, as now suddenly hellions can't protect tanks anymore, because they have to drive out to far in the front and have to enter aoe range of the opponent, while the aoe is outside of tank range. Thors also can't 250mm them that easily anymore, because they can run out of range before getting affected. It is really impressive what a small range buff can do. Luckily ghosts are easy to use with mech now. And it is nice to see the immortal used more often, without it spidering around trying to retreat or attack and fail at both, which was quiet a painful sight.
On August 20 2012 11:56 KawaiiRice wrote: I wish we could just get irradiate back to replace HSM. Terran's only aoe spell is HSM which is a projectile costs a lot and takes time blah blah etc. Protoss has storm which is instant and DOT zerg's spell is also instant DOT and root.
replacing hsm with irradiate would make it more in line with the other races/useful overall/easier to balance and also more interesting to watch in general (mass hsm is like KABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMM, well, game over).
On August 20 2012 12:12 BgSBendeR wrote: @Avilo, TvZ is fine. If you spent all that time practising instead of whining on the internet. You might actually become slightly better. Mvp makes good use of the raven and doesn't complain about TvZ Balance so your entire post is irrelevant.
Lack of whining from the best SC2 player to date, when he never really says anything in the first place, doesn't say much.
TvZ isn't broken. Terran is just UP. We have no late game, and therein lies the problem. This buff does not help the late game. Ravens are still not worth what they cost.
If Zerg is going to be uncontested, make sure Terran has a viable late game. That solves the TvP issue as well.
I think that replacing HSM with irradiate would be the way to go in terms of tweaking this late game. And I agree that it would solve the late game problem for Terran.
On August 20 2012 11:56 KawaiiRice wrote: I wish we could just get irradiate back to replace HSM. Terran's only aoe spell is HSM which is a projectile costs a lot and takes time blah blah etc. Protoss has storm which is instant and DOT zerg's spell is also instant DOT and root.
replacing hsm with irradiate would make it more in line with the other races/useful overall/easier to balance and also more interesting to watch in general (mass hsm is like KABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMM, well, game over).
Words of Wisdom from Kawaii Rice.
So good.
and just think about it, irradiate on tanks, kills any lings that comes running by
On August 20 2012 12:12 BgSBendeR wrote: @Avilo, TvZ is fine. If you spent all that time practising instead of whining on the internet. You might actually become slightly better. Mvp makes good use of the raven and doesn't complain about TvZ Balance so your entire post is irrelevant.
Lack of whining from the best SC2 player to date, when he never really says anything in the first place, doesn't say much.
TvZ isn't broken. Terran is just UP. We have no late game, and therein lies the problem. This buff does not help the late game. Ravens are still not worth what they cost.
If Zerg is going to be uncontested, make sure Terran has a viable late game. That solves the TvP issue as well.
Terran has no late game? What in the actual fuck. Terran actually has the best late game army of the 3 races. Mvp beats zerg late game. so yes You guys are whining for no reason. Start actually practising and maybe you won't be as bad.
Fruitdealer won the first GSL. Why was reaper and medivac nerfed right after? Fruitdealer beat Terran players so why didn't Zerg players just do what he did? Maybe they should have just practiced more so they wouldn't be so bad.
You see how using a small sample size to make your point makes you ignorant? When the majority of Terran players (pros included) haven an issue with something it should be addressed. You can't just sit here and be like "hey one guy beat it, wth is everyone else complaining about." And yes, Mvp does lose to late game zerg too. He played late game TvZ beautifully at IEM, yet players he is significantly better than (I will give credit to Vortix and Nerchio, but they are not even close to Mvp's level) gave him a much harder time than he should have.
If one player is doing it, It simply means that it's possible. Perfection comes from practice. Mvp did not get to where he is today by whining on the internet with every patch.
*Edit typo.
Not sure how this guy gets away when he keeps posting incendiary comments.
On August 20 2012 20:56 Natespank wrote: 0 terrans remain in the winners bracket of WCG korea- it's nice that Blizzard intends to tweak TvZ lategame, but they haven't done a thing to help out in TvP lategame. Terran is already the hardest of the 3 races by far overall, it would be nice to see some acknowledgment in the form of a balance tweak... and not a crappy speed bonus to the raven. The raven, to come into regular use, needs more than .25 speed...
I think Blizzard is finally seeing the problem after a long, long time of needing something of this kind.
According to this logic. BW never was a decent game, cause if there is something difficult to overcome, it needs to be patched. Guess what, BW havent been patched for a long long time, and still it is amazingly competetive. Although WoL is a different beast, glaring imbalances should be patched, but not several months after patch. There will be no patch before Hots anyway, why bother.
On August 20 2012 11:56 KawaiiRice wrote: I wish we could just get irradiate back to replace HSM. Terran's only aoe spell is HSM which is a projectile costs a lot and takes time blah blah etc. Protoss has storm which is instant and DOT zerg's spell is also instant DOT and root.
replacing hsm with irradiate would make it more in line with the other races/useful overall/easier to balance and also more interesting to watch in general (mass hsm is like KABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMM, well, game over).
Words of Wisdom from Kawaii Rice.
So good.
and just think about it, irradiate on tanks, kills any lings that comes running by
welp
Why would lings run right into tanks, which are irradiated? It's not like energy is free or can be repeatedly cast. Give Zergs more respect than just running their lings into irradiated units.
random idea that's probably been mentioned, but what about decreasing the cost of the Raven by 50gas? Then you increase the cost of the HSM upgrade?
It makes it more viable in mid game for clearing creep and auto-turret harrassing, but keeps the HSM function as a late-game deathball tool. allows you to have them for longer to build up energy. if it entered mid-game zvt meta, it might even force zerg to shift to a muta transition to stop harrass or snipe ravens. just tossing it out there, don't throw me to the wolves.
On August 20 2012 11:56 KawaiiRice wrote: I wish we could just get irradiate back to replace HSM. Terran's only aoe spell is HSM which is a projectile costs a lot and takes time blah blah etc. Protoss has storm which is instant and DOT zerg's spell is also instant DOT and root.
replacing hsm with irradiate would make it more in line with the other races/useful overall/easier to balance and also more interesting to watch in general (mass hsm is like KABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMM, well, game over).
Words of Wisdom from Kawaii Rice.
So good.
and just think about it, irradiate on tanks, kills any lings that comes running by
welp
Why would lings run right into tanks, which are irradiated? It's not like energy is free or can be repeatedly cast. Give Zergs more respect than just running their lings into irradiated units.
My picture of a zerg player is someone who is missing many brain cells and attacks me only when the drool from their mouth gets too heavy and their head hits the keyboard's a button.
On August 21 2012 00:43 jliu wrote: random idea that's probably been mentioned, but what about decreasing the cost of the Raven by 50gas? Then you increase the cost of the HSM upgrade?
It makes it more viable in mid game for clearing creep and auto-turret harrassing, but keeps the HSM function as a late-game deathball tool. allows you to have them for longer to build up energy. if it entered mid-game zvt meta, it might even force zerg to shift to a muta transition to stop harrass or snipe ravens. just tossing it out there, don't throw me to the wolves.
I'm not a very good player but my biggest problem with Ravens isn't the fact that they are expensive or slow or whatever (which I do have a problem with but...) it's more the fact that I can get them out, and they're still kinda paperweights until I get energy for HSM, which takes a really long time.
Hello TL, I don't post much especially in balance matters, but I would like to ask a question to the terran players. This is not a snipe and it does not contain a snarky tone. If infestor fungal were to be nerfed, how does zerg deal with endgame marine production? I'm sure everyone sees at a minimum of 10 rax with reactors during that endgame period, that's 20 reactorsrines at a time with more queued with no more effort than holding down a button for the entirety of the endgame all which can be financed by quickly muling up a newly gotten base. Add in 7-10 medivacs which will almost completely negate the fungal spell. With a production rate of that caliber zerg injects and baneling usage cant keep up enough to protect.the broodlords in the sky. Add in 3 properly times starports with reactors Vikings can't really be negated.
On August 21 2012 00:54 skadumdums wrote: Hello TL, I don't post much especially in balance matters, but I would like to ask a question to the terran players. This is not a snipe and it does not contain a snarky tone. If infestor fungal were to be nerfed, how does zerg deal with endgame marine production? I'm sure everyone sees at a minimum of 10 rax with reactors during that endgame period, that's 20 reactorsrines at a time with more queued with no more effort than holding down a button for the entirety of the endgame all which can be financed by quickly muling up a newly gotten base. Add in 7-10 medivacs which will almost completely negate the fungal spell. With a production rate of that caliber zerg injects and baneling usage cant keep up enough to protect.the broodlords in the sky. Add in 3 properly times starports with reactors Vikings can't really be negated.
Believe it or not, you can nerf something without completely neutering it.
I think getting rid of the root, and throwing a slow on there would be not too bad.
On August 21 2012 00:54 skadumdums wrote: Hello TL, I don't post much especially in balance matters, but I would like to ask a question to the terran players. This is not a snipe and it does not contain a snarky tone. If infestor fungal were to be nerfed, how does zerg deal with endgame marine production? I'm sure everyone sees at a minimum of 10 rax with reactors during that endgame period, that's 20 reactorsrines at a time with more queued with no more effort than holding down a button for the entirety of the endgame all which can be financed by quickly muling up a newly gotten base. Add in 7-10 medivacs which will almost completely negate the fungal spell. With a production rate of that caliber zerg injects and baneling usage cant keep up enough to protect.the broodlords in the sky. Add in 3 properly times starports with reactors Vikings can't really be negated.
well marines need to be microed (correctly splited/stimmed at the right time..) to be effective against the zergs, so the bolded sentence is a bit of an underestimation from your part.
my answer would be that a nerf don't always mean to go from OP to useless in a single patch. the real problem is that fungal does well against the majority of terran army (marines and viking particularly) and feel to the terran like the pre-nerf ghost must had feeled for the zerg.
i think fungal should deal less effectively against viking, forcing the zerg to have more corruptors and less broods, without changing the effects on the bio side.
I think a big problem in TvZ is that infestors design allows them to kill a ton of unspread marines/vikings really quickly
marines being raped by fungal are ok i guess because storm is the same deal. but vikings are the real killer. vikings only have 120 health (wtf?) but they need such low health in order to be balanced with their high dps
My idea is to give vikings double health, but reduce their attackrate in air and ground modes by 50%. This means a viking takes twice as long to die, but takes twice as long to kill things. Actually double health is a stretch but my point is you can increase viking health and still keep it combat balanced by reducing attackspeed.
corrupters and vikings are balanced to kill eachother in a 1v1 fight with one having like 1health remianing, vikings and corrupters are evenly balanced combat stats wise, however corrupters have much more health and less dps, while vikings were balanced with more dps and less health. Dunno why blizzard felt this to be requires but I do not believe the reason for vikings low health is due to their range. Instead I believe the RANGE of vikings is balanced out in the fact that they cant transform into broodlords.
Lets compare vikings, corrupters, and pheonix. Ive faced some tosses that go collossi pheonix and its very strong because pheonix and vikings deal equal dps to eachother, but pheonix have 50% more health than vikings and cost the same. But this is blizzards balance logic because pheonix cannot transform into ground mode and fight ground units and I agree with them there
Pheonix beat vikings easily, but lose to corrupters because of corrupters high armor. While vikings are even with corrupters. The balance in all of this is that pheonix are massively FASTER than corrupters and in the ZvP matchup pheonix can pickoff queens and infestors with good micro and pheonix heavily counter mutalisks so they needed to be balanced to lose to corrupters.
Now back to vikings. My point in all of this was comparing combat stats between pheonix/viking/corrupter and trying to show that I believe blizzard simply gave vikings low health because they felt it would be cool to give them highdamage/lowhealth and they never suspected the metagame to get to this world where you got vikings trying to kill mass broodlords but they all get stunlock killed by 3 fungal growths.
So I suggest you increase viking health but lower attackspeed, thus keeping the same dps per health ratio thus same combat stats ratio but they are stronger against AoE like fungal so now it takes 5fungals to kill vikings instead of 3
So I suggest you increase viking health but lower attackspeed, thus keeping the same dps per health ratio thus same combat stats ratio but they are stronger against AoE like fungal so now it takes 5fungals to kill vikings instead of 3
I think that would create a problem in TvP as colossus would be alive too long. In my opinion it would be better idea to toy with armor type. At the moment vikings are armored + mechanical so they take bonus damage from fungal (double damage). Maybe swap armor type on vikings to light. To adjust phoenix vs vikings they would also have to swap phoenix bonus damage on biological instead of light (for mutas...). OR just remove fungal's bonus damage on armored
On the end I would be much happier if Blizzard would only remove snare from fungal and replace it with slow.
So I suggest you increase viking health but lower attackspeed, thus keeping the same dps per health ratio thus same combat stats ratio but they are stronger against AoE like fungal so now it takes 5fungals to kill vikings instead of 3
I think that would create a problem in TvP as colossus would be alive too long. In my opinion it would be better idea to toy with armor type. At the moment vikings are armored + mechanical so they take bonus damage from fungal (double damage). Maybe swap armor type on vikings to light. To adjust phoenix vs vikings they would also have to swap phoenix bonus damage on biological instead of light (for mutas...). OR just remove fungal's bonus damage on armored
On the end I would be much happier if Blizzard would only remove snare from fungal and replace it with slow.
I think the root is ok, so zerg can connect their melee units easier. Theproblem is they hitting air or raping vikings imho, of course that would have a lot of repercussions aside TvZ so i don't really how to change it. The change to no double damage to armored seems spot on.
Holy crap i just thought of something amazing that could fix the matchup.
How about new snipe, 100 energy for 100 damage, refunds 25 energy when used against a psionic unit.
now its 75 energy to snipe casters instead of 50 energy due to 1shotting instead of 2shotting them.
This snipe would probably be overpowered honestly, because even in the past it wasnt snipes energy/damage ratio that made it overpowered, it was its dps. In mass ghost battles all the ghosts never used their energy anyway, with this change their dps would INCREASE from its old stats (making it even stronger and more overpowered) but it just means the ghosts deplete all their energy instead of 50% of their energy.
3ghosts (6food) vs 1ultralisk (6food). Ghosts simply cast 5snipes and kill the ultralisk in a second. Same for broodlords.
In many ways, this snipe would be as powerful as the current lame ass stankin fungal that kills 30 vikings in 3 seconds stunlocking them
What do you guys think
EDIT: vikings do not take "double damage" from fungal... lol.. they take 40 like any armored unit
On August 21 2012 00:41 NightOfTheDead wrote: According to this logic. BW never was a decent game, cause if there is something difficult to overcome, it needs to be patched. Guess what, BW havent been patched for a long long time, and still it is amazingly competetive. Although WoL is a different beast, glaring imbalances should be patched, but not several months after patch. There will be no patch before Hots anyway, why bother.
What?
Mech was difficult to use as Terran, and you were always playing behind on economy, vision, map control, etc. but a 3 base Terran could easily smash a 5 base Z if he controlled his Tank/Sci Vessel/Mech army properly. Late game T with a fully maxed out Mech army in proper position kills 3+ 200 supply BW Z armies no problem.
The issue is that Z players think that it is somehow balanced that not only do they have a superior late game, that they also need to have the ability to have completely uncontested vision, map control, and exponential economical growth on top of that late game. Any Z player who is saying get better is simply riding the train, because every single Z if you look through their post history that has said "get better" says that to Terran players, but always go into ZvP threads about how +2 Blink Stalkers is impossible to hold without perfect injects, or how 2 base 1/1 sentry/immortal/prism pushes are impossible to stop even if scouted. Both TvP and ZvP are both better match-ups to watch and play right now because all races have some sort of chance of winning. Even in TvP, if the Terran gets solid EMPs off late game with a good flank/spread on units, while also keeping his Medivacs alive, he will crush a Protoss 200 deathball army late game (I've seen it too often from beta till now to say that it doesn't). Sure, the Protoss is at a significant advantage, but it is nothing like TvZ late game where the Terran is literally helpless unless the Zerg player just makes massive mistakes.
If Z players want to have their superior map control and vision early game than they need to give up something later in the game to balance it out. They already have arguably the strongest macro mechanic in the game in terms of countering (the ability to tech switch on the fly is extremely deadly late game) units, there's no reason that they need to also have super cost efficient Infestors or have that much superior map control, vision, etc. in the early game. They have to give up one of them, or Blizzard is going to have to do something dramatically different in HotS like make Battle Helions/Warhounds overpowered as shit.
TL;DR
TvZ will never be balanced if you maintain Terran's shitty late game or continue to allow Z's to take 3rds virtually uncontested while having complete map control and superior vision on the field + having a better late game. Either Blizzard is going to have to do massive overhauls to Z themselves, or they are simply going to have to buff the living snot out of Terran deathball in general. The easier route is going to be buffing Terran late game, allowing a Terran to match a Z with 5 bases with just 3 bases like BW Terran can.
On August 21 2012 03:51 Maxd11 wrote: Apparently this change and the creep one aren't being considered anymore.
Thanks Taeja and MVP!!!
Thank avilo. Taeja and MVP were not killing that many good zergs. Surely it's the crushing rejection of the raven buff that caused this Now you'll need to wait 6 months for the next baby-step 10% buff - just make sure no to criticize it then.
On August 21 2012 00:41 NightOfTheDead wrote: According to this logic. BW never was a decent game, cause if there is something difficult to overcome, it needs to be patched. Guess what, BW havent been patched for a long long time, and still it is amazingly competetive. Although WoL is a different beast, glaring imbalances should be patched, but not several months after patch. There will be no patch before Hots anyway, why bother.
What?
Mech was difficult to use as Terran, and you were always playing behind on economy, vision, map control, etc. but a 3 base Terran could easily smash a 5 base Z if he controlled his Tank/Sci Vessel/Mech army properly. Late game T with a fully maxed out Mech army in proper position kills 3+ 200 supply BW Z armies no problem.
The issue is that Z players think that it is somehow balanced that not only do they have a superior late game, that they also need to have the ability to have completely uncontested vision, map control, and exponential economical growth on top of that late game. Any Z player who is saying get better is simply riding the train, because every single Z if you look through their post history that has said "get better" says that to Terran players, but always go into ZvP threads about how +2 Blink Stalkers is impossible to hold without perfect injects, or how 2 base 1/1 sentry/immortal/prism pushes are impossible to stop even if scouted. Both TvP and ZvP are both better match-ups to watch and play right now because all races have some sort of chance of winning. Even in TvP, if the Terran gets solid EMPs off late game with a good flank/spread on units, while also keeping his Medivacs alive, he will crush a Protoss 200 deathball army late game (I've seen it too often from beta till now to say that it doesn't). Sure, the Protoss is at a significant advantage, but it is nothing like TvZ late game where the Terran is literally helpless unless the Zerg player just makes massive mistakes.
If Z players want to have their superior map control and vision early game than they need to give up something later in the game to balance it out. They already have arguably the strongest macro mechanic in the game in terms of countering (the ability to tech switch on the fly is extremely deadly late game) units, there's no reason that they need to also have super cost efficient Infestors or have that much superior map control, vision, etc. in the early game. They have to give up one of them, or Blizzard is going to have to do something dramatically different in HotS like make Battle Helions/Warhounds overpowered as shit.
TL;DR
TvZ will never be balanced if you maintain Terran's shitty late game or continue to allow Z's to take 3rds virtually uncontested while having complete map control and superior vision on the field + having a better late game. Either Blizzard is going to have to do massive overhauls to Z themselves, or they are simply going to have to buff the living snot out of Terran deathball in general. The easier route is going to be buffing Terran late game, allowing a Terran to match a Z with 5 bases with just 3 bases like BW Terran can.
This post sums it up rather nicely. Can anyone give this man a medal?
As a Terran, I don't find fungal OP at all. It's a super powerful tool, but only if you directly engage with them in the open field. If they've got Infestors out, that's your cue to start dropping everywhere and multi-attacking hatches.
I get the complaints about Terran's weak late game units. The problem that people overlook is that surprise attacks are the terran's late-game tool. Not some spell or unit. You simply can't buff the raven by more than a tiny amount and not have the game spiral out of control. You can't give Terrans a great skyAoE spell (HSM) AND the mobility to drop anywhere on a whim.
IMO Fungal doesn't need a nerf, but Terran's need more viable tech paths as MMM is by far the most common right now at all levels. Make mech and skyterran more viable, and fungal gets naturally nerfed.
On August 21 2012 03:51 Maxd11 wrote: Apparently this change and the creep one aren't being considered anymore.
Thanks Taeja and MVP!!!
Thank avilo. Taeja and MVP were not killing that many good zergs. Surely it's the crushing rejection of the raven buff that caused this Now you'll need to wait 6 months for the next baby-step 10% buff - just make sure no to criticize it then.
avilo: "yo blizz, i think im progamer and raven buff wont fix TvZ. I dont even make ravens rofl" Blizzard: "hmm, this guy says he's a progamer. Well boys, time to scrap the patch."
On August 20 2012 01:05 blug wrote: Late game scans aren't really as much of an issue because you aren't technically losing 1750 minerals. You just won't get the minerals as fast.
If you are talking about early game. Just getting to raven tech can be pretty awkward especially when you are trying to pump out medivacs/vikings.
Late game yes I suppose so it doesn't mean much but if you are going banshee how is it a problem to make 1 raven?
On August 20 2012 01:05 blug wrote: Late game scans aren't really as much of an issue because you aren't technically losing 1750 minerals. You just won't get the minerals as fast.
If you are talking about early game. Just getting to raven tech can be pretty awkward especially when you are trying to pump out medivacs/vikings.
Late game yes I suppose so it doesn't mean much but if you are going banshee how is it a problem to make 1 raven?
Because investing 200 gas in a non combat unit that grants you no map control and auto dies to alot of shit is going to help you in the early game?
[QUOTE]On August 20 2012 18:37 wTeffecT wrote: [QUOTE]On August 20 2012 14:17 Aterons_toss wrote:
Edit: At the above poster; MVP beat both Nerchio and Vortix becasue he is better than them, not becasue terran has somehow in your post gone from UP to OP. How can you even consider current zerg play styles weak when the winrate sits at 45/55 in favour of zerg internationally? MVP is just BETTER than those two. Honestly, Vortix is just bad - his teching patterns are predictable, his unit control is pretty bad, and he constantly gets into terrible engagements where he just 1a moves his entire ultralisk infestor ling army into sieged tanks and marauders. On top of this, his desicion making is so poor when looking at expansions. Even Day9 pointed out in one of his games against SuperNova (I think it was SN), he constantly fails to expand when he has the oppotunity, and he seems to always take the worst expansion avaliable. The guy is just a scrub benefiting from the current metagame which has zergs sitting on top.[/QUOTE]
The problem Terran have is that they're not adapting to range 5 Queens, not that range 5 Queens are imbalanced. Hellions and Banshees haven't lost their harrassment capabilities, but their harrasment rolls have changed from suiciding into the natural and cloaking into the main base to Hellions containing the Zerg to 2 bases and Banshees harrassing the 3rd base while Terrans either A) establish their 3rd base and Zerg sacrifice their 3rd base or B) the Queens and Zerglings are forced to push thru' the Hellions in order to save their 3rd base and expose their natural and main to Hellion harrassment. A pattern occurs where the 4 Queen, and to a lesser extent 6 Queen, openings place their 3rd at 7 minutes without having Zergling speed upgrades or a Roach Warren and their susceptible to either the Hellion and Banshee opening denying their 3rd or a Reactor Hellion, Marauder and Combat Shield Marine timing push.
The opening goal for Terran is to deny Zerg's 3rd and establish their own 3rd with Hellion Banshee and not to try and prevent Zerg's worker saturation of his natural and main bases. You can Command Center first vs Zerg every time, skip Cloak and build the 3rd Orbital Command Center as soon as you start building your first Banshee and take your 3rd as quickly as possible, or skip Cloak and take a Tech Lab on your Barracks for a Stim Pack upgrade and add Marauders into your attack on the 3rd and have a higher success rate. The Banshees only purpose is to either draw out the Queens or provide free DPS vs Zerglings and possibly Roaches, and they'll still build at least one Overseer because they can't afford not to if you do have Cloak.
As far as the mid-game is concerned, it's a question of being able to 1) Engineering Bay and Missile Turrent your natural to prevent the ~10 minute Mutalisk counter attack 2) build a second Factory/Tech Lab, upgrade to Infernal Pre-Igniter to harass the mineral lines of the 3rd if it survived or was re-established, the 4th if it's establishes or Medivac drop the Zerg's main for mid-game harrassment and build Thors as a mobile Mutalisk response unit while surviving Banshees are used primarily for defense against counter attacks and 3) establish your 4th with a Planetary Fortress and 4) your end game is to build 2 additional Starports, 2 with Tech Labs and 1 with Reactor for Raven and Viking production and research Hunter Seeker Missile.
You need to stop thinking in terms of Terran harrassment being restricted towards the natural and main bases of Zerg, Zerg being able to establish an economic advantage on 3 bases that's "unfair" compared to Terran's being able to establish an economic advantage on 3 bases that can't even be harrassed until Mutalisks and that Terran end game compositions are any worse than Zerg end game compositions. Believe me, I'm struggling vs Terran when I have to 1) attack into Hellion, Thor, Siege Tank lines with Ultralisk, Zergling, Infestor, 2) Zergling counter attacks have to attack into Planetary Fortresses at every mineral line 3) Broodlord, Corrupter, Infestor, Queen has to attack into Hellion, Thor, Viking and Raven's where a well placed Hunter Seeker Missiles make my army dissappear all while 4) dealing with constant Blue Flame Hellion harrassment and drops in undefended mineral lines.
Just watch the IEM ZvT match ups and pay attentiont to their strategic and tactical adjustments vs Zerg, you don't have to play like MvP and SuperNova in order to realize that altho' playskill is subjectgive good decision making is not. Right now the entire ZvT match up revolves around Zerg struggling to establish their 3rd, Zerg needing to Mutalisk counter attack the Terran third and Terrans being able to just open up with Command Center first into early 3rd Command Center every game because no Zerg players are taking gas before 40 supply.
Even if you aren't convinced the situation is problematic for Zerg at around the ~9 minute mark, I'm definitely not convinced that Broodlord, Corrupter, Infestor, Queen has an advantage over Hellion, Siege Tank, Thor, Viking, Raven when Hellion's can make mineral lines disappear in seconds, Hunter Seeker Missiles can make armies disappear in seconds while I have to attack into Planetary Fortresses with 3 Armor and Terrans haven't even bothered to experiment with Cloaked Ghosts EMPing Infestors, Nuke play or even Battle Cruisers and Yamato Cannons.
The only reason the ZvT match up is aggrivating for you is because you can't harass the natural expansion and main base now like you could before, but it doesn't matter at all because the metagame has shifted towards openings being about harassing their 3rd and establishing your 3rd simultaneously and the metagame endings have shifted towards whether or not the Zerg Air death ball can deal with the Terran Mech death ball and primarily Hunter Seeker missile.
Terran has pretty clear tactical and strategic objectives at this point, while Zerg has to reconsider whether or not it should be taking 6 Queens, 4 Vespene Geysers in order to support the 7:00 3rd, 5 Queens, 1 Roach Warren and 4 Vespene Geysers in order to suppor the 7:00 3rd base. 4 Queen, 2 Vespene Geysers and skipping a 3rd base for a Macro Hatch and "Mutalisk Expand," 1 Vespene Geyser at 18 supply for early Zergling Speed and Baneling Nests or 11 Spawning Pool, 18 Vespene Geyser to pressure Command Center first and early 3rd Command Centers builds with the possibility of 2 base Zergling, Baneling, Roach All Ins etc. and we have to question whether or not 11 minute Hives into Greater Spires is viable or whether or not we should still go for 11 minute Hives but skip the Spire at the Lair and go straight into Ultralisk, Zergling, Infestor play (god I can't wait for Vipers to add to this)
Right now, nothing is absolutely clear for Zerg up until the 7:00 mark and the decision to take our 3rd, all Terrans have to do is apply pressure to our 3rd, expand behind it with their 3rd and prepare for ~10 Mutalisks while going into the Mech death ball with a Raven end game and rinse and repeat as long as 4 to 6 Queen openings aren't adjusting with earlier Pool and Gas timings, Roach Warrens or giving up on the 7:00 mark for expanding and taking an in base Macro Hatch and waiting to push out with Mutalisks vs a Hellion and Banshee force that can't shoot up.
It's kind of exciting to be Zerg right now, because we honestly have to innovate now that Terran have pretty clear counters in place. And I don't think you have any place to talk shit on Vortix, everything seems so obvious to everyone when you're observing from both player view points. Sure, he made a couple of clear mistakes, but for being 19 and inexperienced in tournament settings he managed to take 3rd at the IEM ... what have you done lately?
uh, those are all just scenarios where zerg has an advantage... every race has scenarios like that. this raven change could really help getting hunter seeker missles into the right spots.
On August 21 2012 18:31 blug wrote: I think ravens are already heaps powerful. I've never understood why people are so hesitant to use hunter seeker missile...
People say that it's slow and unreliable but honestly it's a death warrant to broodlords =S
It takes 2 hsm's to kill 1 broodlord. It takes 110 seconds to upgrade HSM. It takes ages to reach 125 energy. You need a decent amount of starports. The transition to ravens only works when the zerg makes a mistake.
Imagine 10 splitted broodlords. It would require 20 ravens to kill them.
On August 21 2012 18:31 blug wrote: I think ravens are already heaps powerful. I've never understood why people are so hesitant to use hunter seeker missile...
People say that it's slow and unreliable but honestly it's a death warrant to broodlords =S
It takes 2 hsm's to kill 1 broodlord. It takes 110 seconds to upgrade HSM. It takes ages to reach 125 energy. You need a decent amount of starports. The transition to ravens only works when the zerg makes a mistake.
Imagine 10 splitted broodlords. It would require 20 ravens to kill them.
That's the problem though, people think that broodlords are easy to split but that's not 100% true. Splitting broodlords for a stationary position is easy, but if you want to push forward with split broodlords (8-10 broodlords) you have to individually select each one and you need a rediculous amount of APM. So if a zerg is capable of splitting his broodlords, perhaps he deserves an advantage against HSM the same way terran have an advantage against banelings/infestors if they can split their units. This isn't to say that it's not possible to beat a split army, because you see MVP killing zergs all the time with standard terran play.
And if you are going raven, I would assume you would pump the hell out of vikings. Thus, you would fire a seeker missile at the corrupters. Unless you have AI type micro, you simply aren't going to run away with the corrupter whose being chased by the seeker missile, you are gonna run away with all your corrupters while your vikings go mental on the broodlords.
Also 2 Hunter Seeker Missiles to kill a broodlord? You are making it sound underpowered. It takes 2 fungals to kill terrans T1 unit and it takes 2 Hunter Seeker Missiles to Kill Zergs final tier unit.... hmmm.... I can make things sound OP to.
Actually, it takes more than 2 HSMs to kill a Brood Lords as the maximum damage is 100 and they have 225 life. Mind you, it's not hard to have a few vikings' volleys hit, so it's not as if you need to hit all of the Brood Lords with 3 or even 2 and as said, sometimes the corruptors or infestors are better targets.
On August 21 2012 18:46 Fuchsteufelswild wrote: Actually, it takes more than 2 HSMs to kill a Brood Lords as the maximum damage is 100 and they have 225 life. Mind you, it's not hard to have a few vikings' volleys hit, so it's not as if you need to hit all of the Brood Lords with 3 or even 2 and as said, sometimes the corruptors of infestors are better targets.
Yeah sorry I didn't know that they took 3 HSMs, I just was going by what the other guy said xD. But still 3 is pretty good.
How about going back to BW style? Broodlords and Corruptors evolves from Mutalisks while scaling the cost respectively. What it might do is make zergs try to get more of a balance rather than just throw any excess food from broodlord/infestors into corruptors since they are not able to evolve into broodlords. With a lesser corruptor count, terran can try to snipe the broodlords down and try to get more ground units or if corruptor count is low, snipe the corruptors and go air.
Well corruptors are kinda crap for their cost, it's just that zerg can get enough money to have what seem like excessive amounts and have the infestors to back them up and the combination of the two can be powerful, but the cost-scaled Hive-tech corruptors (Devourers then? ) had better be better. If they cannot even turn into Brood Lords, there's be a strong case to buff them. *Cue terran panic QQ* Obviously if this were too strong you could look at balancing other issues. That is to say, if zerg were definitely too strong with that in play, it would probably be something about the infestors that should be changed, rather than corruptors. + Show Spoiler +
While we're at it, nerf roaches & buff hydras! Ho hum! I can dream.
the ravens are not there to only use seeker missile, they are supposed to spread out the corrupters, which weakens their damage output. (vikings can't do this because of fungal and have this damage disadvantage on the broodlords) Afterwards a few pdds, guarantee you air dominane. It means fight here and trade units vs energy, somethings zergs love to do as well. If the corrupters clump, well you can skip the pdd and simply seeker missile them. The reason why you cast seeker missile on a few broodlords that are still stacked is to reduce their broodling production and maybe get lucky and roast the ground army of the zerg, especially infestors, that have to be under the broods to fungal vikings. At the end you want to get red of the anti air of the zerg and then snipe the broodlords for free, as long as you have pdds and seeker missiles ready. To bad the patch isn't that important anymore, as zergs have been struggling again after they started testing. Would have loved to see the changes, especially the creep one as it would affect low level more.
Avilo is a bm kid, but he is right on his first post. It is not ok that fungal cancels any way of micro. I mean: you can move move under emp or storm and you cant under fungal. I think fungal should be changed to be like storm - doing big damage, but dont cancel moving opportunity.
On August 21 2012 18:46 Fuchsteufelswild wrote: Actually, it takes more than 2 HSMs to kill a Brood Lords as the maximum damage is 100 and they have 225 life. Mind you, it's not hard to have a few vikings' volleys hit, so it's not as if you need to hit all of the Brood Lords with 3 or even 2 and as said, sometimes the corruptors of infestors are better targets.
Yeah sorry I didn't know that they took 3 HSMs, I just was going by what the other guy said xD. But still 3 is pretty good.
How is 3 HSM good for killing 1 BL? lol, using twice or 3 times as much gas + time just to hopefully charge my raven in without getting fungaled and lose. Pretty sure he also has corruptors :/
On August 21 2012 18:46 Fuchsteufelswild wrote: Actually, it takes more than 2 HSMs to kill a Brood Lords as the maximum damage is 100 and they have 225 life. Mind you, it's not hard to have a few vikings' volleys hit, so it's not as if you need to hit all of the Brood Lords with 3 or even 2 and as said, sometimes the corruptors of infestors are better targets.
Yeah sorry I didn't know that they took 3 HSMs, I just was going by what the other guy said xD. But still 3 is pretty good.
How is 3 HSM good for killing 1 BL? lol, using twice or 3 times as much gas + time just to hopefully charge my raven in without getting fungaled and lose. Pretty sure he also has corruptors :/
show me a replay where the Z splits all his BLs in SINGLE BLs only. its humanly impossible to split ALL BLs into single ones, split ALL corruptors into single, fungal, inject and build units all at once. you will ALWAYS hit 2-5 units with a HSM and PDD + vikings + 2-3 thors RAPE corruptors. the problem isnt killing the Z super army. so the raven buff isnt needed. the problem for T is getting its own superarmy with ravens. but T will learn how the get there (the korean Ts already know how to).
On August 21 2012 18:31 blug wrote: I think ravens are already heaps powerful. I've never understood why people are so hesitant to use hunter seeker missile...
People say that it's slow and unreliable but honestly it's a death warrant to broodlords =S
It takes 2 hsm's to kill 1 broodlord. It takes 110 seconds to upgrade HSM. It takes ages to reach 125 energy. You need a decent amount of starports. The transition to ravens only works when the zerg makes a mistake.
Imagine 10 splitted broodlords. It would require 20 ravens to kill them.
You aren't supposed to kill Brood lords with HSM, but Corruptors and/or Infestors. Corruptors are usually clumped up, if the Zerg spreads them, he is reducing their dps quite a bit, because Corruptors aren't quite efficient for damaging air units that aren't massive, their true strength is that they have a lot of HP and armor. On the other hand, none of the Zerg players(even on top top levels) are spreading their Infestors either. So, HSM can really be deadly in those situations. Why would you want to kill Brood Lords with Ravens, when if you kill Infestors and/or Corruptors, your army do great job at destroying Brood Lords. Brood Lords are only strong at the combination with Infestors, alone they are quite terrible for their cost.
the ravens are not there to only use seeker missile, they are supposed to spread out the corrupters, which weakens their damage output. (vikings can't do this because of fungal and have this damage disadvantage on the broodlords) Afterwards a few pdds, guarantee you air dominane. It means fight here and trade units vs energy, somethings zergs love to do as well. If the corrupters clump, well you can skip the pdd and simply seeker missile them. The reason why you cast seeker missile on a few broodlords that are still stacked is to reduce their broodling production and maybe get lucky and roast the ground army of the zerg, especially infestors, that have to be under the broods to fungal vikings. At the end you want to get red of the anti air of the zerg and then snipe the broodlords for free, as long as you have pdds and seeker missiles ready. To bad the patch isn't that important anymore, as zergs have been struggling again after they started testing. Would have loved to see the changes, especially the creep one as it would affect low level more.
Exactly.
But to be honest, we might even see the patch. The patch just forced Terran players to think differently and start using Ravens more, which they already did even if the patch didn't started, and it seems to work. Currently, the patch is on hold, so they might even end up implementing these changes or at least some of them.
On August 21 2012 18:46 Fuchsteufelswild wrote: Actually, it takes more than 2 HSMs to kill a Brood Lords as the maximum damage is 100 and they have 225 life. Mind you, it's not hard to have a few vikings' volleys hit, so it's not as if you need to hit all of the Brood Lords with 3 or even 2 and as said, sometimes the corruptors of infestors are better targets.
Yeah sorry I didn't know that they took 3 HSMs, I just was going by what the other guy said xD. But still 3 is pretty good.
How is 3 HSM good for killing 1 BL? lol, using twice or 3 times as much gas + time just to hopefully charge my raven in without getting fungaled and lose. Pretty sure he also has corruptors :/
show me a replay where the Z splits all his BLs in SINGLE BLs only. its humanly impossible to split ALL BLs into single ones, split ALL corruptors into single, fungal, inject and build units all at once. you will ALWAYS hit 2-5 units with a HSM and PDD + vikings + 2-3 thors RAPE corruptors. the problem isnt killing the Z super army. so the raven buff isnt needed. the problem for T is getting its own superarmy with ravens. but T will learn how the get there (the korean Ts already know how to).
I'm not sure if it is humanly impossible, it's rather completly dumb, because then range 9 vikings and stimming in marines can pick off your army one by one, as the units don't cover each other anymore.
But I'm not sure, if it is really possible no matter what to get that army in time on any map.
Newsflash guys: terrans should split their vikings and marines against fungal, BUT don't you dare to say that zergs should split their corruptors and broodlords against HSM!! That's NOT possible!!!!! Zergs should be able to 1a themselves to victory! Terrans should split for their life!
On August 21 2012 19:33 Snowbear wrote: Newsflash guys: terrans should split their vikings and marines against fungal, BUT don't you dare to say that zergs should split their corruptors and broodlords against HSM!! That's NOT possible!!!!! Zergs should be able to 1a themselves to victory! Terrans should split for their life!
Yeah its quite hilarious, i remember when someone suggested that you split your broods vs votex, zergs shat bricks that so much was required from them. Then when terran ask how do i avoid infestors killing my entire army, air units and all. The answer is usually OMG you just gotta split, cant be that hard
On August 21 2012 19:33 Snowbear wrote: Newsflash guys: terrans should split their vikings and marines against fungal, BUT don't you dare to say that zergs should split their corruptors and broodlords against HSM!! That's NOT possible!!!!! Zergs should be able to 1a themselves to victory! Terrans should split for their life!
Yeah its quite hilarious, i remember when someone suggested that you split your broods vs votex, zergs shat bricks that so much was required from them. Then when terran ask how do i avoid infestors killing my entire army, air units and all. The answer is usually OMG you just gotta split, cant be that hard
where did anybody write splitting BLs is not required against HSM?
On August 21 2012 19:33 Snowbear wrote: Newsflash guys: terrans should split their vikings and marines against fungal, BUT don't you dare to say that zergs should split their corruptors and broodlords against HSM!! That's NOT possible!!!!! Zergs should be able to 1a themselves to victory! Terrans should split for their life!
Yeah its quite hilarious, i remember when someone suggested that you split your broods vs votex, zergs shat bricks that so much was required from them. Then when terran ask how do i avoid infestors killing my entire army, air units and all. The answer is usually OMG you just gotta split, cant be that hard
where did anybody write splitting BLs is not required against HSM?
Read the comments on the previous page. "It's humanly impossible to split broodlords"
On August 21 2012 19:33 Snowbear wrote: Newsflash guys: terrans should split their vikings and marines against fungal, BUT don't you dare to say that zergs should split their corruptors and broodlords against HSM!! That's NOT possible!!!!! Zergs should be able to 1a themselves to victory! Terrans should split for their life!
Yeah its quite hilarious, i remember when someone suggested that you split your broods vs votex, zergs shat bricks that so much was required from them. Then when terran ask how do i avoid infestors killing my entire army, air units and all. The answer is usually OMG you just gotta split, cant be that hard
where did anybody write splitting BLs is not required against HSM?
I think he's referring to the fact that most zergs think that splitting their units even a tiny bit is absolutely impossible and requires to much APM for a mere mortal to do
On August 21 2012 19:33 Snowbear wrote: Newsflash guys: terrans should split their vikings and marines against fungal, BUT don't you dare to say that zergs should split their corruptors and broodlords against HSM!! That's NOT possible!!!!! Zergs should be able to 1a themselves to victory! Terrans should split for their life!
Yeah its quite hilarious, i remember when someone suggested that you split your broods vs votex, zergs shat bricks that so much was required from them. Then when terran ask how do i avoid infestors killing my entire army, air units and all. The answer is usually OMG you just gotta split, cant be that hard
where did anybody write splitting BLs is not required against HSM?
nobody did. plus the terrans dont get that splitting superfast marines is much easier than superslow BLs (no presplit marines = stim + split, no presplit BLs = gg) and lowrange corruptors.
there shouldnt be any discussion that a T raven viking + support army can easily fight BL infestor corruptor. it has been shown a lot by top Ts lately. the discussion should rather be about how T gets to that superarmy.
On August 21 2012 19:33 Snowbear wrote: Newsflash guys: terrans should split their vikings and marines against fungal, BUT don't you dare to say that zergs should split their corruptors and broodlords against HSM!! That's NOT possible!!!!! Zergs should be able to 1a themselves to victory! Terrans should split for their life!
Yeah its quite hilarious, i remember when someone suggested that you split your broods vs votex, zergs shat bricks that so much was required from them. Then when terran ask how do i avoid infestors killing my entire army, air units and all. The answer is usually OMG you just gotta split, cant be that hard
where did anybody write splitting BLs is not required against HSM?
Read the comments on the previous page. "It's humanly impossible to split broodlords"
you sir are failing to quote. i said its humanly impossible to split all BLs so that every BL is by its own AND splitting every corruptor so its alone AND inject AND fungal AND build units. THATS what i said. no one said its impossible to split BLs so stop talking BS.
On August 21 2012 19:33 Snowbear wrote: Newsflash guys: terrans should split their vikings and marines against fungal, BUT don't you dare to say that zergs should split their corruptors and broodlords against HSM!! That's NOT possible!!!!! Zergs should be able to 1a themselves to victory! Terrans should split for their life!
Yeah its quite hilarious, i remember when someone suggested that you split your broods vs votex, zergs shat bricks that so much was required from them. Then when terran ask how do i avoid infestors killing my entire army, air units and all. The answer is usually OMG you just gotta split, cant be that hard
where did anybody write splitting BLs is not required against HSM?
nobody did. plus the terrans dont get that splitting superfast marines is much easier than superslow BLs (no presplit marines = stim + split, no presplit BLs = gg) and lowrange corruptors.
there shouldnt be any discussion that a T raven viking + support army can easily fight BL infestor corruptor. it has been shown a lot by top Ts lately. the discussion should rather be about how T gets to that superarmy.
Yeah I know. I thought he might try to actually quote and thereby read what you wrote and then maybe come to the conclusion that he just overraged.
For the "difficulty": there are also less Broodlords than marines around, they are air so you don't have to consider terrain when splitting. I don't think it's of any use to discuss what is "harder". It's been shown that both can be down frequently by humans.
First of all, yes marines are faster because of the stim but they are also in greater numbers and much smaller so it doesn't just consume APM but it also requires a lot of precision. However, even though it is not easy to do, anyone can be decent at marine splitting simply by practicing it a couple of minutes per day.
Secondly, regardless of that super strong late game terran air army, that army still needs to be split in order to win the fight. You don't have to split every single viking, raven and bc, but you need to split them so that they are positioned in a concave. Good examples are Mvp's engagements and Bomber's game vs Slivko at Daybreak - he didn't pre splt his ravens so he lost close to 10 ravens to basically only energy - fungal.
So if terrans can do both marine but also air splits, I'm pretty sure zergs can do it as well.
It is also important to mention that SM damage is not the same through the whole radius, the damage decreases. It is also important that, unlike fungal, SM has travel time and it is relatively easy to spot. SM also doesn't root units so that a series of additional SM's can just devastate the army (like fungal can).
What I'm trying to say is that you don't need to split every single Broodlord so that none of them is touching each other, you need to split them enough that the fight becomes cost effective.
If you examine that Mvp vs. Nestea final game, 2 things are obvious: 1. Mvp had all his units in a beautiful concave, he had 16 ravens but he didn't send all of them at once to risk fungal, he basically flanked with SM. 2. When Nestea saw the ravens (he didn't even scout them before the fight) he pulled everything back which clumped all his broods but also corruptors. Also, since he was busy escaping the SM (which is impossible due to much greater speed of the missle in comparison to bl), he didn't react with his infestors.
So basically, that fight was an ideal scenario for Mvp and also the worst possible scenario for Nestea.
Sure, ravens are great but let's not overexaggerate their effectivnes against properly positioned zerg army and lets also not overexaggerate the difficulty of engaging properly with zerg army, saying it is humanly impossible to split broods good enough to win the fight.
On August 21 2012 21:28 Qwerty85 wrote: First of all, yes marines are faster because of the stim but they are also in greater numbers and much smaller so it doesn't just consume APM but it also requires a lot of precision. However, even though it is not easy to do, anyone can be decent at marine splitting simply by practicing it a couple of minutes per day.
Secondly, regardless of that super strong late game terran air army, that army still needs to be split in order to win the fight. You don't have to split every single viking, raven and bc, but you need to split them so that they are positioned in a concave. Good examples are Mvp's engagements and Bomber's game vs Slivko at Daybreak - he didn't pre splt his ravens so he lost close to 10 ravens to basically only energy - fungal.
So if terrans can do both marine but also air splits, I'm pretty sure zergs can do it as well.
It is also important to mention that SM damage is not the same through the whole radius, the damage decreases. It is also important that, unlike fungal, SM has travel time and it is relatively easy to spot. SM also doesn't root units so that a series of additional SM's can just devastate the army (like fungal can).
What I'm trying to say is that you don't need to split every single Broodlord so that none of them is touching each other, you need to split them enough that the fight becomes cost effective.
If you examine that Mvp vs. Nestea final game, 2 things are obvious: 1. Mvp had all his units in a beautiful concave, he had 16 ravens but he didn't send all of them at once to risk fungal, he basically flanked with SM. 2. When Nestea saw the ravens (he didn't even scout them before the fight) he pulled everything back which clumped all his broods but also corruptors. Also, since he was busy escaping the SM (which is impossible due to much greater speed of the missle in comparison to bl), he didn't react with his infestors.
So basically, that fight was an ideal scenario for Mvp and also the worst possible scenario for Nestea.
Sure, ravens are great but let's not overexaggerate their effectivnes against properly positioned zerg army and lets also not overexaggerate the difficulty of engaging properly with zerg army, saying it is humanly impossible to split broods good enough to win the fight.
good post. except the last sentence. I NEVER SAID THAT, some T misquotet me.
all the things you describe are like it should be. both players should be able to win the lategame battle with good positioning, army composition and micro and with the raven army T is definetly powerful enough to do so.
like i said you guys shouldnt discuss IF the raven army is able to fight lategame zerg (which it definetly is), BUT discuss how to get there safely.
Well funny thing is that in the past, when ravens weren't actually used at all, they would probably be able to be ready in time if terran decided to use them. But as of recently, TvZ is much more passive in the early-mid game which means that hive tech is also ready much faster than it would be ever before.
So far we know that teaching to ravens is viable when you 1. play on super turtle map which can be easily split and which doesn't have too many attack routes for zerg to exploit - we have seen it on Metropolis, it could also work on Metalopolis or Shakuras (but this maps are out of map pool in most tournaments), or when 2. terran gets big enough advantage over zerg in mid game - again, Bomber vs. Slivko on Daybreak comes to mind.
Most tournament maps, at least in my impression, make it very hard for terran to get to that stage if both players enter late game on even terms.
I am almost willing to bet money that ravens will be the new hot topic of OPness after the patch. I don't believe it will be because of the speed increase that will make them OP, it will be the fact that terran will start using an ability that is already amazing but don't currently utilize.
The exact same thing happened with the Warp Prism Buff (I still argue that before the buff it was still useful as hell). Arguably the infestor buff/nerf (8 seconds worth of fungal would be just as good as 4 seconds imo even with the longer duration of damage being done).
On August 21 2012 23:46 blug wrote: I am almost willing to bet money that ravens will be the new hot topic of OPness after the patch. I don't believe it will be because of the speed increase that will make them OP, it will be the fact that terran will start using an ability that is already amazing but don't currently utilize.
The exact same thing happened with the Warp Prism Buff (I still argue that before the buff it was still useful as hell). Arguably the infestor buff/nerf (8 seconds worth of fungal would be just as good as 4 seconds imo even with the longer duration of damage being done).
Pretty much agree, same with Ghosts. Terran players were crying how Infestor is OP, and Zerg players were telling them to use Ghosts. Terran players usually said on that "Ghosts are shit", than few months later, you see masses of Ghost vs. Zerg, and they were countering every unit with Snipe and EMP. Then, after that, we saw Ghosts being nerfed...
Better microing Broodlords and Corrupters is a legitimate argument, besides splitting, another microing abilitiy is to move the targeted Corrupter or Broodlord forward into the Hunter Seeker Missiles in order to absorb the impact and deflect the blast radious from the rest of the army.
As far as nerfing Fungal Growth is concerned, I'd trade a root nerf for a damage buff. if you changed the root to a 50% snare and increased the damage coefficient you'd have a more destructive and skillful ability overall, because the Marines would have to choose between microing away from Banelings less effectively or standing their ground and target firing them while draining additional Medivac energy and you'd do more damage to the Vikings in direct air to air engagements with Corrupters instead of just getting into the double Fungal Growth, GG? situations. Fungal Growth is too good vs Terran air, not in the sense of destroying Vikings and Ravens in the end game but in the sense of destroying Medivacs and uncloaking Banshees in the mid game where Zerg can just circumvent a Spire, and either Mutalisks or Corrupters or a Hydralisk Den and Hydralisks to defend (I may be pushing it with Hydralisk Den and Hydralisks). Zerg definitely need an answer to Medivac and Banshee harassment, but they don't need a hard counter to them in Fungal Growth, Infested Terran /faceroll keyboard.
On August 22 2012 15:14 Thylacine wrote: Wouldn't surprise me if they nerfed the raven in some way in 2 patches.
It wouldn't matter because very few people use them anyway. Takes way too long for a raven to be useful. Speed buff is a joke, needs a buff to the time it takes to get them into the game.
On August 21 2012 22:04 Qwerty85 wrote: Well funny thing is that in the past, when ravens weren't actually used at all, they would probably be able to be ready in time if terran decided to use them. But as of recently, TvZ is much more passive in the early-mid game which means that hive tech is also ready much faster than it would be ever before.
So far we know that teaching to ravens is viable when you 1. play on super turtle map which can be easily split and which doesn't have too many attack routes for zerg to exploit - we have seen it on Metropolis, it could also work on Metalopolis or Shakuras (but this maps are out of map pool in most tournaments), or when 2. terran gets big enough advantage over zerg in mid game - again, Bomber vs. Slivko on Daybreak comes to mind.
Most tournament maps, at least in my impression, make it very hard for terran to get to that stage if both players enter late game on even terms.
It's easy on Ohana, or any other small map, where Mech can take the center. I'm not really sure about Marine, Tank, Medivac play tho', right now Bio play just seems worse than Mech fwiw.
On August 21 2012 22:04 Qwerty85 wrote: Well funny thing is that in the past, when ravens weren't actually used at all, they would probably be able to be ready in time if terran decided to use them. But as of recently, TvZ is much more passive in the early-mid game which means that hive tech is also ready much faster than it would be ever before.
So far we know that teaching to ravens is viable when you 1. play on super turtle map which can be easily split and which doesn't have too many attack routes for zerg to exploit - we have seen it on Metropolis, it could also work on Metalopolis or Shakuras (but this maps are out of map pool in most tournaments), or when 2. terran gets big enough advantage over zerg in mid game - again, Bomber vs. Slivko on Daybreak comes to mind.
Most tournament maps, at least in my impression, make it very hard for terran to get to that stage if both players enter late game on even terms.
It's easy on Ohana, or any other small map, where Mech can take the center. I'm not really sure about Marine, Tank, Medivac play tho', right now Bio play just seems worse than Mech fwiw.
You need to consider the fact that mech consumes way more gas than going bio or marine tank. Units cost much more gas, production facilities cost much more gas, you also need upgrades for ground mech army but later also for vikings etc. It is highly unlikely that terran will go for a mech composition and have the ravens out with all upgrades and enough energy to actually use the spells like seeker missile.
As far as nerfing Fungal Growth is concerned, I'd trade a root nerf for a damage buff. if you changed the root to a 50% snare and increased the damage coefficient you'd have a more destructive and skillful ability overall, because the Marines would have to choose between microing away from Banelings less effectively or standing their ground and target firing them while draining additional Medivac energy
That would be way too powerful. We've already seen the effects of a buff in damage with fungal growth. Increasing the damage to 40 or 45 would mean stimmed Marines with CS are 1-2 hit by zerglings. That's significant. I think the only way that would work would be if you significantly reduced the radius of fungal or made it a projectile (like EMP).
On August 21 2012 18:31 blug wrote: I think ravens are already heaps powerful. I've never understood why people are so hesitant to use hunter seeker missile...
People say that it's slow and unreliable but honestly it's a death warrant to broodlords =S
And why shouldn't Zergs learn to do basic splitting?
They should have learned to do it with their drones, but instead hellions were nerfed and queens were buffed.
But even if Zergs don't split and let's say they lose all their Broolords, they are just fine. They can re-max on whatever it is counters that army. If mass viking Terran, go infestor Ultra. If heavy marauder, tank, go Broodlord, Infestor.
The thing is, if Zergs split their units, it's just icing on the cake. Even if HSMs are cast perfectly and the Zerg is horrible and clumps all their units w/o micro, it still can be a very even game.
On August 21 2012 18:46 Fuchsteufelswild wrote: Actually, it takes more than 2 HSMs to kill a Brood Lords as the maximum damage is 100 and they have 225 life. Mind you, it's not hard to have a few vikings' volleys hit, so it's not as if you need to hit all of the Brood Lords with 3 or even 2 and as said, sometimes the corruptors or infestors are better targets.
Oh and Mooncricket, you need to fix your quotes.
3 HSMs to kill a Broodlord. 1 Fungal to chain fungal Ravens, precluding them from casting HSM
On August 21 2012 18:46 Fuchsteufelswild wrote: Actually, it takes more than 2 HSMs to kill a Brood Lords as the maximum damage is 100 and they have 225 life. Mind you, it's not hard to have a few vikings' volleys hit, so it's not as if you need to hit all of the Brood Lords with 3 or even 2 and as said, sometimes the corruptors of infestors are better targets.
Yeah sorry I didn't know that they took 3 HSMs, I just was going by what the other guy said xD. But still 3 is pretty good.
How is 3 HSM good for killing 1 BL? lol, using twice or 3 times as much gas + time just to hopefully charge my raven in without getting fungaled and lose. Pretty sure he also has corruptors :/
show me a replay where the Z splits all his BLs in SINGLE BLs only. its humanly impossible to split ALL BLs into single ones, split ALL corruptors into single, fungal, inject and build units all at once. you will ALWAYS hit 2-5 units with a HSM and PDD + vikings + 2-3 thors RAPE corruptors. the problem isnt killing the Z super army. so the raven buff isnt needed. the problem for T is getting its own superarmy with ravens. but T will learn how the get there (the korean Ts already know how to).
lol.
I love seeing a Zerg complain about having to split units. Welcome to Terran. And Welcome to Fungal Growth.
On August 21 2012 19:33 Snowbear wrote: Newsflash guys: terrans should split their vikings and marines against fungal, BUT don't you dare to say that zergs should split their corruptors and broodlords against HSM!! That's NOT possible!!!!! Zergs should be able to 1a themselves to victory! Terrans should split for their life!
My thoughts exactly.
I just can't help but find it anything but supremely ironic to see Zergs complain about splitting and calling it "humanly impossible". If that is so, and if splitting vikings is in many ways similar to splitting broodlords, then most Terrans have been doing the humanly impossible for a long time now.
On August 23 2012 03:47 ( bush wrote: The Raven should actually be a unit that scares the opponent, just like the High Templar or Infestor. Raven is far away from being this kind of unit.
On August 23 2012 03:47 ( bush wrote: The Raven should actually be a unit that scares the opponent, just like the High Templar or Infestor. Raven is far away from being this kind of unit.
especially considering how its harder to get to.
I can't think of many Zergs lategame that aren't shitting their pants when they see 6 ravens with full energy HSMing their army... Ravens are fine, get better.
On August 23 2012 03:47 ( bush wrote: The Raven should actually be a unit that scares the opponent, just like the High Templar or Infestor. Raven is far away from being this kind of unit.
Why should the Raven be like those units? The races are asymmetrical, and if Blizzard wanted the Raven to be as strong as the Infestor it would be way stronger than it is now.
On August 21 2012 23:46 blug wrote: I am almost willing to bet money that ravens will be the new hot topic of OPness after the patch. I don't believe it will be because of the speed increase that will make them OP, it will be the fact that terran will start using an ability that is already amazing but don't currently utilize.
The exact same thing happened with the Warp Prism Buff (I still argue that before the buff it was still useful as hell). Arguably the infestor buff/nerf (8 seconds worth of fungal would be just as good as 4 seconds imo even with the longer duration of damage being done).
Pretty much agree, same with Ghosts. Terran players were crying how Infestor is OP, and Zerg players were telling them to use Ghosts. Terran players usually said on that "Ghosts are shit", than few months later, you see masses of Ghost vs. Zerg, and they were countering every unit with Snipe and EMP. Then, after that, we saw Ghosts being nerfed...
This is false beyond belief. Ghosts are shit in that they are extremely cost inefficient and require massive infrastructure to support them, just as much as Ravens if not more. Ghosts require upgrades, cloak, nukes, PFs, Sentry Towers, well positioned tanks, and a split map situation for them to become actually good. There were only a few games where Ghosts were utilized well, one of them was Morrow vs Leenock on Metro, which special map for obvious reasons, and on Shakuras when Z players weren't being aggressive and just simply allowing Terran players to split the map.
Anyone that believes that Ghosts were OP pretty much didn't watch SC2 at all or have a blatantly biased stake in Z. The win percentages, the games themselves, etc. all prove that Ghosts were not OP by any stretch of the imagination; the only thing they allowed was for Terran to actually fight late game Z when they were on even bases, nothing more. If a Terran was behind on bases, he couldn't afford to mass Ghosts simply because it costs way too much to support them.
Various Z players for instance love to point out the games of MVP vs July and MVP vs Nestea as examples as to why Ghosts are imbalanced. Except they forget that not only MVP has historically dominated Nestea and July, both Nestea and July played those particular matches extremely bad. July and Nestea were simply playing subpar level of Z, while MVP was just outplaying them badly. Ghosts had little to no impact; MVP had cut the maps in half and forced both of them into very bad positions, even though both July and Nestea had ample amount of time to either hurt MVP badly with a 3 base attack, or at least force him to not expand and take 4ths and 5ths so quickly (which he did in both games). MVP basically played an ultra greedy Terran, and neither Nestea or July capitalized at all on the greedy play of MVP.
On August 23 2012 03:47 ( bush wrote: The Raven should actually be a unit that scares the opponent, just like the High Templar or Infestor. Raven is far away from being this kind of unit.
especially considering how its harder to get to.
I can't think of many Zergs lategame that aren't shitting their pants when they see 6 ravens with full energy HSMing their army... Ravens are fine, get better.
Maybe the reason they're shitting their pants is the very thought that they may actually have to micro a bit more. Can't have that. Oh, fun fact, if you let 6 slow-ass ravens hsm your entire army then that means you have shit vision for a zerg and even shittier infestor control, because otherwise you'd be able to simply freeze ravens out of range of hsm and pick them off.
agree here the effort for emp and hsm is greater then to fungual a enemy
On August 23 2012 03:47 ( bush wrote: The Raven should actually be a unit that scares the opponent, just like the High Templar or Infestor. Raven is far away from being this kind of unit.
especially considering how its harder to get to.
I can't think of many Zergs lategame that aren't shitting their pants when they see 6 ravens with full energy HSMing their army... Ravens are fine, get better.
I can think of many zergs that don't shit their pants because they are grown up. Good post, great logic. You are the man.
On August 23 2012 03:47 ( bush wrote: The Raven should actually be a unit that scares the opponent, just like the High Templar or Infestor. Raven is far away from being this kind of unit.
Why should the Raven be like those units? The races are asymmetrical, and if Blizzard wanted the Raven to be as strong as the Infestor it would be way stronger than it is now.
Well when terran's early/midgame advantage has been nerfed out of the game then lategame needs a change.
On August 23 2012 03:47 ( bush wrote: The Raven should actually be a unit that scares the opponent, just like the High Templar or Infestor. Raven is far away from being this kind of unit.
especially considering how its harder to get to.
I can't think of many Zergs lategame that aren't shitting their pants when they see 6 ravens with full energy HSMing their army... Ravens are fine, get better.
Maybe the reason they're shitting their pants is the very thought that they may actually have to micro a bit more. Can't have that. Oh, fun fact, if you let 6 slow-ass ravens hsm your entire army then that means you have shit vision for a zerg and even shittier infestor control, because otherwise you'd be able to simply freeze ravens out of range of hsm and pick them off.
agree here the effort for emp and hsm is greater then to fungual a enemy
I think the rank of the player should be bolstered above their posts to see the validity of their comments, it really bugs me that you "agree" with that ridiculous statement.
In pro play Ravens seem to have no issue landing big HSM's on mass Corruptor/Broodlord/infestor army (even without any ghost help to EMP infestors) so why do you think that below that level the Zerg simply has the ability with that "fun fact"
I expected Zerg to bitch about balance when the game was actually broken, I expected Protoss to complain about the 1/1/1 and bitbybit builds when the game was broken but I didn't expect Terrans to bitch about a game that sees Terran swallow most of the prize money/premier leagues even after the patch. The game is fine, you need to again "get better" and stop blaming Blizzard for anything.
Was TvZ lategame fine prepatch? It seemed to be, no one was going up in flames so how in the hell does the queen buff or overlord movement speed change lategame compositions? If it does anything it only elevates the speed at which Zerg gets to the lategame by a near miniscule amount, not some magical god send that gives Zerg the 1A power to crush everyone.
Was TvZ lategame fine prepatch? It seemed to be, no one was going up in flames so how in the hell does the queen buff or overlord movement speed change lategame compositions? If it does anything it only elevates the speed at which Zerg gets to the lategame by a near miniscule amount, not some magical god send that gives Zerg the 1A power to crush everyone.
I agree that some of the people posting here are overreacting, but I recall plenty of people having the opinion that Terran was week in the lategame vs Zerg even before the Queen buff.
So no, I don't think people thought the lategame was fine prepatch, if that's what you're asking.
I cant remember which progamer it was - maybe mvp maybe byun - but like a month ago they claimed that tvz was fine and the late game solution was found; ravens. Stats bear this out. TVZ is balanced yet again in Korea, and is trending that way internationally. Pretty amusing thread.
On August 23 2012 03:47 ( bush wrote: The Raven should actually be a unit that scares the opponent, just like the High Templar or Infestor. Raven is far away from being this kind of unit.
especially considering how its harder to get to.
I can't think of many Zergs lategame that aren't shitting their pants when they see 6 ravens with full energy HSMing their army... Ravens are fine, get better.
Maybe the reason they're shitting their pants is the very thought that they may actually have to micro a bit more. Can't have that. Oh, fun fact, if you let 6 slow-ass ravens hsm your entire army then that means you have shit vision for a zerg and even shittier infestor control, because otherwise you'd be able to simply freeze ravens out of range of hsm and pick them off.
agree here the effort for emp and hsm is greater then to fungual a enemy
I think the rank of the player should be bolstered above their posts to see the validity of their comments, it really bugs me that you "agree" with that ridiculous statement.
In pro play Ravens seem to have no issue landing big HSM's on mass Corruptor/Broodlord/infestor army (even without any ghost help to EMP infestors) so why do you think that below that level the Zerg simply has the ability with that "fun fact"
I expected Zerg to bitch about balance when the game was actually broken, I expected Protoss to complain about the 1/1/1 and bitbybit builds when the game was broken but I didn't expect Terrans to bitch about a game that sees Terran swallow most of the prize money/premier leagues even after the patch. The game is fine, you need to again "get better" and stop blaming Blizzard for anything.
Was TvZ lategame fine prepatch? It seemed to be, no one was going up in flames so how in the hell does the queen buff or overlord movement speed change lategame compositions? If it does anything it only elevates the speed at which Zerg gets to the lategame by a near miniscule amount, not some magical god send that gives Zerg the 1A power to crush everyone.
Frustrating
News flash, the Z players are losing to Ravens because they are unfamiliar against playing them. It's just like how Z players were crying about Mothership play late game vs P when in all reality, there was nothing wrong at all. Just stay behind your huge ass spawn crawler wall and spread your units out. Except for some reason, Z players can't be bothered to split in multiple match-ups for some reason.
Not to mention, we saw top tier Terrans beat lower tier Zerg players at IEM for the most part with Ravens (except Kas vs Nestea, but Kas really shouldn't have won that game at all; Nestea had it in the bag and just reacted poorly to Ravens). When I start seeing Ravens beating top tier Z's like DRG (and not Nestea who has a notoriously poor record against Terran and has not been playing that well lately anyways), then we can talk that the Raven MIGHT have some viability.
On August 23 2012 05:07 whatevername wrote: I cant remember which progamer it was - maybe mvp maybe byun - but like a month ago they claimed that tvz was fine and the late game solution was found; ravens. Stats bear this out. TVZ is balanced yet again in Korea, and is trending that way internationally. Pretty amusing thread.
If by "trending that way" you mean getting worse for 3rd straight month you are right.
On August 23 2012 05:07 whatevername wrote: I cant remember which progamer it was - maybe mvp maybe byun - but like a month ago they claimed that tvz was fine and the late game solution was found; ravens. Stats bear this out. TVZ is balanced yet again in Korea, and is trending that way internationally. Pretty amusing thread.
So apparently one month of data overrides 4 months of imbalance (and continual imbalance in international play).
Two players don't determine everything. You had players like Daigo who could utilize Ryu in ST and beat everybody with him; that doesn't make Ryu a better character or a top tier pick over characters like O.Sagat, Vega, Dhalsim, or Boxer. Just because a very, very, very, very few select players in a competitive game can make something work doesn't mean an imbalance doesn't exist.
On August 23 2012 05:07 whatevername wrote: I cant remember which progamer it was - maybe mvp maybe byun - but like a month ago they claimed that tvz was fine and the late game solution was found; ravens. Stats bear this out. TVZ is balanced yet again in Korea, and is trending that way internationally. Pretty amusing thread.
If by "trending that way" you mean getting worse for 3rd straight month you are right.
On August 21 2012 19:33 Snowbear wrote: Newsflash guys: terrans should split their vikings and marines against fungal, BUT don't you dare to say that zergs should split their corruptors and broodlords against HSM!! That's NOT possible!!!!! Zergs should be able to 1a themselves to victory! Terrans should split for their life!
Yeah its quite hilarious, i remember when someone suggested that you split your broods vs votex, zergs shat bricks that so much was required from them. Then when terran ask how do i avoid infestors killing my entire army, air units and all. The answer is usually OMG you just gotta split, cant be that hard
where did anybody write splitting BLs is not required against HSM?
Read the comments on the previous page. "It's humanly impossible to split broodlords"
you sir are failing to quote. i said its humanly impossible to split all BLs so that every BL is by its own AND splitting every corruptor so its alone AND inject AND fungal AND build units. THATS what i said. no one said its impossible to split BLs so stop talking BS.
It is also humanly impossible to split everymarine vs banes or whatever, but ppl do it anyway and its super cost effective. IF zergs PRE split the the broodlords vs vortex or HSM, ravens are NOT cost effective.
On August 23 2012 05:07 whatevername wrote: I cant remember which progamer it was - maybe mvp maybe byun - but like a month ago they claimed that tvz was fine and the late game solution was found; ravens. Stats bear this out. TVZ is balanced yet again in Korea, and is trending that way internationally. Pretty amusing thread.
If by "trending that way" you mean getting worse for 3rd straight month you are right.
Because Taeja and MVP are clearly a great sample size.
If we really want to use tournaments, why don't you see how many semi-final finishes Terran has versus how many Protoss and Zerg has at every major Korean/Intentional tournament? You will find that both P and Z has various different type of players making deep runs, while Terran is only represented by something like two players. It's a clear shift from the past when Terran players made a vast majority of the quarter finalists or better in alot of tournaments. It's kind of like how only Nestea was basically the only banner carrier for Z back in the day. Clearly Nestea was demonstrating Z could be played at the highest level right? He won a GSL! How come Z still needed buffs then?
On August 21 2012 19:33 Snowbear wrote: Newsflash guys: terrans should split their vikings and marines against fungal, BUT don't you dare to say that zergs should split their corruptors and broodlords against HSM!! That's NOT possible!!!!! Zergs should be able to 1a themselves to victory! Terrans should split for their life!
Yeah its quite hilarious, i remember when someone suggested that you split your broods vs votex, zergs shat bricks that so much was required from them. Then when terran ask how do i avoid infestors killing my entire army, air units and all. The answer is usually OMG you just gotta split, cant be that hard
where did anybody write splitting BLs is not required against HSM?
Read the comments on the previous page. "It's humanly impossible to split broodlords"
you sir are failing to quote. i said its humanly impossible to split all BLs so that every BL is by its own AND splitting every corruptor so its alone AND inject AND fungal AND build units. THATS what i said. no one said its impossible to split BLs so stop talking BS.
It is also humanly impossible to split everymarine vs banes or whatever, but ppl do it anyway and its super cost effective. IF zergs PRE split the the broodlords vs vortex or HSM, ravens are NOT cost effective.
Alot of Z's pre-split along their Spine Crawler wall vs Vortex late game anyways; anyone who is complaining about it against Seeker Missile is really just being dumb.
On August 23 2012 05:07 whatevername wrote: I cant remember which progamer it was - maybe mvp maybe byun - but like a month ago they claimed that tvz was fine and the late game solution was found; ravens. Stats bear this out. TVZ is balanced yet again in Korea, and is trending that way internationally. Pretty amusing thread.
If by "trending that way" you mean getting worse for 3rd straight month you are right.
On August 23 2012 05:07 whatevername wrote: I cant remember which progamer it was - maybe mvp maybe byun - but like a month ago they claimed that tvz was fine and the late game solution was found; ravens. Stats bear this out. TVZ is balanced yet again in Korea, and is trending that way internationally. Pretty amusing thread.
If by "trending that way" you mean getting worse for 3rd straight month you are right.
Hold on now buddy....... you realize that Nestea won a GSL without losing a single map right? Do you realize how hard it is to win a GSL without losing a single map? Really freaking hard... and guess what... zerg got giant buffs then.
On August 23 2012 05:07 whatevername wrote: I cant remember which progamer it was - maybe mvp maybe byun - but like a month ago they claimed that tvz was fine and the late game solution was found; ravens. Stats bear this out. TVZ is balanced yet again in Korea, and is trending that way internationally. Pretty amusing thread.
If by "trending that way" you mean getting worse for 3rd straight month you are right.
Yeah, apparently all terrans have to do is to play like Taeja and MVP to beat zergs. Why didn't anyone think about it before. Oh, and it also helps if your opponents, like Nestea, play like dogshit in those tournaments, eh?
I am a high master Z player and I am wondering is the problem with ravens getting to them or the unit itself? Also I can't find the interview/article or something but I am pretty sure qxc said that having a raven cloud makes Terran OP.
On August 23 2012 05:07 whatevername wrote: I cant remember which progamer it was - maybe mvp maybe byun - but like a month ago they claimed that tvz was fine and the late game solution was found; ravens. Stats bear this out. TVZ is balanced yet again in Korea, and is trending that way internationally. Pretty amusing thread.
If by "trending that way" you mean getting worse for 3rd straight month you are right.
Yeah, apparently all terrans have to do is to play like Taeja and MVP to beat zergs. Why didn't anyone think about it before. Oh, and it also helps if your opponents, like Nestea, play like dogshit in those tournaments, eh?
I am a high master Z player and I am wondering is the problem with ravens getting to them or the unit itself? Also I can't find the interview/article or something but I am pretty sure qxc said that having a raven cloud makes Terran OP.
1) Getting to the unit with the proper support structure to make sure you don't get killed by a tech switch is virtually impossible against any decent Z. You should know this. A T that just sits back is going to get clowned.
2) The unit itself is extremely gimmicky, and is very hit or miss, even more so than the Mothership in PvZ late game. The amount of risk you're taking with it is extremely high.
On August 21 2012 19:33 Snowbear wrote: Newsflash guys: terrans should split their vikings and marines against fungal, BUT don't you dare to say that zergs should split their corruptors and broodlords against HSM!! That's NOT possible!!!!! Zergs should be able to 1a themselves to victory! Terrans should split for their life!
My thoughts exactly.
I just can't help but find it anything but supremely ironic to see Zergs complain about splitting and calling it "humanly impossible". If that is so, and if splitting vikings is in many ways similar to splitting broodlords, then most Terrans have been doing the humanly impossible for a long time now.
Apparently when MVP was in his prime he said Terran was the weakest. So basically yeah, you have been :D
On August 23 2012 05:37 Secret05 wrote: 4 straight championships... Terran looking pretty bad.
Hold on now buddy....... you realize that Nestea won a GSL without losing a single map right? Do you realize how hard it is to win a GSL without losing a single map? Really freaking hard... and guess what... zerg got giant buffs then.[/QUOTE]
It's really hilarious that people keep saying look at taeja/mvp and the terrans reply with look at nestea/fruitdealer and then their is never a response.
On August 23 2012 05:07 whatevername wrote: I cant remember which progamer it was - maybe mvp maybe byun - but like a month ago they claimed that tvz was fine and the late game solution was found; ravens. Stats bear this out. TVZ is balanced yet again in Korea, and is trending that way internationally. Pretty amusing thread.
If by "trending that way" you mean getting worse for 3rd straight month you are right.
Yeah, apparently all terrans have to do is to play like Taeja and MVP to beat zergs. Why didn't anyone think about it before. Oh, and it also helps if your opponents, like Nestea, play like dogshit in those tournaments, eh?
I am a high master Z player and I am wondering is the problem with ravens getting to them or the unit itself? Also I can't find the interview/article or something but I am pretty sure qxc said that having a raven cloud makes Terran OP.
1) Getting to the unit with the proper support structure to make sure you don't get killed by a tech switch is virtually impossible against any decent Z. You should know this. A T that just sits back is going to get clowned.
2) The unit itself is extremely gimmicky, and is very hit or miss, even more so than the Mothership in PvZ late game. The amount of risk you're taking with it is extremely high.
That is true but on ladder I recently ran into a bio hellion into ravens which I lost to, It was pretty rough since the only range unit that zerg can use on a cloud of ravens that doesn't involve missile attacks is the Infested terran.
On August 23 2012 05:07 whatevername wrote: I cant remember which progamer it was - maybe mvp maybe byun - but like a month ago they claimed that tvz was fine and the late game solution was found; ravens. Stats bear this out. TVZ is balanced yet again in Korea, and is trending that way internationally. Pretty amusing thread.
If by "trending that way" you mean getting worse for 3rd straight month you are right.
Yeah, apparently all terrans have to do is to play like Taeja and MVP to beat zergs. Why didn't anyone think about it before. Oh, and it also helps if your opponents, like Nestea, play like dogshit in those tournaments, eh?
I am a high master Z player and I am wondering is the problem with ravens getting to them or the unit itself? Also I can't find the interview/article or something but I am pretty sure qxc said that having a raven cloud makes Terran OP.
It's both. Ravens cost 200 gas making them too expensive for the midgame. Once you get them out you have to research HSM and then wait for them to build up enough energy for HSM. Once you try to use them vs lategame Z army, a decent zerg will fungal them before you can get HSM off. Ravens are just a crappy unit and they need a buff to be viable.
Generally I think avilo's posts are pretty mindless and stupid, but I actually agree with him. It doesn't matter how fast you make the Raven because at the end of the day, Hunter Seeker Missile is just too much of an investment for something that is not even good against all Zerg late game (Ultras, that is) and can be shut down fairly easily with just fungal growth. Terran still does not have a solid answer to Infestors or the Hive tech switches. I feel like this is one of these buffs that Blizzard is introducing not because it will have a huge outcome on the game, but rather they are just trying to draw attention to the unit (like when they reduced the costs of Protoss upgrades; the upgrade cost did not need to be changed, it was just that dumb Protoss players were never upgrading and dying because of it, so Blizzard reduced the cost slightly in such a way that they can say to those players "Hey look, upgrades are good" without actually making them noticeably better. Now double forge and getting quick upgrades is a staple of Protoss play).
The difference between that buff to Protoss upgrades and the Raven is that Protoss upgrades were good before the patch. Ravens are OK right now. I think we'll have to see, but if late game TvZ becomes intense micro battles of Mass Terran air vs Brood/Infestor balls I would really enjoy watching and playing it. The real problem right now is that Terran air has to micro a lot more against Fungal Growth than Zerg has to micro against Terran air, but making Hunter Seeker Missile better/easier to get seems to be the answer (either that or buffing Thor GtA vs Armored damage).
On August 23 2012 05:53 Slipspace wrote: did the smaller broodwar community during the prime of broodwar complain about balance like this?
No, and especially not like on B.net. And that's considering that Blizzard quit balancing the game in 2001. On top of that, Blizzard just made a whole ton of changes each patch rather than incremental ones like in SC2.
Also, what do you mean by smaller BW community? Do you mean BW fandom worldwide? BW was one of the most popular sports in South Korea alone, such that the prime of BW was many more times popular than SC2 ever has been. :S However, I can't speak on balance whining in Korea, since my experience with the BW community is from stalking TL and the blizz forums, and being on a couple smaller forums.
On August 23 2012 05:53 Slipspace wrote: did the smaller broodwar community during the prime of broodwar complain about balance like this?
No, and especially not like on B.net. And that's considering that Blizzard quit balancing the game in 2001. On top of that, Blizzard just made a whole ton of changes each patch rather than incremental ones like in SC2.
Also, what do you mean by smaller BW community? Do you mean BW fandom worldwide? BW was one of the most popular sports in South Korea alone, such that the prime of BW was many more times popular than SC2 ever has been. :S However, I can't speak on balance whining in Korea, since my experience with the BW community is from stalking TL and the blizz forums, and being on a couple smaller forums.
As far as around the world there was a lot less money and attention to Brood War than there is for StarCraft 2. In Korea obviously BW was way bigger than SC2 is right now, but on a global scale SC2 has BW beat.
On August 23 2012 05:53 Slipspace wrote: did the smaller broodwar community during the prime of broodwar complain about balance like this?
No, and especially not like on B.net. And that's considering that Blizzard quit balancing the game in 2001. On top of that, Blizzard just made a whole ton of changes each patch rather than incremental ones like in SC2.
Also, what do you mean by smaller BW community? Do you mean BW fandom worldwide? BW was one of the most popular sports in South Korea alone, such that the prime of BW was many more times popular than SC2 ever has been. :S However, I can't speak on balance whining in Korea, since my experience with the BW community is from stalking TL and the blizz forums, and being on a couple smaller forums.
As far as around the world there was a lot less money and attention to Brood War than there is for StarCraft 2. In Korea obviously BW was way bigger than SC2 is right now, but on a global scale SC2 has BW beat.
It's really hard to say, simply because of how colossal BW was in Korea. Something on the scale of baseball or football in the US in a single country alone will typically trump a far more casual (and already declining, in part thanks to MOBAs and their ease of play) worldwide following. Until SC2 gains in popularity in Korea to reach anywhere near BW status (and hopefully it does considering BW was formally killed in Korea a few weeks ago), I'm going to have to put my money on BW.
On August 23 2012 03:47 ( bush wrote: The Raven should actually be a unit that scares the opponent, just like the High Templar or Infestor. Raven is far away from being this kind of unit.
Why should the Raven be like those units? The races are asymmetrical, and if Blizzard wanted the Raven to be as strong as the Infestor it would be way stronger than it is now.
Well when terran's early/midgame advantage has been nerfed out of the game then lategame needs a change.
That's not even a remotely clear observation, Zerg have serious problems vs Terrans at the 9:00 minute mark vs either a Hellion, Marauder and Combat Shield Marine timing push or Hellion, Banshee and harrassing your third while he takes his third behind the harrassment.
I'm less concerned against Terrans going double Command Center just because I think Zerg will at some point re-evaluate their Spawning Pool and Gas timings and not just take 4 to 6 Queens and only have to make their first real decision at the 7:00 minute mark between a 3rd base or a macro hatch. I mean God forbid we Overpool and take Gas on 18 supply instead of 15 Hatch, 16 Pool, 4 Queens and 2 Gas at 40 supply to have strategic and tactical deviations to our build order between 2 to 5 Queens, Speedling expand or a Baneling Bust just because we're trying to saturate 2 bases at nose bleed speeds while conceding Terrans an unapposed 3rd base ...
As far as Fungal Growth is concernerd, if trading a root debuff for a damage buff is overpowered, then perhaps trading a root debuff for a Neural Parasite buff is another option? I've been considering what it'd take to make Neural Parasite viable again vs Protoss and Terran after the range nerf, and I think allowing Infestors to cast Neural Parasite while burrowed may make it more of an effective micro ability. Right now it's only really used as an answer to Mother Ships and Archons, so something needs to be done to get it back into the game vs Terran and Protoss as something more than a "lucky pull" vs Mother Ships and Ravens, an answer to Archons and a dubious choice vs Thors. It needs to be made useful vs Colossus with their range buff and Siege Tanks, and maybe sneaking around the map and Neural Parasiting them to force Scans would work ok.
On August 23 2012 06:44 captainwaffles wrote: 1500 Masters T on NA, TvZ feels okay right now, I think maps matter more than anything at this point in time.
On August 23 2012 06:44 captainwaffles wrote: 1500 Masters T on NA, TvZ feels okay right now, I think maps matter more than anything at this point in time.
1200 NA Masters T, I completely agree.
MMA (among other people you might've heard of) said tvz is not fine but unfortunately I do not know his ladder points. We all know how good of an argument are ladder points.
Ironically the starter of this thread Avilo only stands upon his ranking for status so in defacing our position as high masters players you are actually weakening Avilo's.
Basically in the pro scene you will find players who believe it is imbalanced and players who believe it is balanced. Cite that resource though, I want to see MMA's comment on TvZ being imbalanced and his explanation as to why.
Also we are not using our points to make any argument other than at High masters we can objectively say that we are experiencing no issues (or no more than usual in any matchup) and if that is the case, it is curious as to why lower league players (such as yourself) have these balance issues that we don't feel farther up.
On August 23 2012 03:47 ( bush wrote: The Raven should actually be a unit that scares the opponent, just like the High Templar or Infestor. Raven is far away from being this kind of unit.
especially considering how its harder to get to.
I can't think of many Zergs lategame that aren't shitting their pants when they see 6 ravens with full energy HSMing their army... Ravens are fine, get better.
Maybe the reason they're shitting their pants is the very thought that they may actually have to micro a bit more. Can't have that. Oh, fun fact, if you let 6 slow-ass ravens hsm your entire army then that means you have shit vision for a zerg and even shittier infestor control, because otherwise you'd be able to simply freeze ravens out of range of hsm and pick them off.
All of this is true. I Don't know why there would be any need to "shit the pants", in op's words, if you can just root those units with repeat casts until they die.
SC2 TvZ: A Brief History -Zergs can't beat mech. Tank damage nerfed. -Zergs can't beat mass Reapers. Reapers nerfed. -Zergs can't handle 2 rax pressure. Raxes now require depot and build time increased. -Zergs can't handle 2 Rax + Bunkers. Bunkers nerfed. -Zergs still can't handle 2 Rax + Bunkers. All map sizes increased, close spawns removed from tourneys. -Zergs can't take third base easily. All maps now have very easy thirds. -Zergs can't handle Cloak Banshees. Spore Crawler burrow time reduced. -Zergs can't handle Blue Flame Hellions. Blue Flame nerfed. -Zergs still can't handle Blue Flame Hellions/Other early pressure. Queens buffed. -Zergs can't handle Ghosts sniping everything down. Snipe nerfed. -Zergs can't take fourth base easily. All maps now have relatively easier fourths.
Essentially, Zerg whining has changed almost everything in the matchup in their favor and they are still finding ways to lose. It isn't too hard to guess the next line there:
It's pretty telling that we have seen widespread usage of virtually every single Terran unit in a variety of different strategies in this matchup at the top level. I believe the only unit that hasn't seen really widespread usage is the Battlecruiser, although even that is becoming more common in the super super late game. Terrans have tried to take all of these nerfs in stride by migrating to different units and strategies (or by simply executing the old ones better), most of which get subsequently nerfed. We've come to the point where there aren't many remaining options for Terrans to even try. It's no wonder that the matchup has gotten stale.
Part of the blame can rightly be laid on Blizzard. They threw in balance changes a bit too quickly without letting Zergs try and innovate and get over any perceived imbalances. They made certain units way too powerful relative to others in the race (Infestor) and other units way too crappy (Hydras). However, the other part of the blame also rightly belongs to the Zerg players that were trying harder to get all of Terrans strategies nerfed instead of asking for more options for their own race, particularly in regards to the early game. It is worth noting that most of the nerfs on that list up there pertain to the early game. Hence, if Zerg early game had simply been buffed so that they could put out aggression (without it being all-in), most of those nerfs probably would not have even been needed.
Ultimately, it is the lack of available strategies for both sides that needs fixing. The Raven changes might help slightly in making them more viable, but at this point IMO the damage is already done. Zerg has no early game options and not much late game option either. Terran early game options were all nerfed into oblivion. Thus even if Ravens become the go-to choice it still means that the matchup has defaulted into a bunch of false choices. Suffice to say, it is a good thing that HOTS beta is coming soon. The matchup sorely needs a reboot.
On August 23 2012 08:50 Sevenofnines wrote: SC2 TvZ: A Brief History -Zergs can't beat mech. Tank damage nerfed. -Zergs can't beat mass Reapers. Reapers nerfed. -Zergs can't handle 2 rax pressure. Raxes now require depot and build time increased. -Zergs can't handle 2 Rax + Bunkers. Bunkers nerfed. -Zergs still can't handle 2 Rax + Bunkers. All map sizes increased, close spawns removed from tourneys. -Zergs can't take third base easily. All maps now have very easy thirds. -Zergs can't handle Cloak Banshees. Spore Crawler burrow time reduced. -Zergs can't handle Blue Flame Hellions. Blue Flame nerfed. -Zergs still can't handle Blue Flame Hellions/Other early pressure. Queens buffed. -Zergs can't handle Ghosts sniping everything down. Snipe nerfed. -Zergs can't take fourth base easily. All maps now have relatively easier fourths.
Essentially, Zerg whining has changed almost everything in the matchup in their favor and they are still finding ways to lose. It isn't too hard to guess the next line there:
It's pretty telling that we have seen widespread usage of virtually every single Terran unit in a variety of different strategies in this matchup at the top level. I believe the only unit that hasn't seen really widespread usage is the Battlecruiser, although even that is becoming more common in the super super late game. Terrans have tried to take all of these nerfs in stride by migrating to different units and strategies (or by simply executing the old ones better), most of which get subsequently nerfed. We've come to the point where there aren't many remaining options for Terrans to even try. It's no wonder that the matchup has gotten stale.
Part of the blame can rightly be laid on Blizzard. They threw in balance changes a bit too quickly without letting Zergs try and innovate and get over any perceived imbalances. They made certain units way too powerful relative to others in the race (Infestor) and other units way too crappy (Hydras). However, the other part of the blame also rightly belongs to the Zerg players that were trying harder to get all of Terrans strategies nerfed instead of asking for more options for their own race, particularly in regards to the early game. It is worth noting that most of the nerfs on that list up there pertain to the early game. Hence, if Zerg early game had simply been buffed so that they could put out aggression (without it being all-in), most of those nerfs probably would not have even been needed.
Ultimately, it is the lack of available strategies for both sides that needs fixing. The Raven changes might help slightly in making them more viable, but at this point IMO the damage is already done. Zerg has no early game options and not much late game option either. Terran early game options were all nerfed into oblivion. Thus even if Ravens become the go-to choice it still means that the matchup has defaulted into a bunch of false choices. Suffice to say, it is a good thing that HOTS beta is coming soon. The matchup sorely needs a reboot.
You also left out the Medivac speed nerf and the Thor nerf.
On August 23 2012 08:50 Sevenofnines wrote: SC2 TvZ: A Brief History -Zergs can't beat mech. Tank damage nerfed. -Zergs can't beat mass Reapers. Reapers nerfed. -Zergs can't handle 2 rax pressure. Raxes now require depot and build time increased. -Zergs can't handle 2 Rax + Bunkers. Bunkers nerfed. -Zergs still can't handle 2 Rax + Bunkers. All map sizes increased, close spawns removed from tourneys. -Zergs can't take third base easily. All maps now have very easy thirds. -Zergs can't handle Cloak Banshees. Spore Crawler burrow time reduced. -Zergs can't handle Blue Flame Hellions. Blue Flame nerfed. -Zergs still can't handle Blue Flame Hellions/Other early pressure. Queens buffed. -Zergs can't handle Ghosts sniping everything down. Snipe nerfed. -Zergs can't take fourth base easily. All maps now have relatively easier fourths.
Essentially, Zerg whining has changed almost everything in the matchup in their favor and they are still finding ways to lose. It isn't too hard to guess the next line there:
On August 23 2012 08:50 Sevenofnines wrote: SC2 TvZ: A Brief History -Zergs can't beat mech. Tank damage nerfed. -Zergs can't beat mass Reapers. Reapers nerfed. -Zergs can't handle 2 rax pressure. Raxes now require depot and build time increased. -Zergs can't handle 2 Rax + Bunkers. Bunkers nerfed. -Zergs still can't handle 2 Rax + Bunkers. All map sizes increased, close spawns removed from tourneys. -Zergs can't take third base easily. All maps now have very easy thirds. -Zergs can't handle Cloak Banshees. Spore Crawler burrow time reduced. -Zergs can't handle Blue Flame Hellions. Blue Flame nerfed. -Zergs still can't handle Blue Flame Hellions/Other early pressure. Queens buffed. -Zergs can't handle Ghosts sniping everything down. Snipe nerfed. -Zergs can't take fourth base easily. All maps now have relatively easier fourths.
Essentially, Zerg whining has changed almost everything in the matchup in their favor and they are still finding ways to lose. It isn't too hard to guess the next line there:
Terran just goes marine tank and then cries when they lose to "tier 3" units.
Actually Terran goes marines with stim/combat shield - tier 1.5; tanks - tier 2, medivacs - tier 2.5, vikings - tier 2.5, and mix in some thors late game - tier 3. The problem is more that zerg gets tier 3 by 17 minutes, terran can unlock their tier 3 at ~25 minutes because of production costs and race dynamics. The issue is never that they can't fight tier 3 with their low tier units, it's that they lose to tier 3 long before they have a chance to build their own high tier units to deal with the zerg tier 3 units.
On August 23 2012 10:04 Petninja wrote: The easy answer is to make fungal growth not root units it hits. It's broken as fuck right now in all match-ups.
The issue with that is that even right now in PvZ a lot of the reason why Blink stalker allins fail off 2 base is because the Zerg can stun them with fungal, perhaps reducing it to "ensare" from BW and having it remove all applicable spells while ensared (like blink etc) would be nice but you can't just say "lets just make fungal growth do nothing" because that won't help.
On August 21 2012 19:33 Snowbear wrote: Newsflash guys: terrans should split their vikings and marines against fungal, BUT don't you dare to say that zergs should split their corruptors and broodlords against HSM!! That's NOT possible!!!!! Zergs should be able to 1a themselves to victory! Terrans should split for their life!
because zerg cannot snipe vikings and marines like how marines and vikings can pick off spreaded broodlords
Beasty:After the recent patch Blizzard introduced new unit called Queendralisks which kills anything that terran has up to 10 minutes into game allowing zerg to get on 3 base and get 70-80 drones with no problem, which then allows zerg to get tier 3 units at 13-14 minute into game and most of the time terran is simply not being able to deal with it unless you manage to deal damage to zerg economy through defences of queendralisks. It's obviously possible for terran to win vs both P and Z, its just..really hard at this point.
What I would change is maybe give terran tier 3 units, nerf warpgate and make it only defensive ability so that protoss wouldnt be able to warp 30 zealots in middle of fights while attacking you and I would agree with new unit queendralisk staying in game as long as GGlord/ infestor composition would be nerfed.
I personally find all these balance-related nicknames like queendralisks, GGlords, lolrines, etc. to be kind of unfortunate. They discourage reasoned discussion, and shift the tone of the conversation to more toward name-calling.
I think if a Zerg player really knows what he is doing then it becomes very hard for the terran player. I think the raven change isn't really necessary, the creep nerfs are nice though. What terran really needs are some more options other than hellion/banshee, people are starting to get used to that style and it's kind of like the last opener the race has left lol.
On August 21 2012 19:33 Snowbear wrote: Newsflash guys: terrans should split their vikings and marines against fungal, BUT don't you dare to say that zergs should split their corruptors and broodlords against HSM!! That's NOT possible!!!!! Zergs should be able to 1a themselves to victory! Terrans should split for their life!
because zerg cannot snipe vikings and marines like how marines and vikings can pick off spreaded broodlords
corruptors can protect the broodlords from vikings and marines can be taken care of by fungals.
I have always found Ravens to be more effective than ghosts, ever since I started using them season 1 back when the game was first released. Reason being I thought ghosts were utter trash and snipe was useless vs Zerg (oh, was I ever wrong). Regardless, I had already become so accustomed to Ravens, it was fine.
The composition you need is Raven/Viking. Vikings can attack corrupters at range, and seeker is used simply as a deterrant for them to engage your vikings. You do not advance in with the Ravens if it can be helped. Sometimes it is necessary, but generally speaking. BL/Infestor is insanely immobile, and even if they have 4 spines per expansion, double drops that unload elsewhere then stim in can be a massive pain in the ass.
Fungal is only effective vs Ravens if you have something else to take them out. Otherwise, fungal is highly ineffective vs split Ravens, just as it is highly effective vs split Banshees (which not enough people use, almost all my wins vs Korean Zergs have come from a 3-4 port banshee switch when they're using Ling/Infestor/Ultra... split banshees, use cloak, infestors die, even if they hit perfect fungals and IT, it is almost never cost effective, and then you can use them to deny new expansions, while you most Zergs don't even have spire since you typically go infestor straight into hive into ultra).
Beasty:After the recent patch Blizzard introduced new unit called Queendralisks which kills anything that terran has up to 10 minutes into game allowing zerg to get on 3 base and get 70-80 drones with no problem, which then allows zerg to get tier 3 units at 13-14 minute into game and most of the time terran is simply not being able to deal with it unless you manage to deal damage to zerg economy through defences of queendralisks. It's obviously possible for terran to win vs both P and Z, its just..really hard at this point.
What I would change is maybe give terran tier 3 units, nerf warpgate and make it only defensive ability so that protoss wouldnt be able to warp 30 zealots in middle of fights while attacking you and I would agree with new unit queendralisk staying in game as long as GGlord/ infestor composition would be nerfed.
I personally find all these balance-related nicknames like queendralisks, GGlords, lolrines, etc. to be kind of unfortunate. They discourage reasoned discussion, and shift the tone of the conversation to more toward name-calling.
I think it's gotten to the point now where Terrans probably don't think their comments are being taken seriously anyways.
Beasty:After the recent patch Blizzard introduced new unit called Queendralisks which kills anything that terran has up to 10 minutes into game allowing zerg to get on 3 base and get 70-80 drones with no problem, which then allows zerg to get tier 3 units at 13-14 minute into game and most of the time terran is simply not being able to deal with it unless you manage to deal damage to zerg economy through defences of queendralisks. It's obviously possible for terran to win vs both P and Z, its just..really hard at this point.
What I would change is maybe give terran tier 3 units, nerf warpgate and make it only defensive ability so that protoss wouldnt be able to warp 30 zealots in middle of fights while attacking you and I would agree with new unit queendralisk staying in game as long as GGlord/ infestor composition would be nerfed.
I personally find all these balance-related nicknames like queendralisks, GGlords, lolrines, etc. to be kind of unfortunate. They discourage reasoned discussion, and shift the tone of the conversation to more toward name-calling.
I think it's gotten to the point now where Terrans probably don't think their comments are being taken seriously anyways.
Probably because most of the comments are to grossly over exaggerated to take seriously.
On August 23 2012 06:44 captainwaffles wrote: 1500 Masters T on NA, TvZ feels okay right now, I think maps matter more than anything at this point in time.
1200 NA Masters T, I completely agree.
1320 NA Master, 19 years old and 178 centimeters tall, and I agree
Beasty:After the recent patch Blizzard introduced new unit called Queendralisks which kills anything that terran has up to 10 minutes into game allowing zerg to get on 3 base and get 70-80 drones with no problem, which then allows zerg to get tier 3 units at 13-14 minute into game and most of the time terran is simply not being able to deal with it unless you manage to deal damage to zerg economy through defences of queendralisks. It's obviously possible for terran to win vs both P and Z, its just..really hard at this point.
What I would change is maybe give terran tier 3 units, nerf warpgate and make it only defensive ability so that protoss wouldnt be able to warp 30 zealots in middle of fights while attacking you and I would agree with new unit queendralisk staying in game as long as GGlord/ infestor composition would be nerfed.
I personally find all these balance-related nicknames like queendralisks, GGlords, lolrines, etc. to be kind of unfortunate. They discourage reasoned discussion, and shift the tone of the conversation to more toward name-calling.
I think it's gotten to the point now where Terrans probably don't think their comments are being taken seriously anyways.
Probably because most of the comments are to grossly over exaggerated to take seriously.
Because all Z players ever say is "you're bad get better" or "the game is fine" ? Lol. They aren't even open to the idea that just possibly that taking a free third uncontested while droning straight to 70+ workers isn't entertaining, nor is it balanced at all. And no, I'm not exaggerating at all. A Z takes his 3rd almost uncontested really, and can drone extremely quickly to 70 drones without much threat of getting killed by a Terran player unless he royally fucks up his build somehow either through just not droning on a certain round of larvae, overreacting badly, or just plain out getting out controlled when facing Helion/Banshee.
On August 23 2012 06:44 captainwaffles wrote: 1500 Masters T on NA, TvZ feels okay right now, I think maps matter more than anything at this point in time.
1200 NA Masters T, I completely agree.
1320 NA Master, 19 years old and 178 centimeters tall, and I agree
1600 NA Master, Random, 22 years old, 5'10'', Bachelors in Business Economics with a Minor in Accounting, 8:00-4:30 day job, and Ravens work well.
People always have bias towards their own race. If a players of certain race claim game is balanced it is actually a good indicator that their race is currently on top.
It is equally bad if you have terran as a dominating race or if you have zerg. Some people see no problem in zerg being the strongest now just because terran had their strong period before. Other don't even think there are balance issues.
The problem lies in the fact that terran was the strongest race at the release of the game so people, immaturely, developed a dislike toward terran and have a revenge-like mentality. People also forget statistics, actual numbers, and remember how terran was "ridiculously op", "unbeatable" in 2011 and forget that statistics weren't actually that bad. In fact, strongest terran month vs. zerg in 2011 is very similar to how zerg looks now against terran in July 2012.
The other problem is that most influential people in sc2 community are zerg or protoss players, with the exception of some randoms. There really isn't a strong and influential terran voice in the community. If you speak about balance from terran perspective, even if you try your best to provide good arguments, it is often labeled as QQ.
Beasty:After the recent patch Blizzard introduced new unit called Queendralisks which kills anything that terran has up to 10 minutes into game allowing zerg to get on 3 base and get 70-80 drones with no problem, which then allows zerg to get tier 3 units at 13-14 minute into game and most of the time terran is simply not being able to deal with it unless you manage to deal damage to zerg economy through defences of queendralisks. It's obviously possible for terran to win vs both P and Z, its just..really hard at this point.
What I would change is maybe give terran tier 3 units, nerf warpgate and make it only defensive ability so that protoss wouldnt be able to warp 30 zealots in middle of fights while attacking you and I would agree with new unit queendralisk staying in game as long as GGlord/ infestor composition would be nerfed.
I personally find all these balance-related nicknames like queendralisks, GGlords, lolrines, etc. to be kind of unfortunate. They discourage reasoned discussion, and shift the tone of the conversation to more toward name-calling.
I think it's gotten to the point now where Terrans probably don't think their comments are being taken seriously anyways.
Probably because most of the comments are to grossly over exaggerated to take seriously.
Because all Z players ever say is "you're bad get better" or "the game is fine" ? Lol. They aren't even open to the idea that just possibly that taking a free third uncontested while droning straight to 70+ workers isn't entertaining, nor is it balanced at all. And no, I'm not exaggerating at all. A Z takes his 3rd almost uncontested really, and can drone extremely quickly to 70 drones without much threat of getting killed by a Terran player unless he royally fucks up his build somehow either through just not droning on a certain round of larvae, overreacting badly, or just plain out getting out controlled when facing Helion/Banshee.
Because there's nothing much that the Zerg can do in the way of aggression? There's not too many timings that zerg can exploit. They're not a very aggressive race, and unfortunately, that's by design. The more and more I've been playing, the more I've come to realize and understand why Zerg is forced to drone to 4 base/5base gas and get infestor broodlord or infestor ultra. It's because the race is unable to be aggressive without being allin. There are no attacks you can perform. It's a shame.
This is due to a lot of things - the way armies work, the fact that you cannot split up forces, meaning that the terran army is always going to be close to home, preventing drops or backstabs. I'm sure they can be done, and well, but will they ever become a staple of play with the current game? I don't think so. Don't even talk about ZvP, lol. You have to go infestor broodlord.
I am open to the idea that a lack of aggression in the early game due to queens, and consequentially the early third droned to high heaven, isn't very entertaining. Personally, I hate infestor broodlord. I think that it is boring. I would love to play a very counterattack, backstab, drop heavy style. But you really can't. Not the way the current game plays. You have to work for that lategame army. Yes, the queen change allows Zerg players to reach that deathball even faster. But it really all stems from bad design.
The current metagame forces terran to play very greedy so as a zerg you can in fact do damage early on, sometimes even win the game at that point, and it won't even be an all in.
Bomber vs. Moonglade game 1 comes to mind. Bomber fast expanded, made an early 3rd orbital. Moonglade went for an early third and then did a big ling bane push which actually killed Bomber immediately.
If both players fast expand, zerg can put pressure faster.
Beasty:After the recent patch Blizzard introduced new unit called Queendralisks which kills anything that terran has up to 10 minutes into game allowing zerg to get on 3 base and get 70-80 drones with no problem, which then allows zerg to get tier 3 units at 13-14 minute into game and most of the time terran is simply not being able to deal with it unless you manage to deal damage to zerg economy through defences of queendralisks. It's obviously possible for terran to win vs both P and Z, its just..really hard at this point.
What I would change is maybe give terran tier 3 units, nerf warpgate and make it only defensive ability so that protoss wouldnt be able to warp 30 zealots in middle of fights while attacking you and I would agree with new unit queendralisk staying in game as long as GGlord/ infestor composition would be nerfed.
I personally find all these balance-related nicknames like queendralisks, GGlords, lolrines, etc. to be kind of unfortunate. They discourage reasoned discussion, and shift the tone of the conversation to more toward name-calling.
I think it's gotten to the point now where Terrans probably don't think their comments are being taken seriously anyways.
Probably because most of the comments are to grossly over exaggerated to take seriously.
Because all Z players ever say is "you're bad get better" or "the game is fine" ? Lol. They aren't even open to the idea that just possibly that taking a free third uncontested while droning straight to 70+ workers isn't entertaining, nor is it balanced at all. And no, I'm not exaggerating at all. A Z takes his 3rd almost uncontested really, and can drone extremely quickly to 70 drones without much threat of getting killed by a Terran player unless he royally fucks up his build somehow either through just not droning on a certain round of larvae, overreacting badly, or just plain out getting out controlled when facing Helion/Banshee.
Because there's nothing much that the Zerg can do in the way of aggression? There's not too many timings that zerg can exploit. They're not a very aggressive race, and unfortunately, that's by design. The more and more I've been playing, the more I've come to realize and understand why Zerg is forced to drone to 4 base/5base gas and get infestor broodlord or infestor ultra. It's because the race is unable to be aggressive without being allin. There are no attacks you can perform. It's a shame.
This is due to a lot of things - the way armies work, the fact that you cannot split up forces, meaning that the terran army is always going to be close to home, preventing drops or backstabs. I'm sure they can be done, and well, but will they ever become a staple of play with the current game? I don't think so. Don't even talk about ZvP, lol. You have to go infestor broodlord.
I am open to the idea that a lack of aggression in the early game due to queens, and consequentially the early third droned to high heaven, isn't very entertaining. Personally, I hate infestor broodlord. I think that it is boring. I would love to play a very counterattack, backstab, drop heavy style. But you really can't. Not the way the current game plays. You have to work for that lategame army. Yes, the queen change allows Zerg players to reach that deathball even faster. But it really all stems from bad design.
Honestly, in ZvT early game Zerg aggression with either bling/ling, roach/ling or roach/bling/ling works very well in at least trading SCVs for units. It's really not that hard and while it is less economical than greedy droning, it is in no way all-in even if it doesn't cripple. It's as much an investment as hellion/banshee and it works more often from what I see.
Because there's nothing much that the Zerg can do in the way of aggression? There's not too many timings that zerg can exploit. They're not a very aggressive race, and unfortunately, that's by design. The more and more I've been playing, the more I've come to realize and understand why Zerg is forced to drone to 4 base/5base gas and get infestor broodlord or infestor ultra. It's because the race is unable to be aggressive without being allin. There are no attacks you can perform. It's a shame.
This is due to a lot of things - the way armies work, the fact that you cannot split up forces, meaning that the terran army is always going to be close to home, preventing drops or backstabs. I'm sure they can be done, and well, but will they ever become a staple of play with the current game? I don't think so. Don't even talk about ZvP, lol. You have to go infestor broodlord.
I am open to the idea that a lack of aggression in the early game due to queens, and consequentially the early third droned to high heaven, isn't very entertaining. Personally, I hate infestor broodlord. I think that it is boring. I would love to play a very counterattack, backstab, drop heavy style. But you really can't. Not the way the current game plays. You have to work for that lategame army. Yes, the queen change allows Zerg players to reach that deathball even faster. But it really all stems from bad design.
There wasn't much of a problem with the balance before, though. And early Z vs. Reactor Hellion was at least entertaining - not necessarily from a build perspective, but neither was forced to commit to anything heavily - some Hellions and Roaches were cheap, and the Spine-Queen-Hellion dances and trying to sneak creep tumors past the Hellions were pretty damn entertaining if you ask me. (Plus if you Roached the Hellions, T would necessarily be on the backfoot - Reactor Hellion establishes tech and economy, but basically no army.) Plus after the early game due diligence was done on both sides the game went on to a rather long and entertaining midgame because Z's economy wasn't in as brilliant of a shape so they had to make units and T had to likewise establish an army (perhaps also slowed by muta harass). All in all, much better than what we have now, more balanced too, even if the winrates aren't atrociously imbalanced anymore.
There was a problem with two Factory mass Hellion being hard to distinguish from standard light Hellion pressure, but Overlord speed should've been enough for that surely?
Speaking of drops, the main change I would've done to pre-patch Zerg was to speed up drop research so Zerg had stuff to do faster after getting Lair. Lair itself seemed more of a speedbump than an enabler of anything exciting, Burrow timings perhaps excepted. This way, Zerg might've gained some Terran-style builds where they tech quickly to drops, and I don't think I've ever seen people say drops are boring. (And give Hydras a speed upgrade, even a small one)
On August 23 2012 08:50 Sevenofnines wrote: SC2 TvZ: A Brief History -Zergs can't beat mech. Tank damage nerfed. -Zergs can't beat mass Reapers. Reapers nerfed. -Zergs can't handle 2 rax pressure. Raxes now require depot and build time increased. -Zergs can't handle 2 Rax + Bunkers. Bunkers nerfed. -Zergs still can't handle 2 Rax + Bunkers. All map sizes increased, close spawns removed from tourneys. -Zergs can't take third base easily. All maps now have very easy thirds. -Zergs can't handle Cloak Banshees. Spore Crawler burrow time reduced. -Zergs can't handle Blue Flame Hellions. Blue Flame nerfed. -Zergs still can't handle Blue Flame Hellions/Other early pressure. Queens buffed. -Zergs can't handle Ghosts sniping everything down. Snipe nerfed. -Zergs can't take fourth base easily. All maps now have relatively easier fourths.
Essentially, Zerg whining has changed almost everything in the matchup in their favor and they are still finding ways to lose. It isn't too hard to guess the next line there:
It's pretty telling that we have seen widespread usage of virtually every single Terran unit in a variety of different strategies in this matchup at the top level. I believe the only unit that hasn't seen really widespread usage is the Battlecruiser, although even that is becoming more common in the super super late game. Terrans have tried to take all of these nerfs in stride by migrating to different units and strategies (or by simply executing the old ones better), most of which get subsequently nerfed. We've come to the point where there aren't many remaining options for Terrans to even try. It's no wonder that the matchup has gotten stale.
Part of the blame can rightly be laid on Blizzard. They threw in balance changes a bit too quickly without letting Zergs try and innovate and get over any perceived imbalances. They made certain units way too powerful relative to others in the race (Infestor) and other units way too crappy (Hydras). However, the other part of the blame also rightly belongs to the Zerg players that were trying harder to get all of Terrans strategies nerfed instead of asking for more options for their own race, particularly in regards to the early game. It is worth noting that most of the nerfs on that list up there pertain to the early game. Hence, if Zerg early game had simply been buffed so that they could put out aggression (without it being all-in), most of those nerfs probably would not have even been needed.
Ultimately, it is the lack of available strategies for both sides that needs fixing. The Raven changes might help slightly in making them more viable, but at this point IMO the damage is already done. Zerg has no early game options and not much late game option either. Terran early game options were all nerfed into oblivion. Thus even if Ravens become the go-to choice it still means that the matchup has defaulted into a bunch of false choices. Suffice to say, it is a good thing that HOTS beta is coming soon. The matchup sorely needs a reboot.
That post is really scary. That is exactly what it has been like. I loved the reaper and hellions until they got nerfed because you could get an early lead with really good micro. And Ghost vs. lategame zerg was some of the most interesting lategame play i have seen.
Though I am not sure how much the reboot will help on the matchup after looking at it, because what you describe is an early into midgame issue, where the changes from zergs side mainly are midgame into lategame changes.
On August 23 2012 08:50 Sevenofnines wrote: SC2 TvZ: A Brief History -Zergs can't beat mech. Tank damage nerfed. -Zergs can't beat mass Reapers. Reapers nerfed. -Zergs can't handle 2 rax pressure. Raxes now require depot and build time increased. -Zergs can't handle 2 Rax + Bunkers. Bunkers nerfed. -Zergs still can't handle 2 Rax + Bunkers. All map sizes increased, close spawns removed from tourneys. -Zergs can't take third base easily. All maps now have very easy thirds. -Zergs can't handle Cloak Banshees. Spore Crawler burrow time reduced. -Zergs can't handle Blue Flame Hellions. Blue Flame nerfed. -Zergs still can't handle Blue Flame Hellions/Other early pressure. Queens buffed. -Zergs can't handle Ghosts sniping everything down. Snipe nerfed. -Zergs can't take fourth base easily. All maps now have relatively easier fourths.
Essentially, Zerg whining has changed almost everything in the matchup in their favor and they are still finding ways to lose. It isn't too hard to guess the next line there:
It's pretty telling that we have seen widespread usage of virtually every single Terran unit in a variety of different strategies in this matchup at the top level. I believe the only unit that hasn't seen really widespread usage is the Battlecruiser, although even that is becoming more common in the super super late game. Terrans have tried to take all of these nerfs in stride by migrating to different units and strategies (or by simply executing the old ones better), most of which get subsequently nerfed. We've come to the point where there aren't many remaining options for Terrans to even try. It's no wonder that the matchup has gotten stale.
Part of the blame can rightly be laid on Blizzard. They threw in balance changes a bit too quickly without letting Zergs try and innovate and get over any perceived imbalances. They made certain units way too powerful relative to others in the race (Infestor) and other units way too crappy (Hydras). However, the other part of the blame also rightly belongs to the Zerg players that were trying harder to get all of Terrans strategies nerfed instead of asking for more options for their own race, particularly in regards to the early game. It is worth noting that most of the nerfs on that list up there pertain to the early game. Hence, if Zerg early game had simply been buffed so that they could put out aggression (without it being all-in), most of those nerfs probably would not have even been needed.
Ultimately, it is the lack of available strategies for both sides that needs fixing. The Raven changes might help slightly in making them more viable, but at this point IMO the damage is already done. Zerg has no early game options and not much late game option either. Terran early game options were all nerfed into oblivion. Thus even if Ravens become the go-to choice it still means that the matchup has defaulted into a bunch of false choices. Suffice to say, it is a good thing that HOTS beta is coming soon. The matchup sorely needs a reboot.
Like said before u missed some nerfs but its pretty good summary. Also i think ultras buff was an important one, giving zergs the possibilty to switch easely between bl and ultras in late game. Terrans decided to make mass ghost late game because its pretty good vs both ultras ans BL, but still it was not that easy to play. Now ghosts are useless vs both units, and zergs still can switch easy.
As a Protoss player watching pro Korean Terrans against Pro Korean Zergs, I have to say that balance isssues, aside, TvZ has become a lot more boring to watch for the first 15 minutes than it was before the queen buff.
On August 23 2012 08:50 Sevenofnines wrote: SC2 TvZ: A Brief History -Zergs can't beat mech. Tank damage nerfed. -Zergs can't beat mass Reapers. Reapers nerfed. -Zergs can't handle 2 rax pressure. Raxes now require depot and build time increased. -Zergs can't handle 2 Rax + Bunkers. Bunkers nerfed. -Zergs still can't handle 2 Rax + Bunkers. All map sizes increased, close spawns removed from tourneys. -Zergs can't take third base easily. All maps now have very easy thirds. -Zergs can't handle Cloak Banshees. Spore Crawler burrow time reduced. -Zergs can't handle Blue Flame Hellions. Blue Flame nerfed. -Zergs still can't handle Blue Flame Hellions/Other early pressure. Queens buffed. -Zergs can't handle Ghosts sniping everything down. Snipe nerfed. -Zergs can't take fourth base easily. All maps now have relatively easier fourths.
Essentially, Zerg whining has changed almost everything in the matchup in their favor and they are still finding ways to lose. It isn't too hard to guess the next line there:
This is incomplete, you are missing the complete beta phase of the game, with TvZ specific changes like hydralisk damage and health nerf or the bunker and barracks build time buffs. And then of course stuff like: the roach buff, the infestor buff, the infestor nerfs, the medivac nerf, the ultralisk nerf that was surely only because of mech, the ultralisk building damage nerf (essential nerf for lategame TvZ, because Ultralisks were specifically too good vs PFs) trollololololololololololololol
But yeah, Zergs just wanted to have it easy and whined about balanced builds like 5rax reaper, that were completly fair and not the result of roach nerfs in the beta.
On August 24 2012 04:02 Coffee Zombie wrote: Wasn't the Blueflame nerf more for TvT and Spore root time to help with Stargate allins in ZvP?
Protoss got a similar treatment, and I think the philosophy is the same. 4 gate used to work, let's make sure it never works again. 1 base Stargate used to work, let's make sure that never works again. So, if you all you ever do is patch the early timings into oblivion, you're stuck with nothing for a solid 12 minutes.
On August 23 2012 14:25 FabledIntegral wrote: I have always found Ravens to be more effective than ghosts, ever since I started using them season 1 back when the game was first released. Reason being I thought ghosts were utter trash and snipe was useless vs Zerg (oh, was I ever wrong). Regardless, I had already become so accustomed to Ravens, it was fine.
The composition you need is Raven/Viking. Vikings can attack corrupters at range, and seeker is used simply as a deterrant for them to engage your vikings. You do not advance in with the Ravens if it can be helped. Sometimes it is necessary, but generally speaking. BL/Infestor is insanely immobile, and even if they have 4 spines per expansion, double drops that unload elsewhere then stim in can be a massive pain in the ass.
Fungal is only effective vs Ravens if you have something else to take them out. Otherwise, fungal is highly ineffective vs split Ravens, just as it is highly effective vs split Banshees (which not enough people use, almost all my wins vs Korean Zergs have come from a 3-4 port banshee switch when they're using Ling/Infestor/Ultra... split banshees, use cloak, infestors die, even if they hit perfect fungals and IT, it is almost never cost effective, and then you can use them to deny new expansions, while you most Zergs don't even have spire since you typically go infestor straight into hive into ultra).
Each time I play this guy zvt, I cry in the corning after I get owned. ^_^ Ravens work very well
I agree with Avilo here guys. The queen buff has given zerg the ability to dedicate all their precious larva to drones while being able to defend (if not all the time) with soley queens. Most zergs then go directly into infestor and are able to secure additional expansions because terran just does not want to get close to that army with the risk of 1 fungal making them lose their entire army.
With the threat of losing that army zerg can take more bases and tech up to gglords/ultraop (joke guys im not crying imba or anything just trying to get a laugh here) pretty comfortably. Well, that's just my 2 cents. I want to reiterate I think the problem is with fungal and that the raven speed boost wont directly change balance in the matchup. I think if anything it's Blizzards attempt at getting terrans to use them more (but I don't think this change alone is enough)
I really can't believe you guys are crying over Queen buffs after MVP won IEM vs Vortix and Nerchio, if Zerg's entire build order has changed from 4 Queens before gas to a gas steal, 18 gas, 2 Queens and a Roach Warren for a timing push and taking Macro Hatches before 3rds at MLG that's a clear indication that Zergs are not comfortable defending 7:00 3rds with Hellion, Banshee and Marauder pressure with only 4 Queens and Slowlings.
Welcome back to 18 Gas and Roach aggression, Baneling aggression and Speedling expand, and I'm sure we'll see 4 Queen, 6:00 Macro Hatch for 2 base Mutalisk expand before MLG is finished as well. If Zerg has to adapt to 1/1/1 aggression by taking 18 Gas, then I can't see how you can say Range 5 Queens are OP and the only argument you've got left is vs 6 Queens as the greediest economic opening that let's you take a 3rd completely unapposed ...
On August 23 2012 08:50 Sevenofnines wrote: SC2 TvZ: A Brief History -Zergs can't beat mech. Tank damage nerfed. -Zergs can't beat mass Reapers. Reapers nerfed. -Zergs can't handle 2 rax pressure. Raxes now require depot and build time increased. -Zergs can't handle 2 Rax + Bunkers. Bunkers nerfed. -Zergs still can't handle 2 Rax + Bunkers. All map sizes increased, close spawns removed from tourneys. -Zergs can't take third base easily. All maps now have very easy thirds. -Zergs can't handle Cloak Banshees. Spore Crawler burrow time reduced. -Zergs can't handle Blue Flame Hellions. Blue Flame nerfed. -Zergs still can't handle Blue Flame Hellions/Other early pressure. Queens buffed. -Zergs can't handle Ghosts sniping everything down. Snipe nerfed. -Zergs can't take fourth base easily. All maps now have relatively easier fourths.
Essentially, Zerg whining has changed almost everything in the matchup in their favor and they are still finding ways to lose. It isn't too hard to guess the next line there:
This is incomplete, you are missing the complete beta phase of the game, with TvZ specific changes like hydralisk damage and health nerf or the bunker and barracks build time buffs. And then of course stuff like: the roach buff, the infestor buff, the infestor nerfs, the medivac nerf, the ultralisk nerf that was surely only because of mech, the ultralisk building damage nerf (essential nerf for lategame TvZ, because Ultralisks were specifically too good vs PFs) trollololololololololololololol
But yeah, Zergs just wanted to have it easy and whined about balanced builds like 5rax reaper, that were completly fair and not the result of roach nerfs in the beta.
ya zerg got hit really hard on the roach in beta making the range increase necessary later.
Patch 6 (version 0.8.0.14593)
Burrowed regeneration rate decreased from 10 to 5. Upgraded burrowed regeneration bonus decreased from +20 to +10.
Patch 7 (version 0.9.0.14621B)
Organic Carapace no longer grants bonus regeneration to unburrowed roaches.
Patch 8 (version 0.9.0.14621B)
Burrowed move speed decreased from 2 to 1.4. Armor value decreased from 2 to 1.
Patch 12 (version 0.14.0.15343)
Supply count increased from 1 to 2.
Patch 14 (version 0.16.0.15580)
Organic Carapace upgrade removed. Tunneling Claws now also increases burrowed regeneration rate from 5 to 10.
I'd like to see what would happen if the burrowed movement speed and/or regeneration where buffed up a bit more those abilities aren't used enough I want cool burrow micro.
Some other big nerfs are
Spine Crawler
The root time has been increased from 6 to 12.
Spore Crawler
The root time has been increased from 6 to 12.
and this one turned a really cool ability into something barely used for the next 2 years just like the reaper. I'd like to see how progamers would handle it if this one was changed back.
Nydus Network
Nydus Worm build time increased from 10 seconds to 20 seconds.
Lastly here is something that people forget about that really helped a lot of terrans win a lot of games. Imagine if this change never happened the entire cloaked banshee opening wouldn't exist as an option!
Banshee
Cloak: This ability no longer requires Fusion Core to research.
I'm really tired of people saying that Fungal Growth prevents SM.
If you have a lot of ravens late game, Fungal Growth can delay SM, not prevent it.
If the Terran uses his ravens correctly, the fungals will generally only hit one raven each, which means five fungals per Raven, or 3 infestors with partial energy. Fungal's snare should not cause many Ravens to die, because you should have infantry and/or turrets on the ground controlling space against Unfestors, Corruptors, Mutas, and perhaps Hydras. Any actual attacking units that try to prey on the Ravens, or fight on the gound, can have SM retargeted on them-
Fungal growth is the ONLY anti-air Zerg ability that outranges SM.
Mutas and especially Corruptors are exceptionally vulnerable to PDD, which has great range and can be fired by Ravens near the back. This will buy you the time to fire missiles or disengage, and if he only brought a few units so as to avoid SM, you can remain invulnerable for quite some time.
A quick player can move his mutas back every time there's a missile on them, but he's already at a disadvantage if he has to do that- you can go kill something valuable while he waits for the timer to run out. It's 20 seconds plus return time.
tldr:
Lots of Zergies, they blow up A few Zergies, turrets kill them Any number of Zergies; PDD is God Mode.
On August 25 2012 19:24 LavaLava wrote: I'm really tired of people saying that Fungal Growth prevents SM.
If you have a lot of ravens late game, Fungal Growth can delay SM, not prevent it.
If the Terran uses his ravens correctly, the fungals will generally only hit one raven each, which means five fungals per Raven, or 3 infestors with partial energy. Fungal's snare should not cause many Ravens to die, because you should have infantry and/or turrets on the ground controlling space against Unfestors, Corruptors, Mutas, and perhaps Hydras. Any actual attacking units that try to prey on the Ravens, or fight...
Wow so if the terran spread his ravens they wouldn't all get group fungaled so easily. If the zerg spread his corrupters/broodlords then the massive HSM splash damage could be negated. If both races were played how they SHOULD be played, HSM would be useless.
On August 25 2012 19:24 LavaLava wrote: I'm really tired of people saying that Fungal Growth prevents SM.
If you have a lot of ravens late game, Fungal Growth can delay SM, not prevent it.
If the Terran uses his ravens correctly, the fungals will generally only hit one raven each, which means five fungals per Raven, or 3 infestors with partial energy. Fungal's snare should not cause many Ravens to die, because you should have infantry and/or turrets on the ground controlling space against Unfestors, Corruptors, Mutas, and perhaps Hydras. Any actual attacking units that try to prey on the Ravens, or fight...
Wow so if the terran spread his ravens they wouldn't all get group fungaled so easily. If the zerg spread his corrupters/broodlords then the massive HSM splash damage could be negated. If both races were played how they SHOULD be played, HSM would be useless.
agree here just spread your units like everyone else you must do it for storm or emp too and since you guys knows magic box i see no problem
i mean chain fugual any negate micro
about raven lets test it out in some games and then qq about the raven change i looking forward to the change at least they get medivac speed
On August 25 2012 19:24 LavaLava wrote: I'm really tired of people saying that Fungal Growth prevents SM.
If you have a lot of ravens late game, Fungal Growth can delay SM, not prevent it.
If the Terran uses his ravens correctly, the fungals will generally only hit one raven each, which means five fungals per Raven, or 3 infestors with partial energy. Fungal's snare should not cause many Ravens to die, because you should have infantry and/or turrets on the ground controlling space against Unfestors, Corruptors, Mutas, and perhaps Hydras. Any actual attacking units that try to prey on the Ravens, or fight on the gound, can have SM retargeted on them-
Fungal growth is the ONLY anti-air Zerg ability that outranges SM.
Mutas and especially Corruptors are exceptionally vulnerable to PDD, which has great range and can be fired by Ravens near the back. This will buy you the time to fire missiles or disengage, and if he only brought a few units so as to avoid SM, you can remain invulnerable for quite some time.
A quick player can move his mutas back every time there's a missile on them, but he's already at a disadvantage if he has to do that- you can go kill something valuable while he waits for the timer to run out. It's 20 seconds plus return time.
tldr:
Lots of Zergies, they blow up A few Zergies, turrets kill them Any number of Zergies; PDD is God Mode.
The problem is that Fungal just negates ANY ability to get out of it once you are caught. When you see a raven coming to you (due to the small range) there is a possibility of splitting, or running like hell (infestors run quickly enough on creep). PDDs work the same way as nukes. If you engage under them and try to force the issue, you better have the ability to crush him.
Fungal is strong against EVERYTHING. Plague in BW was "negatable" with medics ++, Dark Swarm was something you could move out of, just like storm in both games. Fungal does not reward the mechanical aspect of the game, but awareness before the casting happens. It is not a projectile like HSM or EMP. It is instant cast like storm, and gives you the power to force a commitment, not the opposite, which is something the other spells do. Casting a nuke forces your opponent to gtfo. HSM and EMP do the same, and also make you pull back/split. Fungal works the other way where if you get caught, there is no way to combat it without doing what your opponent wants you to do.
On August 25 2012 19:24 LavaLava wrote: I'm really tired of people saying that Fungal Growth prevents SM.
If you have a lot of ravens late game, Fungal Growth can delay SM, not prevent it.
If the Terran uses his ravens correctly, the fungals will generally only hit one raven each, which means five fungals per Raven, or 3 infestors with partial energy. Fungal's snare should not cause many Ravens to die, because you should have infantry and/or turrets on the ground controlling space against Unfestors, Corruptors, Mutas, and perhaps Hydras. Any actual attacking units that try to prey on the Ravens, or fight...
Wow so if the terran spread his ravens they wouldn't all get group fungaled so easily. If the zerg spread his corrupters/broodlords then the massive HSM splash damage could be negated. If both races were played how they SHOULD be played, HSM would be useless.
If both sides spread out their units to that extend before the combat, both fungal and HSM become singlefire abilities which won't make a lot of sense compared to the other meant-to-be singlefire abilities they have. In such a scenario, it would probably come down to: who can pick of more stuff, very slowly, very methodically as any move or attack command with mutlitple units will reclump you very fast.
It would be very interesting to see this scenario, but I doubt that any map even offers as much open space and that there will ever occur a situation in which spreading out that much through natural maneuvering won't just cost you the game, as the player that is not clumped might just be able to engage you from an angle that you cannot reinforce against fast enough. (Imagine a spread out line of broodlords, infestors and corruptors and then vikings flank that line and just start picking of some units for free; or a spread out viking/raven/Terran ground line and the zerg just starts to throw ITs under the outer spots) However this would end, the player who wins in such a fight would definatly have to have great micro (and awareness as this line would be multiple screens long)
On August 25 2012 21:18 YyapSsap wrote: Does anybody find it disturbing that in WCS Korea, no Ts made it?
7Ps and 3Zs made it out of 11P/9T/12Z.
not really thier opponents played better so ofc they win
I'm sure you were sayin the same about zergs during the gomTvT era...
BTT: the OP fails to mention terran drops, which are one of the best weapons of terran in TvZ right now by allowing to punish the overdroning zerg (queens can't be everywhere at once) but I still agree overall. but as a diamond player my input is hardly relevant anyway (but for the info, my ZvT is 10 times better than my TvZ but that would be because I don't have the APM required to play terran decently - which btw makes me think zerg is too easy, as I played a lot more of terran in my sc2 "career" but end up being stronger with zerg)
On August 25 2012 19:24 LavaLava wrote: I'm really tired of people saying that Fungal Growth prevents SM.
If you have a lot of ravens late game, Fungal Growth can delay SM, not prevent it.
If the Terran uses his ravens correctly, the fungals will generally only hit one raven each, which means five fungals per Raven, or 3 infestors with partial energy. Fungal's snare should not cause many Ravens to die, because you should have infantry and/or turrets on the ground controlling space against Unfestors, Corruptors, Mutas, and perhaps Hydras. Any actual attacking units that try to prey on the Ravens, or fight on the gound, can have SM retargeted on them-
Fungal growth is the ONLY anti-air Zerg ability that outranges SM.
Mutas and especially Corruptors are exceptionally vulnerable to PDD, which has great range and can be fired by Ravens near the back. This will buy you the time to fire missiles or disengage, and if he only brought a few units so as to avoid SM, you can remain invulnerable for quite some time.
A quick player can move his mutas back every time there's a missile on them, but he's already at a disadvantage if he has to do that- you can go kill something valuable while he waits for the timer to run out. It's 20 seconds plus return time.
tldr:
Lots of Zergies, they blow up A few Zergies, turrets kill them Any number of Zergies; PDD is God Mode.
mmm and i thought Neural could hit air with a range of 7. Or infested terrans could be thrown. Seeker is no danger until you get out of position, just like neural is no danger until you get out of position. The ranges might be different, but the combination gives for an interesting positional play. With the advantage on the terran side, though they don't have the production to make an mistake in this situation and they could only go forward rather slowly. Though including ghosts as well is pretty nice. Banshees and marauders can't reach infestors once they are fungaled, ghosts can and the 2 shot makes it possible, that the infestor doesn't escape. But of course the other 2 infestor remover units are a move.
mmm and i thought Neural could hit air with a range of 7. Or infested terrans could be thrown. Seeker is no danger until you get out of position, just like neural is no danger until you get out of position. The ranges might be different, but the combination gives for an interesting positional play. With the advantage on the terran side, though they don't have the production to make an mistake in this situation and they could only go forward rather slowly. Though including ghosts as well is pretty nice. Banshees and marauders can't reach infestors once they are fungaled, ghosts can and the 2 shot makes it possible, that the infestor doesn't escape. But of course the other 2 infestor remover units are a move.
Neural is pretty damned useless. Remember how Seeker Missiles are supposed to be easy to dodge? They aren't that easy to dodge, but you know what is? Seeker Missile with a 2 second delay and a giant tentacle reaching across the battlefield at one particular Raven... while your Infestors are unselected and can't do anything but get shot up by auto turrets. All so that you can have your two raven vs 10-20 raven battle. You should just use fungal to slow him down.
Everyone wrote:
Brood lord split.
It's fine if he splits his brood lords, that means you just have to pick at them with Vikings. It will be a lot easier to do if he has them spread out. He still can't engage your ravens, because large groups will get PDD and Missiles on them, forcing them to run or explode, and small groups will get easily killed by the vikings. Nobody said you have to use Seeker Missile at any given moment.
Besides, Brood lords are so expensive, it can actually be worth it to hit maybe two of them with a Seeker Missile, one if it's simply urgent. You're trading a large amount of one Raven's energy (100/200) for a lot of health off brood lords (300/250 each).
I think the problem might not be TvZ per se but rather Blizzard's attitude towards the Terran race, and perhaps some other things in Blizzard's approach. While it's true that big nerfs have happened in the past to all races, Blizzard does have a tendency to prefer small changes, supposedly. I can't really see how the Queen buff is a small change. It feels more like a "let's mess up the metagame" change. A change from range 3 to range 5 is a +66% change, that is hardly minimal. Why not 4, especially in the beginning?
I also have the impression that Blizzard is giving Terrans too much l2p. The fun in playing Terran diminishes in connection with this, it just feels too punishing and Blizzard's attitude isn't helping. As for Blizzard's attitude, without wanting to be hostile towards Blizzard, I believe it would help to be 1) more open (more outgoing when it comes to providing reasons as to why things are done or not done, giving more warning), 2) more consistent (as in, it would help if the effects of the interventions made in the balance of the game were consistent with their stated reasons, not let's say, a TvZ nerf that has large implications in TvP that don't get addressed). There should not be silence in situations like the current one.
Also, while I don't wanto to make a conclusive assertion, I'm inclined to think that fungal is OP. Unlike some other posters, I actually think that looking at the raven in this connection is actually a good reflex. This is because the ghost alone is not a direct, strict counterpart of the infestor or the high templar. It is a weaker caster than either of those two units. However, the raven is a "caster" too. The HSM is the Terran AoE. It is the counterpart of fungal or storm, I guess. If Terrans want something along the lines of fungal or storm, and I believe they should have it, the only such thing is the HSM, which comes from the raven. To fix raven speed and accelaration or anything else making the micro easier is a good thing in making ravens more accessible to Terran players. This said, they are indeed too risky, too easy to waste, it all takes too long.
Without implying that this somehow connects with the merits of whether or not fungal is OP, I would like to turn everybody's attention to how frustrating it is psychologically to watch fungal at work if you're not on the Zerg side. It doesn't kill units outright. It makes them helpless, unusable, until they inevitably die. As others have said, it negates micro. It preempts HSM too. I suppose direct damage could actually be less frustrating, you at least wouldn't be looking at, let's say, a full medivac of marines wiggling in convulsions for a long time. (Although, I guess, looking at a pack of broodlords die to 2 HSMs is frustrating too.) It may be true, perhaps, that the psychological effects of fungal are worse than the actual losses it inflicts on the opponent in numerical terms.
On August 26 2012 02:15 NewbieOne wrote: I think the problem might not be TvZ per se but rather Blizzard's attitude towards the Terran race, and perhaps some other things in Blizzard's approach. While it's true that big nerfs have happened in the past to all races, Blizzard does have a tendency to prefer small changes, supposedly. I can't really see how the Queen buff is a small change. It feels more like a "let's mess up the metagame" change. A change from range 3 to range 5 is a +66% change, that is hardly minimal. Why not 4, especially in the beginning?
I also have the impression that Blizzard is giving Terrans too much l2p. The fun in playing Terran diminishes in connection with this, it just feels too punishing and Blizzard's attitude isn't helping.
Blizzard's attitude about Terran is awful:
They say they want to make early game strategies unreliable. They say they want to make late game strategies reliable.
And they say that Terran should be an early game race.
In other words they want Terran to be inherently unreliable and rush-based.
On August 26 2012 02:15 NewbieOne wrote: I think the problem might not be TvZ per se but rather Blizzard's attitude towards the Terran race, and perhaps some other things in Blizzard's approach. While it's true that big nerfs have happened in the past to all races, Blizzard does have a tendency to prefer small changes, supposedly. I can't really see how the Queen buff is a small change. It feels more like a "let's mess up the metagame" change. A change from range 3 to range 5 is a +66% change, that is hardly minimal. Why not 4, especially in the beginning?
I also have the impression that Blizzard is giving Terrans too much l2p. The fun in playing Terran diminishes in connection with this, it just feels too punishing and Blizzard's attitude isn't helping.
Blizzard's attitude about Terran is awful:
They say they want to make early game strategies unreliable. They say they want to make late game strategies reliable.
And they say that Terran should be an early game race.
In other words they want Terran to be inherently unreliable and rush-based.
No, they said that Terran can be in trouble against Protoss if they don't emphasize on their reliable strengths in the earlier phases of the game.
In other words, they said that Terran early game strenghts against Protoss are reliable enough to put them in a reasonable spot for the later stages of the game.
I really wish blizzard had never made this PvT commend, as it seems like noone has ever read it properly and I really start to understand why blizzard does not explain anything anymore. People just read what they want to read, no matter how carefully they choose their words.
On August 26 2012 02:15 NewbieOne wrote: I think the problem might not be TvZ per se but rather Blizzard's attitude towards the Terran race, and perhaps some other things in Blizzard's approach. While it's true that big nerfs have happened in the past to all races, Blizzard does have a tendency to prefer small changes, supposedly. I can't really see how the Queen buff is a small change. It feels more like a "let's mess up the metagame" change. A change from range 3 to range 5 is a +66% change, that is hardly minimal. Why not 4, especially in the beginning?
I also have the impression that Blizzard is giving Terrans too much l2p. The fun in playing Terran diminishes in connection with this, it just feels too punishing and Blizzard's attitude isn't helping.
Blizzard's attitude about Terran is awful:
They say they want to make early game strategies unreliable. They say they want to make late game strategies reliable.
And they say that Terran should be an early game race.
In other words they want Terran to be inherently unreliable and rush-based.
No, they said that Terran can be in trouble against Protoss if they don't emphasize on their reliable strengths in the earlier phases of the game.
In other words, they said that Terran early game strenghts against Protoss are reliable enough to put them in a reasonable spot for the later stages of the game.
I really wish blizzard had never made this PvT commend, as it seems like noone has ever read it properly and I really start to understand why blizzard does not explain anything anymore. People just read what they want to read, no matter how carefully they choose their words.
I agree with text in spoiler, it annoys me more and more.
Wow this thread is so full of misquoting, selective reading, selective memory, and extreme exaggeration its hard to believe any kind of meaningful discussion is going on here
Actually, Protoss is stronger than Terran in early game (better at all-inning, generally better access to strong openings, I think). It's mid-game where Terran is supposed to be stronger than Toss.
The whole talk about it doesn't sound very convincing. I could perhaps accept the idea that the early, mid and late game balance shifts are just how the game has turned out in effect but if it's working as designed, then I'm inclined to disagree with that design. I can understand that this race is stronger around 7:30, that one around 10:00, another around 13:00, but it shouldn't be like past a certain threshold you're basically no longer supported. Every race should have a developed, functional and non-inferior late-game.
On August 26 2012 03:41 Supamang wrote: Wow this thread is so full of misquoting, selective reading, selective memory, and extreme exaggeration its hard to believe any kind of meaningful discussion is going on here
I agree and I'm probably guilty of some of it too but the same can be said for that side of the debate which says everything is okay or acceptable right now. Including Blizzard (yes, I can point out where Blizzard loses it).
On August 26 2012 02:15 NewbieOne wrote: I think the problem might not be TvZ per se but rather Blizzard's attitude towards the Terran race, and perhaps some other things in Blizzard's approach. While it's true that big nerfs have happened in the past to all races, Blizzard does have a tendency to prefer small changes, supposedly. I can't really see how the Queen buff is a small change. It feels more like a "let's mess up the metagame" change. A change from range 3 to range 5 is a +66% change, that is hardly minimal. Why not 4, especially in the beginning?
I also have the impression that Blizzard is giving Terrans too much l2p. The fun in playing Terran diminishes in connection with this, it just feels too punishing and Blizzard's attitude isn't helping.
Blizzard's attitude about Terran is awful:
They say they want to make early game strategies unreliable. They say they want to make late game strategies reliable.
And they say that Terran should be an early game race.
In other words they want Terran to be inherently unreliable and rush-based.
No, they said that Terran can be in trouble against Protoss if they don't emphasize on their reliable strengths in the earlier phases of the game.
In other words, they said that Terran early game strenghts against Protoss are reliable enough to put them in a reasonable spot for the later stages of the game.
I really wish blizzard had never made this PvT commend, as it seems like noone has ever read it properly and I really start to understand why blizzard does not explain anything anymore. People just read what they want to read, no matter how carefully they choose their words.
But they've also shown that their philosophy is that specific early game attacks are not allowed to be reliable. Changes will always be made to the game to prevent reliable damage. Anything that almost always hurts, will be taken out of the game.
I mean, the Queen buff happened because they didn't like Terrans always running in and trading evenly for Drones. Simple reliable early game damage, which often wasn't even worth the loss of map control.
On the other hand, reliable lategame compositions are never too strong in Blizzard's eyes- because those lategame armies have to be "earned" so to speak.
But they don't want Terran to have anything they can reliably tech to that is as good as Protoss Splash or Zerg BL/Infestor.
Terran had figured out Zerg's early game, and there were a lot of very exciting matches, but the sameness of reactor Hellion expands somehow angered Blizzard and they made them far less viable. Meanwhile you see the same opener from Zerg every game, Protoss still FFEs every PvZ. For some reason those things are fine if they happen all the time. And now we're actually seeing a lot less variation from Terran, because they're just trying to get a lot of OC's etc. And then there's a lot of MMM now. Woo, MMM.
Basically Blizzard just has a backwards philosophy for the races and if they haven't made the game worse yet, it is completely inevitable that they will at some point in the future.
Terran had figured out Zerg's early game, and there were a lot of very exciting matches, but the sameness of reactor Hellion expands somehow angered Blizzard and they made them far less viable. Meanwhile you see the same opener from Zerg every game, Protoss still FFEs every PvZ. For some reason those things are fine if they happen all the time. And now we're actually seeing a lot less variation from Terran, because they're just trying to get a lot of OC's etc. And then there's a lot of MMM now. Woo, MMM.
Basically Blizzard just has a backwards philosophy for the races and if they haven't made the game worse yet, it is completely inevitable that they will at some point in the future.
I'm inclined to agree. Terran is getting more and more streamlined simply on the principle that nothing else works. And whatever actually works eventually gets nerfed perhaps because it's too commonly used.
For the record, I don't think FE will ever get nerfed for any race but I'd rather it were a bit more viable as Terran on ladder.
terrans in the wcs series - 7/32 na, 8/32 europe, 3/32 asia, 2/8 oceania, 2/16 sa. so far only 3/20 qualifiers for worlds are terran. the wcg world championship will be mostly zvz, zvp, pvp this makes this zerg sad. and i do not think that buffing raven speed will be the answer.
On August 26 2012 11:58 bahunto28 wrote: terrans in the wcs series - 7/32 na, 8/32 europe, 3/32 asia, 2/8 oceania, 2/16 sa. so far only 3/20 qualifiers for worlds are terran. the wcg world championship will be mostly zvz, zvp, pvp this makes this zerg sad. and i do not think that buffing raven speed will be the answer.
I don't know if that is necessarily evidence of imbalance. At least in the case of oceania there is tons of zergs not because of balance, but because the SEA server has tons of zergs for some reason.
On August 26 2012 11:58 bahunto28 wrote: terrans in the wcs series - 7/32 na, 8/32 europe, 3/32 asia, 2/8 oceania, 2/16 sa. so far only 3/20 qualifiers for worlds are terran. the wcg world championship will be mostly zvz, zvp, pvp this makes this zerg sad. and i do not think that buffing raven speed will be the answer.
I don't know if that is necessarily evidence of imbalance. At least in the case of oceania there is tons of zergs not because of balance, but because the SEA server has tons of zergs for some reason.
We're seeing some weak Terran numbers in places like TSL4 and the recent IEM. Some lesser players are doing really well against some of the Terran powerhouses, and we have hardly seen any Terrans rise up in the scene for months.
Now, don't mistake this as a claim that Terran can't win. There are still Terran powerhouses, and they still do really well, win tournaments, and beat "lesser" players.
The two times I have watched this guy's stream he complains about ALL THREE races. I read this entire post, looked at the name of who typed it up and flipped my desk....
On August 26 2012 14:19 elewie wrote: The two times I have watched this guy's stream he complains about ALL THREE races. I read this entire post, looked at the name of who typed it up and flipped my desk....
Have to agree on that, I would be open to a real discussion about "balance", and the way match up are evolving in this game, but I watched almost an hour of avilo's stream, and it simply was torture. This guy played horrrrriibly vs a Zerg, twice, ended up by saying "Patch zergs obviously", when he got outplayed so much, I mean, how the fuck do you want to be at least a little bit taken seriously after that? You're not looking for balance, or for a well developped SC2, you just want the easy way, and you picked the wrong race for that, switch / get better / quit, there's your 3 options, trying to convince the community is just pointless, you can twist every facts and patch around to make your point, but you'll still loose mate. GL I guess
On August 26 2012 14:19 elewie wrote: The two times I have watched this guy's stream he complains about ALL THREE races. I read this entire post, looked at the name of who typed it up and flipped my desk....
Have to agree on that, I would be open to a real discussion about "balance", and the way match up are evolving in this game, but I watched almost an hour of avilo's stream, and it simply was torture. This guy played horrrrriibly vs a Zerg, twice, ended up by saying "Patch zergs obviously", when he got outplayed so much, I mean, how the fuck do you want to be at least a little bit taken seriously after that? You're not looking for balance, or for a well developped SC2, you just want the easy way, and you picked the wrong race for that, switch / get better / quit, there's your 3 options, trying to convince the community is just pointless, you can twist every facts and patch around to make your point, but you'll still loose mate. GL I guess
He beat the zerg player IMHorror the other day on his stream... The guy has some serious insights into the game, although he whines a lot after losing, most of it is just because he is disappointed. He doesn't pretend that he is not BM and acts all stuck up about it as most of the community.
If you actually watched his stream with an unbiased eye for a little more than that you will see that your claim that he wants the easy way is horribly false. If anything, he complains that Zerg and Protoss should be harder. He wants to play terran because he feels that Terran rewards his multitasking and strategical thinking best. He has on multiple occasions specifically stated that he doesn't want Terran play to become easier to fix the current issues with the game.
Now I might sound as a complete fanboy, but one of the biggest problems I have with TL.net is that semi-poor posts like yours are allowed because the mods only actively go after the really poor ones that stand out while good quality posting is not encouraged. The overall effect is that the floods of semi-poor posts in every thread aren't stopped . You are simply wrong.
edit: qxc has also made a blog post about the raven. Maybe there is a reason why more terran players are concerned about the raven and that this is not just avilo whining?
On August 26 2012 14:19 elewie wrote: The two times I have watched this guy's stream he complains about ALL THREE races. I read this entire post, looked at the name of who typed it up and flipped my desk....
Have to agree on that, I would be open to a real discussion about "balance", and the way match up are evolving in this game, but I watched almost an hour of avilo's stream, and it simply was torture. This guy played horrrrriibly vs a Zerg, twice, ended up by saying "Patch zergs obviously", when he got outplayed so much, I mean, how the fuck do you want to be at least a little bit taken seriously after that? You're not looking for balance, or for a well developped SC2, you just want the easy way, and you picked the wrong race for that, switch / get better / quit, there's your 3 options, trying to convince the community is just pointless, you can twist every facts and patch around to make your point, but you'll still loose mate. GL I guess
He beat the zerg player IMHorror the other day on his stream... The guy has some serious insights into the game, although he whines a lot after losing, most of it is just because he is disappointed. He doesn't pretend that he is not BM and acts all stuck up about it as most of the community.
If you actually watched his stream with an unbiased eye for a little more than that you will see that your claim that he wants the easy way is horribly false. If anything, he complains that Zerg and Protoss should be harder. He wants to play terran because he feels that Terran rewards his multitasking and strategical thinking best. He has on multiple occasions specifically stated that he doesn't want Terran play to become easier to fix the current issues with the game.
Now I might sound as a complete fanboy, but one of the biggest problems I have with TL.net is that semi-poor posts like yours are allowed because the mods only actively go after the really poor ones. The overall effect is that the floods of semi-poor posts in every thread aren't stopped. You are simply wrong.
One-one-one: You are 100% a fan boy. I have also read a number a large number of your posts in threads dealing with "terran balance issues" and I would charitability call your point of view bias. It is clear you have a bone to pick and believe the game is unfair stacked against terran. It is only natural that you would enjoy watching Avilo's stream, since he has the same views you do.
Also, you may wish to avoid such blatant ad hominem arguments in the future. Insulting the quality of TL moderation and the "quality" of the post does not make your argument strong, since you provide very little reasoning as to why the post is bad. You say that Avilo does not want the game to be easier, but he simply asks for the other races to be more difficult to play. When you ask for the game to be made more difficult for your opponents, it is the same thing as asking the game to be easier for yourself.
I have attempted to watch Avilo's stream because people seem to thing he is insight into the game and how to play. However, I did not feel he provided any insight and most the the information he provided did not match up with more succussful terran's opinions on how to play. This, combined with the fact that he complained back when the reaper nerf was put into place and has not stopped since, gives a lot of people a very good idea as to what Avilo opinion is.
Plansix: You seem to have some kind of grudge against me.
Also, you may wish to avoid such blatant ad hominem arguments in the future. Insulting the quality of TL moderation and the "quality" of the post does not make your argument strong, since you provide very little reasoning as to why the post is bad. You say that Avilo does not want the game to be easier, but he simply asks for the other races to be more difficult to play. When you ask for the game to be made more difficult for your opponents, it is the same thing as asking the game to be easier for yourself.
Just because you use the word "ad hominem" doesn't make your point valid. I clearly provided enough reasoning since I showed that all, or at least most, of his points about avilo were wrong.
There is indeed a difference between making the other two races harder and making your own race easier. It is not the same thing.
As for high quality posting I clearly remember a post that you made in response to a post by me in the TLPD win rate statistics where you really shine. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=15301437 Then go look at my follow up posts in that thread and tell me again about what Terran bias I show in that thread? Also look at the posts in reply to yours where people tell you that you clearly have misunderstood what I wrote. Never mind that I have a degree in mathematics while you probably do not...
edit: I have probably written some biased posts myself after being upset or whatever, but I still think that I have pretty good concepts about game balance/imbalance.
Also, you may wish to avoid such blatant ad hominem arguments in the future. Insulting the quality of TL moderation and the "quality" of the post does not make your argument strong, since you provide very little reasoning as to why the post is bad. You say that Avilo does not want the game to be easier, but he simply asks for the other races to be more difficult to play. When you ask for the game to be made more difficult for your opponents, it is the same thing as asking the game to be easier for yourself.
Just because you use the word "ad hominem" doesn't make your point valid. I clearly provided enough reasoning since I showed that all, or at least most, of his points about avilo were wrong.
There is indeed a difference between making the other two races harder and making your own race easier. It is not the same thing.
As for high quality posting I clearly remember a post that you made in response to a post by me in the TLPD win rate statistics where you really shine. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=15301437 Then go look at my follow up posts in that thread and tell me again about what Terran bias I show in that thread? Also look at the posts in reply to yours where people tell you that you clearly have misunderstood what I wrote. Never mind that I have a degree in mathematics while you probably do not...
edit: I have probably written some biased posts myself after being upset or whatever, but I still think that I have pretty good concepts about game balance/imbalance.
First off, I was rather proud of that post. It was most of my more amusing work. Second off all, I do not take many, if any arguments of imbalance seriously, regardless of who they come from. Personally, I believed that all of my losses are my own fault for playing poorly, regardless of my opponent. Even if my opponent took a blind risk for an easy win, I feel it is my burden to locate and scout those risks. I have a long history of playing boardgames, like GO and chess, where you have no one to blame but yourself when you lose.
I do not believe the game needs other races need to be made “harder” and I believe people who are requesting because they have hit a wall in their play and don’t know how to improve further. All the races have equally hard parts to their play and people just discount the challenge of each race because it is easier than facing their own faults. If imbalance exists, it is mostly created by maps and not by the specific abilities of each race. If a player is getting rolled in a specific match up, they are likely not taking advantage of a timing that their opponents are leaving open earlier in the match.
I also find all the focus on balance discussions to be distracting and not fruitful. It detracts from the over all enjoyment of the game, real discussion on maps and the best way to respond to specific styles. It is a black hole that drags us all into it, but leads to nothing good.
I have lost to my far share of a-moved armies in the past, mostly filled with roaches and lings. I have no one to blame but myself for letting it get to that point.
On August 26 2012 03:41 Supamang wrote: Wow this thread is so full of misquoting, selective reading, selective memory, and extreme exaggeration its hard to believe any kind of meaningful discussion is going on here
i could post this anywhere on the internet and it would probably be true...
hahaha also the title of this thread is so ridiculous "x does not solve problem y" . that could ALWAYS be said no matter anything.
On August 30 2012 02:33 one-one-one wrote: Plansix: You seem to have some kind of grudge against me.
Also, you may wish to avoid such blatant ad hominem arguments in the future. Insulting the quality of TL moderation and the "quality" of the post does not make your argument strong, since you provide very little reasoning as to why the post is bad. You say that Avilo does not want the game to be easier, but he simply asks for the other races to be more difficult to play. When you ask for the game to be made more difficult for your opponents, it is the same thing as asking the game to be easier for yourself.
Just because you use the word "ad hominem" doesn't make your point valid. I clearly provided enough reasoning since I showed that all, or at least most, of his points about avilo were wrong.
There is indeed a difference between making the other two races harder and making your own race easier. It is not the same thing.
As for high quality posting I clearly remember a post that you made in response to a post by me in the TLPD win rate statistics where you really shine. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=15301437 Then go look at my follow up posts in that thread and tell me again about what Terran bias I show in that thread? Also look at the posts in reply to yours where people tell you that you clearly have misunderstood what I wrote. Never mind that I have a degree in mathematics while you probably do not...
edit: I have probably written some biased posts myself after being upset or whatever, but I still think that I have pretty good concepts about game balance/imbalance.
First off, I was rather proud of that post. It was most of my more amusing work. Second off all, I do not take many, if any arguments of imbalance seriously, regardless of who they come from. Personally, I believed that all of my losses are my own fault for playing poorly, regardless of my opponent. Even if my opponent took a blind risk for an easy win, I feel it is my burden to locate and scout those risks. I have a long history of playing boardgames, like GO and chess, where you have no one to blame but yourself when you lose.
I do not believe the game needs other races need to be made “harder” and I believe people who are requesting because they have hit a wall in their play and don’t know how to improve further. All the races have equally hard parts to their play and people just discount the challenge of each race because it is easier than facing their own faults. If imbalance exists, it is mostly created by maps and not by the specific abilities of each race. If a player is getting rolled in a specific match up, they are likely not taking advantage of a timing that their opponents are leaving open earlier in the match.
I also find all the focus on balance discussions to be distracting and not fruitful. It detracts from the over all enjoyment of the game, real discussion on maps and the best way to respond to specific styles. It is a black hole that drags us all into it, but leads to nothing good.
I have lost to my far share of a-moved armies in the past, mostly filled with roaches and lings. I have no one to blame but myself for letting it get to that point.
The only funny thing about that post was how stupid it was, I'll give you that. I wouldn't be so proud over it ...
But another thing strikes me though. You didn't participate in the debate in this thread. Your first post here was another personal attack on me. I was telling a guy to basically keep himself on topic and discuss Ravens in TvZ instead of bashing the OP.
Then you come in and accuse _me_ of using "ad hominems" as you eloquently put it. In your reply you ramble about how little you care about balance/imbalance talk. This thread isn't about that at all which is pointed out explicitly by the OP. But I guess you didn't even read that. What the hell Plansix?
...
So, what is your take on the raven situation in TvZ?
On August 30 2012 02:33 one-one-one wrote: Plansix: You seem to have some kind of grudge against me.
Also, you may wish to avoid such blatant ad hominem arguments in the future. Insulting the quality of TL moderation and the "quality" of the post does not make your argument strong, since you provide very little reasoning as to why the post is bad. You say that Avilo does not want the game to be easier, but he simply asks for the other races to be more difficult to play. When you ask for the game to be made more difficult for your opponents, it is the same thing as asking the game to be easier for yourself.
Just because you use the word "ad hominem" doesn't make your point valid. I clearly provided enough reasoning since I showed that all, or at least most, of his points about avilo were wrong.
There is indeed a difference between making the other two races harder and making your own race easier. It is not the same thing.
As for high quality posting I clearly remember a post that you made in response to a post by me in the TLPD win rate statistics where you really shine. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=15301437 Then go look at my follow up posts in that thread and tell me again about what Terran bias I show in that thread? Also look at the posts in reply to yours where people tell you that you clearly have misunderstood what I wrote. Never mind that I have a degree in mathematics while you probably do not...
edit: I have probably written some biased posts myself after being upset or whatever, but I still think that I have pretty good concepts about game balance/imbalance.
First off, I was rather proud of that post. It was most of my more amusing work. Second off all, I do not take many, if any arguments of imbalance seriously, regardless of who they come from. Personally, I believed that all of my losses are my own fault for playing poorly, regardless of my opponent. Even if my opponent took a blind risk for an easy win, I feel it is my burden to locate and scout those risks. I have a long history of playing boardgames, like GO and chess, where you have no one to blame but yourself when you lose.
I do not believe the game needs other races need to be made “harder” and I believe people who are requesting because they have hit a wall in their play and don’t know how to improve further. All the races have equally hard parts to their play and people just discount the challenge of each race because it is easier than facing their own faults. If imbalance exists, it is mostly created by maps and not by the specific abilities of each race. If a player is getting rolled in a specific match up, they are likely not taking advantage of a timing that their opponents are leaving open earlier in the match.
I also find all the focus on balance discussions to be distracting and not fruitful. It detracts from the over all enjoyment of the game, real discussion on maps and the best way to respond to specific styles. It is a black hole that drags us all into it, but leads to nothing good.
I have lost to my far share of a-moved armies in the past, mostly filled with roaches and lings. I have no one to blame but myself for letting it get to that point.
The only funny thing about that post was how stupid it was, I'll give you that. I wouldn't be so proud over it ...
But another thing strikes me though. You didn't participate in the debate in this thread. Your first post here was another personal attack on me. I was telling a guy to basically keep himself on topic and discuss Ravens in TvZ instead of bashing the OP.
Then you come in and accuse _me_ of using "ad hominems" as you eloquently put it. In your reply you ramble about how little you care about balance/imbalance talk. This thread isn't about that at all which is pointed out explicitly by the OP. But I guess you didn't even read that. What the hell Plansix?
...
So, what is your take on the raven situation in TvZ?
There you go again, talking down to the people again. You are aware of what an ad hominem argument is, correct? Ad hominem mean that you insult the posters or question their intelligence, rather than address their arguments on face value. As someone who works in a field that argues professional, it is the weakest and more irritating form of argument to address. It is the main reason I have a ‘grudge’ against you, since I dislike people who’s main tactic in arguments is to talking down to others.
As for the Raven, I feel it should be buffed simply because it underused. Terran has been unable to fit the Raven into any of the match ups and having it move at the same speed as medivacs is a good way to attempt to make it more viable. Mobile detection would be a huge boost to almost any match up for terran, as it frees up scans that can be used for extra income. This also feeds into the tactics used by Teaja in using mass mules at vulnerable expansions and increased use of the PFs.
As a whole, I think ZvP is being figured slowly figured out and terrans are learning to how to punish the zerg’s greed. The raven buff would be a good boost, as more units and abilities are always good for the game.
On August 30 2012 02:33 one-one-one wrote: Plansix: You seem to have some kind of grudge against me.
Also, you may wish to avoid such blatant ad hominem arguments in the future. Insulting the quality of TL moderation and the "quality" of the post does not make your argument strong, since you provide very little reasoning as to why the post is bad. You say that Avilo does not want the game to be easier, but he simply asks for the other races to be more difficult to play. When you ask for the game to be made more difficult for your opponents, it is the same thing as asking the game to be easier for yourself.
Just because you use the word "ad hominem" doesn't make your point valid. I clearly provided enough reasoning since I showed that all, or at least most, of his points about avilo were wrong.
There is indeed a difference between making the other two races harder and making your own race easier. It is not the same thing.
As for high quality posting I clearly remember a post that you made in response to a post by me in the TLPD win rate statistics where you really shine. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=15301437 Then go look at my follow up posts in that thread and tell me again about what Terran bias I show in that thread? Also look at the posts in reply to yours where people tell you that you clearly have misunderstood what I wrote. Never mind that I have a degree in mathematics while you probably do not...
edit: I have probably written some biased posts myself after being upset or whatever, but I still think that I have pretty good concepts about game balance/imbalance.
First off, I was rather proud of that post. It was most of my more amusing work. Second off all, I do not take many, if any arguments of imbalance seriously, regardless of who they come from. Personally, I believed that all of my losses are my own fault for playing poorly, regardless of my opponent. Even if my opponent took a blind risk for an easy win, I feel it is my burden to locate and scout those risks. I have a long history of playing boardgames, like GO and chess, where you have no one to blame but yourself when you lose.
I do not believe the game needs other races need to be made “harder” and I believe people who are requesting because they have hit a wall in their play and don’t know how to improve further. All the races have equally hard parts to their play and people just discount the challenge of each race because it is easier than facing their own faults. If imbalance exists, it is mostly created by maps and not by the specific abilities of each race. If a player is getting rolled in a specific match up, they are likely not taking advantage of a timing that their opponents are leaving open earlier in the match.
I also find all the focus on balance discussions to be distracting and not fruitful. It detracts from the over all enjoyment of the game, real discussion on maps and the best way to respond to specific styles. It is a black hole that drags us all into it, but leads to nothing good.
I have lost to my far share of a-moved armies in the past, mostly filled with roaches and lings. I have no one to blame but myself for letting it get to that point.
The only funny thing about that post was how stupid it was, I'll give you that. I wouldn't be so proud over it ...
But another thing strikes me though. You didn't participate in the debate in this thread. Your first post here was another personal attack on me. I was telling a guy to basically keep himself on topic and discuss Ravens in TvZ instead of bashing the OP.
Then you come in and accuse _me_ of using "ad hominems" as you eloquently put it. In your reply you ramble about how little you care about balance/imbalance talk. This thread isn't about that at all which is pointed out explicitly by the OP. But I guess you didn't even read that. What the hell Plansix?
...
So, what is your take on the raven situation in TvZ?
There you go again, talking down to the people again. You are aware of what an ad hominem argument is, correct? Ad hominem mean that you insult the posters or question their intelligence, rather than address their arguments on face value. As someone who works in a field that argues professional, it is the weakest and more irritating form of argument to address. It is the main reason I have a ‘grudge’ against you, since I dislike people who’s main tactic in arguments is to talking down to others.
As for the Raven, I feel it should be buffed simply because it underused. Terran has been unable to fit the Raven into any of the match ups and having it move at the same speed as medivacs is a good way to attempt to make it more viable. Mobile detection would be a huge boost to almost any match up for terran, as it frees up scans that can be used for extra income. This also feeds into the tactics used by Teaja in using mass mules at vulnerable expansions and increased use of the PFs.
As a whole, I think ZvP is being figured slowly figured out and terrans are learning to how to punish the zerg’s greed. The raven buff would be a good boost, as more units and abilities are always good for the game.
You still don't get it ...
My first post in this thread was in response to a guy using insults and his self perceived ideas about the OP instead of arguing about the topic - Blizzard's suggested raven changes and how they will adress the issues terran are experiencing in the matchup. I also said that he was wrong in what he claimed and explained why I thought so with real arguments. Then I also said that I found the quality of his post quite poor. Guess what? A post can be both wrong and of poor quality, and attacking both the quality and the factual errors certainly does not indicate that my main discussion tactic is to use insults.
Last time you wrote to me you also pulled "ranks" telling me that you worked for a big bank and implying that you had some kind of authority to call the number cooking you accused me of doing. You were wrong back then and you eventually had to admit that you had no problems with my numbers. Now you come in completely from the side accusing me of using down talking as my main argumentation method. So you were wrong one more time and once again you tried to pull ranks by referring to your work and how experienced you are with facing peoples argumentation techniques. I find your attitude very arrogant. Before you make such accusations you could at least read my post properly and make an effort to understand the context. Did you even read the OP ?
Now this shit is cluttering the thread so if you want to respond I recommend doing so in a PM. I won't write anything more about this to you here.
As for your take on the raven you have missed the main point in the OP - how the suggested changes will help terrans deal with Zergs lategame. I'm not saying that your take on the whole raven thing is wrong though, but mobile detection and the slightly fewer scans is not super important in the lategame. At least not important enough to justify mass raven usage.
after watching some recent high level play, i don't think Terran is UP, it just took some time for them to adapt. Terran needs to play more adaptive now (scout+macro), you can't do blind timing push builds any more. Also you need to take more risks early game. A lot of complaints here sound like beginner zergs complaints about 'unscoutable' all-ins
I don't mean to be overly simplistic here, but I feel like TvZ is a balanced matchup. Each side has to micro against the other for an advantageous position. Terrans continue to lose to zergs in large tournaments because they absolutely refuse to do things like split their vikings, build extra starports, or spread out their MMM balls. Zergs lose to Terrans because even though BL/Infestor is the "godly" composition that no one can ever lose with, ever, there's still some major drawbacks involved. BL/Inf is undeniably slow, has major difficulty dealing with drops, and is ridiculously expensive. Don't want to be fungaled? Split your shit, bros. It's about as hard as clicking "F".
On August 31 2012 03:35 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: after watching some recent high level play, i don't think Terran is UP, it just took some time for them to adapt. Terran needs to play more adaptive now (scout+macro), you can't do blind timing push builds any more. Also you need to take more risks early game. A lot of complaints here sound like beginner zergs complaints about 'unscoutable' all-ins
by beginner zergs do you mean pro zergs for the first 2 years of the game?
I don't think terran is in that bad of a place either, honestly I think if the raven buff WAS gonna "fix" tvz no one would ever care about the name avilo again so of course he supports the idea that it won't. but things are fairly difficult right now, so if t can just briefly be given the leeway on complaining z was for 2 years that'd be awesome.
On August 31 2012 04:04 Homework wrote: I don't mean to be overly simplistic here, but I feel like TvZ is a balanced matchup. Each side has to micro against the other for an advantageous position. Terrans continue to lose to zergs in large tournaments because they absolutely refuse to do things like split their vikings, build extra starports, or spread out their MMM balls. Zergs lose to Terrans because even though BL/Infestor is the "godly" composition that no one can ever lose with, ever, there's still some major drawbacks involved. BL/Inf is undeniably slow, has major difficulty dealing with drops, and is ridiculously expensive. Don't want to be fungaled? Split your shit, bros. It's about as hard as clicking "F".
hahaha, pros don't split
that's actually hilarious
almost as funny as zerg requiring the same micro as terran. good shit!
On August 31 2012 04:04 Homework wrote: I don't mean to be overly simplistic here, but I feel like TvZ is a balanced matchup. Each side has to micro against the other for an advantageous position. Terrans continue to lose to zergs in large tournaments because they absolutely refuse to do things like split their vikings, build extra starports, or spread out their MMM balls. Zergs lose to Terrans because even though BL/Infestor is the "godly" composition that no one can ever lose with, ever, there's still some major drawbacks involved. BL/Inf is undeniably slow, has major difficulty dealing with drops, and is ridiculously expensive. Don't want to be fungaled? Split your shit, bros. It's about as hard as clicking "F".
what? splitting is as hard as casting fungal?
are you serious? >_> please do your homework before you say things like that
On August 31 2012 08:56 gosublade wrote: I might consider taking your thread seriously avilo, but not mentioning ghosts even once shows how clueless you are
The thread is specifically about the suggested raven buff and its implications, not the ghost. The ghost might have its uses anyways though, and as far as I know from occasionally watching avilo stream he uses ghosts in the lategame to deal with infestors.
It sounds to me like you were just looking for any reason to dismiss the thread.
But making a bunch of specific counters against a bunch of different, severe threats is totally the same folks. So Ghosts are obviously very good in the matchup because they deal with one kind of unit pretty well. Like BLs that just kill everything on ground, Infestors that just kill everything and...
On August 31 2012 03:35 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: after watching some recent high level play, i don't think Terran is UP, it just took some time for them to adapt. Terran needs to play more adaptive now (scout+macro), you can't do blind timing push builds any more. Also you need to take more risks early game. A lot of complaints here sound like beginner zergs complaints about 'unscoutable' all-ins
You can't be serious. Terran has adapted far more than any other race since the beginning of WoL. This isn't up for debate. T has been nerfed and changed far more than the other two races combined, so don't go on about "Oh T needs to actually adapt and work now". That's complete BS.
its been state now by more than one pro and actaully agree with it
the issue with TvZ is not a balance issue its a differculty issue
at the highest level its a balanced match up but as the skill level falls the balance moves more in the directions of the zerg
this is the reaons the likes of Teaja and MVP still doing well in the match up
I would be more worried about the state of TvP
intresting question how many pro's offrace Terran I watch lot of streams where Terrans offrace zerg and do very well and the odd one that offrace toss but I cannot remember anyone for some time offracing Terran (TLO did a little before he went to korean when warming up but he played Terran for long time anyway)
As a Zerg who finds ZvT to be the easiest matchup ever. I think Raven Energy costs need a reduction across the board. I'd say reduce Auto-turret to 25 Energy from 50 Energy whilst halving the duration, reduce the cost of Point Defense Drone to 50 and make Hunter Seeker Missile cost 75 Energy instead of 125 Energy. HSM already does poor splash damage in comparison to abilities like Fungal Growth and Psionic Storm.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
the game doesnt need a giant change doing small things like making ravens faster and creep slower is exactly what blizz needs to do
the game is so balanced right now that a careless nerf or buff just makes it more imbalanced they need small nerfs taht are carefully thought out and tested and watched religiously
people said the same thing about warp prisoms now warp prism harass is hugely hard to deal with as Zerg
You mean no careless unnecessary giant changes like giving the queen an extra two range in an already close to 50-50 balanced match-up...right?
As for blizzard going slow with changes, that is great, but changing raven speed does nothing to address any of the balance issues for the TvZ match-up that occurred after the queen buff patch.
The creep spread nerf I'm sure most players agree blizzard needs to do.
I think you are forgeting the part where the terran was pretty much untoucheble while having the chanse to kill the zerg early game.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
the game doesnt need a giant change doing small things like making ravens faster and creep slower is exactly what blizz needs to do
the game is so balanced right now that a careless nerf or buff just makes it more imbalanced they need small nerfs taht are carefully thought out and tested and watched religiously
people said the same thing about warp prisoms now warp prism harass is hugely hard to deal with as Zerg
You mean no careless unnecessary giant changes like giving the queen an extra two range in an already close to 50-50 balanced match-up...right?
As for blizzard going slow with changes, that is great, but changing raven speed does nothing to address any of the balance issues for the TvZ match-up that occurred after the queen buff patch.
The creep spread nerf I'm sure most players agree blizzard needs to do.
I think you are forgeting the part where the terran was pretty much untoucheble while having the chanse to kill the zerg early game.
And what exactly is wrong with terran having a chance at killing zerg early on through aggression like 11/11 rax, they were no where near untouchable and you make it sound like it's so wrong for the zerg being forced to scout cheese in order to prepare for it and hold it instead of blindly making 4+ queens and pulling a couple of drones in order to hold cheeses like 11/11 or 12/14 rax.
On August 31 2012 22:59 Clbull wrote: As a Zerg who finds ZvT to be the easiest matchup ever. I think Raven Energy costs need a reduction across the board. I'd say reduce Auto-turret to 25 Energy from 50 Energy whilst halving the duration, reduce the cost of Point Defense Drone to 50 and make Hunter Seeker Missile cost 75 Energy instead of 125 Energy. HSM already does poor splash damage in comparison to abilities like Fungal Growth and Psionic Storm.
To be honest I'm happy with the amount of damage and the radius HSM does, it just desperately needs the energy cost for the ability to be decreased so that ravens aren't useless while you wait around for energy to build up so you can actually use HSM, and so that if possible you could actually cast HSM twice with a single raven if it has accumulated enough energy instead of it only being able to cast once.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
the game doesnt need a giant change doing small things like making ravens faster and creep slower is exactly what blizz needs to do
the game is so balanced right now that a careless nerf or buff just makes it more imbalanced they need small nerfs taht are carefully thought out and tested and watched religiously
people said the same thing about warp prisoms now warp prism harass is hugely hard to deal with as Zerg
You mean no careless unnecessary giant changes like giving the queen an extra two range in an already close to 50-50 balanced match-up...right?
As for blizzard going slow with changes, that is great, but changing raven speed does nothing to address any of the balance issues for the TvZ match-up that occurred after the queen buff patch.
The creep spread nerf I'm sure most players agree blizzard needs to do.
I think you are forgeting the part where the terran was pretty much untoucheble while having the chanse to kill the zerg early game.
And what exactly is wrong with terran having a chance at killing zerg early on through aggression like 11/11 rax, they were no where near untouchable and you make it sound like it's so wrong for the zerg being forced to scout cheese in order to prepare for it and hold it instead of blindly making 4+ queens and pulling a couple of drones in order to hold cheeses like 11/11 or 12/14 rax.
On August 31 2012 22:59 Clbull wrote: As a Zerg who finds ZvT to be the easiest matchup ever. I think Raven Energy costs need a reduction across the board. I'd say reduce Auto-turret to 25 Energy from 50 Energy whilst halving the duration, reduce the cost of Point Defense Drone to 50 and make Hunter Seeker Missile cost 75 Energy instead of 125 Energy. HSM already does poor splash damage in comparison to abilities like Fungal Growth and Psionic Storm.
To be honest I'm happy with the amount of damage and the radius HSM does, it just desperately needs the energy cost for the ability to be decreased so that ravens aren't useless while you wait around for energy to build up so you can actually use HSM, and so that if possible you could actually cast HSM twice with a single raven if it has accumulated enough energy instead of it only being able to cast once.
Yea HSM is very good, the problem is the energy cost
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
the game doesnt need a giant change doing small things like making ravens faster and creep slower is exactly what blizz needs to do
the game is so balanced right now that a careless nerf or buff just makes it more imbalanced they need small nerfs taht are carefully thought out and tested and watched religiously
people said the same thing about warp prisoms now warp prism harass is hugely hard to deal with as Zerg
You mean no careless unnecessary giant changes like giving the queen an extra two range in an already close to 50-50 balanced match-up...right?
As for blizzard going slow with changes, that is great, but changing raven speed does nothing to address any of the balance issues for the TvZ match-up that occurred after the queen buff patch.
The creep spread nerf I'm sure most players agree blizzard needs to do.
I think you are forgeting the part where the terran was pretty much untoucheble while having the chanse to kill the zerg early game.
And what exactly is wrong with terran having a chance at killing zerg early on through aggression like 11/11 rax, they were no where near untouchable and you make it sound like it's so wrong for the zerg being forced to scout cheese in order to prepare for it and hold it instead of blindly making 4+ queens and pulling a couple of drones in order to hold cheeses like 11/11 or 12/14 rax.
On August 31 2012 22:59 Clbull wrote: As a Zerg who finds ZvT to be the easiest matchup ever. I think Raven Energy costs need a reduction across the board. I'd say reduce Auto-turret to 25 Energy from 50 Energy whilst halving the duration, reduce the cost of Point Defense Drone to 50 and make Hunter Seeker Missile cost 75 Energy instead of 125 Energy. HSM already does poor splash damage in comparison to abilities like Fungal Growth and Psionic Storm.
To be honest I'm happy with the amount of damage and the radius HSM does, it just desperately needs the energy cost for the ability to be decreased so that ravens aren't useless while you wait around for energy to build up so you can actually use HSM, and so that if possible you could actually cast HSM twice with a single raven if it has accumulated enough energy instead of it only being able to cast once.
I was thinking somewhere along the lines off the 6 reactor helion opening, where the terran could be lucky and roast all the zergs drones, and the zerg had a hard time to know what the terran did behind this if they had 1-2 well placed marines to kill off the scouting overlord.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
the game doesnt need a giant change doing small things like making ravens faster and creep slower is exactly what blizz needs to do
the game is so balanced right now that a careless nerf or buff just makes it more imbalanced they need small nerfs taht are carefully thought out and tested and watched religiously
people said the same thing about warp prisoms now warp prism harass is hugely hard to deal with as Zerg
You mean no careless unnecessary giant changes like giving the queen an extra two range in an already close to 50-50 balanced match-up...right?
As for blizzard going slow with changes, that is great, but changing raven speed does nothing to address any of the balance issues for the TvZ match-up that occurred after the queen buff patch.
The creep spread nerf I'm sure most players agree blizzard needs to do.
I think you are forgeting the part where the terran was pretty much untoucheble while having the chanse to kill the zerg early game.
And what exactly is wrong with terran having a chance at killing zerg early on through aggression like 11/11 rax, they were no where near untouchable and you make it sound like it's so wrong for the zerg being forced to scout cheese in order to prepare for it and hold it instead of blindly making 4+ queens and pulling a couple of drones in order to hold cheeses like 11/11 or 12/14 rax.
On August 31 2012 22:59 Clbull wrote: As a Zerg who finds ZvT to be the easiest matchup ever. I think Raven Energy costs need a reduction across the board. I'd say reduce Auto-turret to 25 Energy from 50 Energy whilst halving the duration, reduce the cost of Point Defense Drone to 50 and make Hunter Seeker Missile cost 75 Energy instead of 125 Energy. HSM already does poor splash damage in comparison to abilities like Fungal Growth and Psionic Storm.
To be honest I'm happy with the amount of damage and the radius HSM does, it just desperately needs the energy cost for the ability to be decreased so that ravens aren't useless while you wait around for energy to build up so you can actually use HSM, and so that if possible you could actually cast HSM twice with a single raven if it has accumulated enough energy instead of it only being able to cast once.
When the missiles can be spammed many at a time and still their damage STACK they should never do the same damage/have too low energy cost as storm/fungal. Can you imagine storm and fungal getting spammed on the same groups stacking damage? x.x
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
the game doesnt need a giant change doing small things like making ravens faster and creep slower is exactly what blizz needs to do
the game is so balanced right now that a careless nerf or buff just makes it more imbalanced they need small nerfs taht are carefully thought out and tested and watched religiously
people said the same thing about warp prisoms now warp prism harass is hugely hard to deal with as Zerg
You mean no careless unnecessary giant changes like giving the queen an extra two range in an already close to 50-50 balanced match-up...right?
As for blizzard going slow with changes, that is great, but changing raven speed does nothing to address any of the balance issues for the TvZ match-up that occurred after the queen buff patch.
The creep spread nerf I'm sure most players agree blizzard needs to do.
I think you are forgeting the part where the terran was pretty much untoucheble while having the chanse to kill the zerg early game.
And what exactly is wrong with terran having a chance at killing zerg early on through aggression like 11/11 rax, they were no where near untouchable and you make it sound like it's so wrong for the zerg being forced to scout cheese in order to prepare for it and hold it instead of blindly making 4+ queens and pulling a couple of drones in order to hold cheeses like 11/11 or 12/14 rax.
On August 31 2012 22:59 Clbull wrote: As a Zerg who finds ZvT to be the easiest matchup ever. I think Raven Energy costs need a reduction across the board. I'd say reduce Auto-turret to 25 Energy from 50 Energy whilst halving the duration, reduce the cost of Point Defense Drone to 50 and make Hunter Seeker Missile cost 75 Energy instead of 125 Energy. HSM already does poor splash damage in comparison to abilities like Fungal Growth and Psionic Storm.
To be honest I'm happy with the amount of damage and the radius HSM does, it just desperately needs the energy cost for the ability to be decreased so that ravens aren't useless while you wait around for energy to build up so you can actually use HSM, and so that if possible you could actually cast HSM twice with a single raven if it has accumulated enough energy instead of it only being able to cast once.
When the missiles can be spammed many at a time and still their damage STACK they should never do the same damage/have too low energy cost as storm/fungal. Can you imagine storm and fungal getting spammed on the same groups stacking damage? x.x
Fungal/Storm does instant damage as well, just in low amounts, then it dots, so it is possible to sort of stack. At least last night I noticed double or triple fungals instantly putting my units in the yellow.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
the game doesnt need a giant change doing small things like making ravens faster and creep slower is exactly what blizz needs to do
the game is so balanced right now that a careless nerf or buff just makes it more imbalanced they need small nerfs taht are carefully thought out and tested and watched religiously
people said the same thing about warp prisoms now warp prism harass is hugely hard to deal with as Zerg
You mean no careless unnecessary giant changes like giving the queen an extra two range in an already close to 50-50 balanced match-up...right?
As for blizzard going slow with changes, that is great, but changing raven speed does nothing to address any of the balance issues for the TvZ match-up that occurred after the queen buff patch.
The creep spread nerf I'm sure most players agree blizzard needs to do.
I think you are forgeting the part where the terran was pretty much untoucheble while having the chanse to kill the zerg early game.
And what exactly is wrong with terran having a chance at killing zerg early on through aggression like 11/11 rax, they were no where near untouchable and you make it sound like it's so wrong for the zerg being forced to scout cheese in order to prepare for it and hold it instead of blindly making 4+ queens and pulling a couple of drones in order to hold cheeses like 11/11 or 12/14 rax.
On August 31 2012 22:59 Clbull wrote: As a Zerg who finds ZvT to be the easiest matchup ever. I think Raven Energy costs need a reduction across the board. I'd say reduce Auto-turret to 25 Energy from 50 Energy whilst halving the duration, reduce the cost of Point Defense Drone to 50 and make Hunter Seeker Missile cost 75 Energy instead of 125 Energy. HSM already does poor splash damage in comparison to abilities like Fungal Growth and Psionic Storm.
To be honest I'm happy with the amount of damage and the radius HSM does, it just desperately needs the energy cost for the ability to be decreased so that ravens aren't useless while you wait around for energy to build up so you can actually use HSM, and so that if possible you could actually cast HSM twice with a single raven if it has accumulated enough energy instead of it only being able to cast once.
When the missiles can be spammed many at a time and still their damage STACK they should never do the same damage/have too low energy cost as storm/fungal. Can you imagine storm and fungal getting spammed on the same groups stacking damage? x.x
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
the game doesnt need a giant change doing small things like making ravens faster and creep slower is exactly what blizz needs to do
the game is so balanced right now that a careless nerf or buff just makes it more imbalanced they need small nerfs taht are carefully thought out and tested and watched religiously
people said the same thing about warp prisoms now warp prism harass is hugely hard to deal with as Zerg
You mean no careless unnecessary giant changes like giving the queen an extra two range in an already close to 50-50 balanced match-up...right?
As for blizzard going slow with changes, that is great, but changing raven speed does nothing to address any of the balance issues for the TvZ match-up that occurred after the queen buff patch.
The creep spread nerf I'm sure most players agree blizzard needs to do.
I think you are forgeting the part where the terran was pretty much untoucheble while having the chanse to kill the zerg early game.
And what exactly is wrong with terran having a chance at killing zerg early on through aggression like 11/11 rax, they were no where near untouchable and you make it sound like it's so wrong for the zerg being forced to scout cheese in order to prepare for it and hold it instead of blindly making 4+ queens and pulling a couple of drones in order to hold cheeses like 11/11 or 12/14 rax.
On August 31 2012 22:59 Clbull wrote: As a Zerg who finds ZvT to be the easiest matchup ever. I think Raven Energy costs need a reduction across the board. I'd say reduce Auto-turret to 25 Energy from 50 Energy whilst halving the duration, reduce the cost of Point Defense Drone to 50 and make Hunter Seeker Missile cost 75 Energy instead of 125 Energy. HSM already does poor splash damage in comparison to abilities like Fungal Growth and Psionic Storm.
To be honest I'm happy with the amount of damage and the radius HSM does, it just desperately needs the energy cost for the ability to be decreased so that ravens aren't useless while you wait around for energy to build up so you can actually use HSM, and so that if possible you could actually cast HSM twice with a single raven if it has accumulated enough energy instead of it only being able to cast once.
When the missiles can be spammed many at a time and still their damage STACK they should never do the same damage/have too low energy cost as storm/fungal. Can you imagine storm and fungal getting spammed on the same groups stacking damage? x.x
You can still micro away from HSM though, if missiles were targeted onto infestors or corruptors you can still micro away from them though minimising damage taken and broodlords can be presplit despite them moving incredibly slowly. Whereas spells like fungal are instant and cannot be micro'd out of unless zerg makes a mistake and misses a chain fungal.
Though many ravens shouldn't get a chance to cast HSM and do significant damage since fungal has a greater range than HSM too.
Edit: Different races are different so shouldn't be argued about what spell casters are best. I guess it's just up to terran to turtle up and accumulate raven energy then individually split their ravens while microing the rest of their army to get off some HSM's then it's up to zerg to find a way to negate HSM and micro out of it.
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
the game doesnt need a giant change doing small things like making ravens faster and creep slower is exactly what blizz needs to do
the game is so balanced right now that a careless nerf or buff just makes it more imbalanced they need small nerfs taht are carefully thought out and tested and watched religiously
people said the same thing about warp prisoms now warp prism harass is hugely hard to deal with as Zerg
You mean no careless unnecessary giant changes like giving the queen an extra two range in an already close to 50-50 balanced match-up...right?
As for blizzard going slow with changes, that is great, but changing raven speed does nothing to address any of the balance issues for the TvZ match-up that occurred after the queen buff patch.
The creep spread nerf I'm sure most players agree blizzard needs to do.
I think you are forgeting the part where the terran was pretty much untoucheble while having the chanse to kill the zerg early game.
And what exactly is wrong with terran having a chance at killing zerg early on through aggression like 11/11 rax, they were no where near untouchable and you make it sound like it's so wrong for the zerg being forced to scout cheese in order to prepare for it and hold it instead of blindly making 4+ queens and pulling a couple of drones in order to hold cheeses like 11/11 or 12/14 rax.
On August 31 2012 22:59 Clbull wrote: As a Zerg who finds ZvT to be the easiest matchup ever. I think Raven Energy costs need a reduction across the board. I'd say reduce Auto-turret to 25 Energy from 50 Energy whilst halving the duration, reduce the cost of Point Defense Drone to 50 and make Hunter Seeker Missile cost 75 Energy instead of 125 Energy. HSM already does poor splash damage in comparison to abilities like Fungal Growth and Psionic Storm.
To be honest I'm happy with the amount of damage and the radius HSM does, it just desperately needs the energy cost for the ability to be decreased so that ravens aren't useless while you wait around for energy to build up so you can actually use HSM, and so that if possible you could actually cast HSM twice with a single raven if it has accumulated enough energy instead of it only being able to cast once.
When the missiles can be spammed many at a time and still their damage STACK they should never do the same damage/have too low energy cost as storm/fungal. Can you imagine storm and fungal getting spammed on the same groups stacking damage? x.x
On August 19 2012 11:12 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: Another wall of text from Avilo, are you losing 100% of your TvZs or something? Terrans have been doing quite well recently in all stages of the matchup.
a) the wall of text is discussing how a raven speed buff does nothing for the match-up, and speed does nothing to address any core issues.
b) thread is not about me personally
c) I would suggest you look at tournament results, winrates, and general trends because they disagree with your assessment.
the game doesnt need a giant change doing small things like making ravens faster and creep slower is exactly what blizz needs to do
the game is so balanced right now that a careless nerf or buff just makes it more imbalanced they need small nerfs taht are carefully thought out and tested and watched religiously
people said the same thing about warp prisoms now warp prism harass is hugely hard to deal with as Zerg
You mean no careless unnecessary giant changes like giving the queen an extra two range in an already close to 50-50 balanced match-up...right?
As for blizzard going slow with changes, that is great, but changing raven speed does nothing to address any of the balance issues for the TvZ match-up that occurred after the queen buff patch.
The creep spread nerf I'm sure most players agree blizzard needs to do.
I think you are forgeting the part where the terran was pretty much untoucheble while having the chanse to kill the zerg early game.
And what exactly is wrong with terran having a chance at killing zerg early on through aggression like 11/11 rax, they were no where near untouchable and you make it sound like it's so wrong for the zerg being forced to scout cheese in order to prepare for it and hold it instead of blindly making 4+ queens and pulling a couple of drones in order to hold cheeses like 11/11 or 12/14 rax.
On August 31 2012 22:59 Clbull wrote: As a Zerg who finds ZvT to be the easiest matchup ever. I think Raven Energy costs need a reduction across the board. I'd say reduce Auto-turret to 25 Energy from 50 Energy whilst halving the duration, reduce the cost of Point Defense Drone to 50 and make Hunter Seeker Missile cost 75 Energy instead of 125 Energy. HSM already does poor splash damage in comparison to abilities like Fungal Growth and Psionic Storm.
To be honest I'm happy with the amount of damage and the radius HSM does, it just desperately needs the energy cost for the ability to be decreased so that ravens aren't useless while you wait around for energy to build up so you can actually use HSM, and so that if possible you could actually cast HSM twice with a single raven if it has accumulated enough energy instead of it only being able to cast once.
When the missiles can be spammed many at a time and still their damage STACK they should never do the same damage/have too low energy cost as storm/fungal. Can you imagine storm and fungal getting spammed on the same groups stacking damage? x.x
You can still micro away from HSM though, if missiles were targeted onto infestors or corruptors you can still micro away from them though minimising damage taken and broodlords can be presplit despite them moving incredibly slowly. Whereas spells like fungal are instant and cannot be micro'd out of unless zerg makes a mistake and misses a chain fungal.
Though many ravens shouldn't get a chance to cast HSM and do significant damage since fungal has a greater range than HSM too.
Instant or not instant, the dynamic that Fungal and HSM create is basically the same in an actual game: you need to presplit, because splitting during battle - whether it is because an infestor is getting close to 9range of your troops or a HSM has been started - is just not that efficient to rely on in combat.
And though Fungal has a higher range than HSM, saying that most Ravens should not be able to even start HSM is like saying that most Infestors should never be in range to cast a fungal, because they should die to siege tanks first. It's just not working this way, because there is too much stuff happening to handle everything perfectly.
So there won't be any buff for us or any nerf for zergs, thanks to MvP and other top players. It means we're screwed at lower levels, as usual. We're not able to safely transitioning to skyterran like these incredible players can… I feel so punished for being Terran since a few months. I'm playing less & less and I don't know if I can handle more. It's just terribly hard (at my level, high diamond / low master) and disappointing to constantly lose to worst players that just throw their a click army without care and still winning. They just care about macroing like crazy which I have to do too on top of constant baby-sitting my army and drops. Their race design requires absolutely no skill since the patch, whereas before, it was a great and dynamic matchup with hard micro needed from both players. It makes me really sad.
And while we play a lot greedier now, a lot of them also like to commit to huge baneling bust that are so freaking hard to stop even with 4 fucking repaired bunkers against no microed banelings, and when I ask for advice, they just answer "tank good unit". How the fuck they want me to waste my gas on early tanks instead of crucial upgrades for my bio. With my 120 apm, I'm not able to use the hellion / banshee opener even after 20 tries, because • It forces me to go mech and I find it boring and passive • I will be horribly late for my bio upgrades & support • The multitasking needed just screw my macro up…
I'm lost in this matchup while I was a total beast with non-stop dropping agression before the patch, and I could cripple all zergs even the master ones. Now that they're safe in the early game and have insane creep for the midgame, they can get the eco & tech much faster than before, it's incredibly hard. I spent so much time in this game trying to improve, it almost makes me want to cry to lose against such a badly designed matchup where no multitasking or micro is needed for one race while the other has to do all the work… It was so much better before. I guess it's time to stop SCII for me. Heart of the Swarm doesn't head in the right direction either, I don't want a fucking a click army and wait 20 min doing nothing…
It means we're screwed at lower levels, as usual. We're not able to safely transitioning to skyterran like these incredible players can… I feel so punished for being Terran since a few months. I'm playing less & less and I don't know if I can handle more. It's just terribly hard (at my level, high diamond / low master) and disappointing to constantly lose to worst players that just throw their a click army without care and still winning. They just care about macroing like crazy which I have to do too on top of constant baby-sitting my army and drops. Their race design requires absolutely no skill since the patch, whereas before, it was a great and dynamic matchup with hard micro needed from both players. It makes me really sad.
And while we play a lot greedier now, a lot of them also like to commit to huge baneling bust that's impossible to stop even with 4 fucking repaired bunkers, and when I ask for advice, they just answer "tank good unit".
I'm lost in this matchup while I was a total beast with non-stop dropping agression before the patch, and I could cripple all zergs even the master ones. Now that they're safe and have insane creep tumors, they can have the eco & tech much faster than before, it's incredibly hard. I spent so much time in this game trying to improve, it almost makes me want to cry to lose against such a badly designed matchup where no multitasking or micro is needed for one race while the other has to do all the work… I guess it's time to stop SCII for me. Heart of the Swarm doesn't head in the right direction either, I don't want a fucking a click army and wait 20 min doing nothing…
why would you ask the monkeys you play against for advices, just ask better players
and honestly most of your ranting is unrelated to balance but more related to your lack of skills/practice, so get to work and improve until you beat them easily or just stop playing if you can't handle it
MVP 4 time GSL champion beats foreigner zerg, all must be balanced.
Yeah OK, so MVP and Kas made good use of HSM in a couple of series, mainly due to surprise.
Once zerg figure out a timing that hits after terran has spent all the money on starports and upgrades but before HSM is ready it will be a different story. Ravens are great when they have a bunch of energy and upgrades, but that takes way too long atm.
On September 01 2012 01:33 Willzzz wrote: MVP 4 time GSL champion beats foreigner zerg, all must be balanced.
Yeah OK, so MVP and Kas made good use of HSM in a couple of series, mainly due to surprise.
Once zerg figure out a timing that hits after terran has spent all the money on starports and upgrades but before HSM is ready it will be a different story. Ravens are great when they have a bunch of energy and upgrades, but that takes way too long atm.
and honestly most of your ranting is unrelated to balance but more related to your lack of skills/practice, so get to work and improve until you beat them easily or just stop playing if you can't handle it
Balance is for all levels. We bought the game to have fun, and all of us don't have 60 hours a week to spend on Starcraft, and I already spent a lot of time on this game (like 6-8 hours a week) + watching replays & streams & competitions. I just want to feel outplayed when I lose, that was the case when a good zerg destroyed me with perfect muta harass, hellion defense, or great flanking. At my level, now it's just rushing for hive tech and a clicking, or baneling busting early. I mean, they shouldn't be able to destroy me when they have terrible controls. But they do. And I have really great bio control, all the zergs players I have beat in the past complimented me on this ! They recognized they were outmultitasked and outmicroed. I just no longer feel on a equal footing now. How can my very best matchup (like 80% winrate) just became my worst in a few weeks. I just can't believe it.
It means we're screwed at lower levels, as usual. We're not able to safely transitioning to skyterran like these incredible players can… I feel so punished for being Terran since a few months. I'm playing less & less and I don't know if I can handle more. It's just terribly hard (at my level, high diamond / low master) and disappointing to constantly lose to worst players that just throw their a click army without care and still winning. They just care about macroing like crazy which I have to do too on top of constant baby-sitting my army and drops. Their race design requires absolutely no skill since the patch, whereas before, it was a great and dynamic matchup with hard micro needed from both players. It makes me really sad.
And while we play a lot greedier now, a lot of them also like to commit to huge baneling bust that's impossible to stop even with 4 fucking repaired bunkers, and when I ask for advice, they just answer "tank good unit".
I'm lost in this matchup while I was a total beast with non-stop dropping agression before the patch, and I could cripple all zergs even the master ones. Now that they're safe and have insane creep tumors, they can have the eco & tech much faster than before, it's incredibly hard. I spent so much time in this game trying to improve, it almost makes me want to cry to lose against such a badly designed matchup where no multitasking or micro is needed for one race while the other has to do all the work… I guess it's time to stop SCII for me. Heart of the Swarm doesn't head in the right direction either, I don't want a fucking a click army and wait 20 min doing nothing…
why would you ask the monkeys you play against for advices, just ask better players
and honestly most of your ranting is unrelated to balance but more related to your lack of skills/practice, so get to work and improve until you beat them easily or just stop playing if you can't handle it
Well said sir. I am so inspired by this, I think I will take time this weekend to lose games practicing my horrible blink micro. Losing those game is the only way I will ever get passible blink micro.
"A raven speed buff does zero to address these issues because the problem is and never will be raven speed. The problem is how fungal growth pins down ravens making HSM unusable, and the amount of time necessary to put ravens into play and make them pay themselves off. "
I would verry much welcome a raven speed buf and i do found their slow speed a deterent from using them to their full potential. Fungal growth locking down ravens is not a problem of the raven,anny unit can be locked down by fungal growth. If this is realy a problem then fungal growth is the problem, not the raven. The amount of time needed to get them into play with hsm is indeed a problem,they could lower the energy needed for hsm maybe. Still i would be pretty pleased with just a speed buf, the raven would then become more viable for harras with auto turrets, hsm is not its only spell. Its good that ravens get a buff at least
and honestly most of your ranting is unrelated to balance but more related to your lack of skills/practice, so get to work and improve until you beat them easily or just stop playing if you can't handle it
Balance is for all levels. We bought the game to have fun, and all of us don't have 60 hours a week to spend on Starcraft, and I already spent a lot of time on this game (like 6-8 hours a week) + watching replays & streams & competitions. I just want to feel outplayed when I lose, that was the case when a good zerg destroyed me with perfect muta harass, hellion defense, or great flanking. At my level, now it's just rushing for hive tech and a clicking, or baneling busting early. I mean, they shouldn't be able to destroy me when they have terrible controls. But they do. And I have really great bio control, all the zergs players I have beat in the past complimented me on this ! They recognized they were outmultitasked and outmicroed. I just no longer feel on a equal footing now. How can my very best matchup (like 80% winrate) just became my worst in a few weeks. I just can't believe it.
I have to assume your macro is flawless since it requires no skill at all, and no clearly balance isn't for all level since all units are not used in the same manner
some units will always be harder to use than other, it's literally impossible to balance the game on all levels and the priority will obviously be pro level since they play for a living...
It would be absolutely possible to "balance" the game in a way that bad controls equal bad outcome no matter what. They should make zergs & protoss harder to control. It wouldn't change anything at the pro level, because pro players have amazing controls, but at lower levels, it's clearly not the case, you know terrans have to work a lot harder than just macroing if they want to win. The racial distribution among higher leagues (diamond & higher) speak for itself : It's like 20% terran, 35% zerg, 35% protoss, 10% random… But Blizzard preferred balancing the opposite way in the future HOTS, offering an easier to control army for terrans… It's just a terrible way of designing the game.
My macro is not flawless but I reach all the standards timing (53 vcs at 10:00, etc) and I love orbital farms lategame. In replays, my late game production is not that far with what I see from pro players : it's like 12 marines - 2 marauders - 2 medivacs - 2 tanks at a time. It's at least on par with players of my levels, if not better. I just should lose against better players, and win against worst. Since the patch, it's not the longer the case. The balance was much better a few months ago, where good zergs were really impressive, denied all early pressure, the mid game drops and deserved their win. The other ones deserved to lose because of their poor scouting, guessing, and multitasking. Now they can scout with overlords, have 6 queens for early defense, and rush T3 without being too annoyed.
On September 01 2012 02:14 pimsc2 wrote: It would be absolutely possible to "balance" the game in a way that bad controls equal bad outcome no matter what. They should make zergs & protoss harder to control. It wouldn't change anything at the pro level, because pro players have amazing controls, but at lower levels, it's clearly not the case, you know terrans have to work a lot harder than just macroing if they want to win. The racial distribution among higher leagues (diamond & higher) speak for itself : It's like 20% terran, 35% zerg, 35% protoss, 10% random… But Blizzard preferred balancing the opposite way in the future HOTS, offering an easier to control army for terrans… It's just a terrible way of designing the game.
My macro is not flawless but I reach all the standards timing (53 vcs at 10:00, etc) and I love orbital farms lategame. In replays, my late game production is not that far with what I see from pro players : it's like 12 marines - 2 marauders - 2 medivacs - 2 tanks at a time. It's at least on par with players of my levels, if not better. I just should lose against better players, and win against worst. Since the patch, it's not the longer the case. The balance was much better a few months ago, where good zergs were really impressive, denied all early pressure, the mid game drops and deserved their win. The other ones deserved to lose because of their poor scouting, guessing, and multitasking. Now they can scout with overlords, have 6 queens for early defense, and rush T3 without being too annoyed.
I'm really not sure how you expect blizzard to balance at lower level when you have absolutely no indication if the reason people lose there is because of balance or because they lack something in their gameplay, what you are asking of blizzard is impossible...
you say you play for fun, if you don't have fun playing terran anymore, then just switch race? why should it matter to you, you don't play competitively
Fayth, I'm sorry but you're Protoss. You probably don't understand why we love to play terran. Because of the glass cannon style. Because of the required multitasking. Because of the constant attention to our units. Because of the only unit microable like broodwar : the marine. Because of the planification of our play. We can't warp 10 templars. We can't get 10 ravens instantly to sink our gas and get a huge AOE boost. We can't warp if we didn't expected an agression in our main. We have to prepare for everything. Our barracks requires us to queue at least one unit each which means money sleeping instead of improving my eco / upgrades / production. This style of thinking, the need to prepare each detail, is a huge part of why we love to play Terran. And finally, also because of the constant agression required. I don't want to switch race because I don't want to sit 20 min defending, waiting to reach tiers 3 to move out and try things. Because I feel these races are poorly designed compared to terran. You can even see it at the beginning. There isn't any wait in the terran build orders at the beginning, while protoss & zerg have to wait their pylon / overlords. You can see how Blizzard started to work with the terran race, and the^n added the two others. That's why I loved my race. It's the more rewarding to play in my opinion, but also the more frustrating to master. Starcraft is not my job but it's my passion. I have almost 2000 games, it's quite a commitment if you think of it.
Yes my play is not flawless, but my opponents plays aren't perfect too. Therefore it should be equally punitive for each race. You know it's not the case right now, until HOTS - which fixes the issue in the worst way possible - smoothing everything toward easiness.
On September 01 2012 02:14 pimsc2 wrote: It would be absolutely possible to "balance" the game in a way that bad controls equal bad outcome no matter what. They should make zergs & protoss harder to control. It wouldn't change anything at the pro level, because pro players have amazing controls, but at lower levels, it's clearly not the case, you know terrans have to work a lot harder than just macroing if they want to win. The racial distribution among higher leagues (diamond & higher) speak for itself : It's like 20% terran, 35% zerg, 35% protoss, 10% random… But Blizzard preferred balancing the opposite way in the future HOTS, offering an easier to control army for terrans… It's just a terrible way of designing the game.
My macro is not flawless but I reach all the standards timing (53 vcs at 10:00, etc) and I love orbital farms lategame. In replays, my late game production is not that far with what I see from pro players : it's like 12 marines - 2 marauders - 2 medivacs - 2 tanks at a time. It's at least on par with players of my levels, if not better. I just should lose against better players, and win against worst. Since the patch, it's not the longer the case. The balance was much better a few months ago, where good zergs were really impressive, denied all early pressure, the mid game drops and deserved their win. The other ones deserved to lose because of their poor scouting, guessing, and multitasking. Now they can scout with overlords, have 6 queens for early defense, and rush T3 without being too annoyed.
I'm really not sure how you expect blizzard to balance at lower level when you have absolutely no indication if the reason people lose there is because of balance or because they lack something in their gameplay, what you are asking of blizzard is impossible...
you say you play for fun, if you don't have fun playing terran anymore, then just switch race? why should it matter to you, you don't play competitively
because zerg and protoss are incredibly boring to play. I'd rather lose as Terran than win as Zerg/Protoss.
and how the fuck do you suggest you make other races more mechanically demanding
this is pretty fucking mission impossible
oh and for ur info, it's a lot harder for protoss to defend multi pronged attack by terran than it is to execute them with terran, yet you don't see protoss whining about that
On September 01 2012 03:17 ROOTFayth wrote: and how the fuck do you suggest you make other races more mechanically demanding
this is pretty fucking mission impossible
Not if you aren't an idiot.
HOTS introduces opportunities for blizzard to make it more difficult. Here's a simple idea: lower inject larva count to 3, lower the time it takes to pop an inject. More injects, more skill.
Fayth, you're unsuccessful because you're bad. Your race gives you advantages over Terrans who practice the same amount as you do. Shouldn't you try to get good instead of hoping that Terran stays more difficult?
On September 01 2012 03:17 ROOTFayth wrote: and how the fuck do you suggest you make other races more mechanically demanding
this is pretty fucking mission impossible
Not if you aren't an idiot.
HOTS introduces opportunities for blizzard to make it more difficult. Here's a simple idea: lower inject larva count to 3, lower the time it takes to pop an inject. More injects, more skill.
Fayth, you're unsuccessful because you're bad. Your race gives you advantages over Terrans who practice the same amount as you do. Shouldn't you try to get good instead of hoping that Terran stays more difficult?
I'm unsuccessful because I'm inactive... I was among top foreigners in bw when I played and went on in poker to get pretty massive success for a reason
On September 01 2012 03:17 ROOTFayth wrote: and how the fuck do you suggest you make other races more mechanically demanding
this is pretty fucking mission impossible
Not if you aren't an idiot.
HOTS introduces opportunities for blizzard to make it more difficult. Here's a simple idea: lower inject larva count to 3, lower the time it takes to pop an inject. More injects, more skill.
Fayth, you're unsuccessful because you're bad. Your race gives you advantages over Terrans who practice the same amount as you do. Shouldn't you try to get good instead of hoping that Terran stays more difficult?
I believe Fayth isn't a player on ROOT in the same way the other people are, he does more management related stuff I believe. [Edit: this seems incorrect he now plays poker]
Also, if inject larva created less larva certain all ins that are already difficult to hold would become impossible, especially in the early game.
On September 01 2012 03:17 ROOTFayth wrote: and how the fuck do you suggest you make other races more mechanically demanding
this is pretty fucking mission impossible
Not if you aren't an idiot.
HOTS introduces opportunities for blizzard to make it more difficult. Here's a simple idea: lower inject larva count to 3, lower the time it takes to pop an inject. More injects, more skill.
Fayth, you're unsuccessful because you're bad. Your race gives you advantages over Terrans who practice the same amount as you do. Shouldn't you try to get good instead of hoping that Terran stays more difficult?
I believe Fayth isn't a player on ROOT in the same way the other people are, he does more management related stuff I believe. [Edit: this seems incorrect he now plays poker]
Also, if inject larva created less larva certain all ins that are already difficult to hold would become impossible, especially in the early game.
That doesn't mean there aren't ways to make it more challenging for the other races. It's very doable when the whole game is undergoing a giant balance reset and a long period of tuning. You'd have to be a moron to think its impossible to increase the skillcap for the races.
Ideas I or anyone else just farts out on teamliquid aren't going to work without alot more thought and time put into them. It's Blizzard's job not to fart out dumb ideas but instead design the game with an overall goal in mind, and I think that goal should be to increase the skillcap overall, and bring the skillcap gap between Terran vs Zerg/Protoss closer.
On September 01 2012 02:45 ROOTFayth wrote: I played terran for like 6 months before i switched to P, cuz i found Terran incredibly boring to play
also it seems no matter what I say you will never give up on thinking it's possible to balance at ur level, it is not, deal with it
don't buff terran, make protoss and zerg more mechanically demanding
there, it's more balanced.
it shouldn't affect the pros cause they should have good enough mechanics. and will affect everyone else on the lower leagues.
i dont mind the idea of making zerg/protoss more mechanically diff but then ur gonna have to make zerg macro easier. guess why terran is able to micro their army like crazy, because ur macro is ez as shit. why u think zerg have higher APM but their army control blows? cus sometimes getting all our injects is more important than perfect army control. thats why u see lotta pros jus put all infestors and everything into one group. yeah i put my infestors in a separate hotkey and micro them like a beast and dont lose them after i fungal but i dont inject as well and end up with 2k. was it worth the army micro?
why u think zergs sometimes just move command past an army? cus they are off macroing. terran is ez macro but hard army micro, zerg is the opposite. u want blizzard to design zerg to be more like terran? than this game will be balanced but boring. every race is diff just stop the whining god.
raven speed doesnt fix the problem in TvZ? yeah cus it doesnt fix the problem that u suck. if u dont like having to outmicro ur opponents then switch to Z/P and prepare to have fun a-moving ur army but dedicating APM to macro. if u want to respond with "i dont want empty wins with an OP race" then quit the game cus ull just whine about anything.
On September 01 2012 03:28 ROOTFayth wrote: well pardon me I thought we were talking about wings of liberty here .....
It could also be done in WoL, but with the timeframe between now and HotS it doesn't make a lot of sense. If that was the point you were trying to make, that was my mistake for misinterpreting.
Also I shouldn't have included an asinine personal attack in all of that, I just went through a terrible mess of traffic that put me in a bad mood. Good news is the only thing it accomplished was making me look stupid.
On September 01 2012 02:45 ROOTFayth wrote: I played terran for like 6 months before i switched to P, cuz i found Terran incredibly boring to play
also it seems no matter what I say you will never give up on thinking it's possible to balance at ur level, it is not, deal with it
don't buff terran, make protoss and zerg more mechanically demanding
there, it's more balanced.
it shouldn't affect the pros cause they should have good enough mechanics. and will affect everyone else on the lower leagues.
i dont mind the idea of making zerg/protoss more mechanically diff but then ur gonna have to make zerg macro easier. guess why terran is able to micro their army like crazy, because ur macro is ez as shit. why u think zerg have higher APM but their army control blows? cus sometimes getting all our injects is more important than perfect army control. thats why u see lotta pros jus put all infestors and everything into one group. yeah i put my infestors in a separate hotkey and micro them like a beast and dont lose them after i fungal but i dont inject as well and end up with 2k. was it worth the army micro?
why u think zergs sometimes just move command past an army? cus they are off macroing. terran is ez macro but hard army micro, zerg is the opposite. u want blizzard to design zerg to be more like terran? than this game will be balanced but boring. every race is diff just stop the whining god.
raven speed doesnt fix the problem in TvZ? yeah cus it doesnt fix the problem that u suck. if u dont like having to outmicro ur opponents then switch to Z/P and prepare to have fun a-moving ur army but dedicating APM to macro. if u want to respond with "i dont want empty wins with an OP race" then quit the game cus ull just whine about anything.
zerg macro isn't harder, it's different. it's pretty easy to get a rhythm going, and it's not nearly the end of the world if you miss 1-2 injects during a battle. it is if you've been missing them all game though
On September 01 2012 02:45 ROOTFayth wrote: I played terran for like 6 months before i switched to P, cuz i found Terran incredibly boring to play
also it seems no matter what I say you will never give up on thinking it's possible to balance at ur level, it is not, deal with it
don't buff terran, make protoss and zerg more mechanically demanding
there, it's more balanced.
it shouldn't affect the pros cause they should have good enough mechanics. and will affect everyone else on the lower leagues.
i dont mind the idea of making zerg/protoss more mechanically diff but then ur gonna have to make zerg macro easier. guess why terran is able to micro their army like crazy, because ur macro is ez as shit. why u think zerg have higher APM but their army control blows? cus sometimes getting all our injects is more important than perfect army control. thats why u see lotta pros jus put all infestors and everything into one group. yeah i put my infestors in a separate hotkey and micro them like a beast and dont lose them after i fungal but i dont inject as well and end up with 2k. was it worth the army micro?
why u think zergs sometimes just move command past an army? cus they are off macroing. terran is ez macro but hard army micro, zerg is the opposite. u want blizzard to design zerg to be more like terran? than this game will be balanced but boring. every race is diff just stop the whining god.
raven speed doesnt fix the problem in TvZ? yeah cus it doesnt fix the problem that u suck. if u dont like having to outmicro ur opponents then switch to Z/P and prepare to have fun a-moving ur army but dedicating APM to macro. if u want to respond with "i dont want empty wins with an OP race" then quit the game cus ull just whine about anything.
I don't agree that Z macro is harder than T. Injects are very easy with just a little bit of practice, creep spread takes a bit more practice but also isn't particularly hard. You have to remember that while Z has lots of injects and creep spread, T has far more buildings to make and when they decide to make them has a tremendous impact throughout the rest of the game. Terran also has production cycles they can miss that won't come back, much like zerg has injects they can miss that won't come back.
I also play Z and P at a master level, and I can tell you that it is much easier than playing T.
On September 01 2012 02:42 pimsc2 wrote: Fayth, I'm sorry but you're Protoss. You probably don't understand why we love to play terran. Because of the glass cannon style. Because of the required multitasking. Because of the constant attention to our units. Because of the only unit microable like broodwar : the marine. Because of the planification of our play. We can't warp 10 templars. We can't get 10 ravens instantly to sink our gas and get a huge AOE boost. We can't warp if we didn't expected an agression in our main. We have to prepare for everything. Our barracks requires us to queue at least one unit each which means money sleeping instead of improving my eco / upgrades / production. This style of thinking, the need to prepare each detail, is a huge part of why we love to play Terran. And finally, also because of the constant agression required. I don't want to switch race because I don't want to sit 20 min defending, waiting to reach tiers 3 to move out and try things. Because I feel these races are poorly designed compared to terran. You can even see it at the beginning. There isn't any wait in the terran build orders at the beginning, while protoss & zerg have to wait their pylon / overlords. You can see how Blizzard started to work with the terran race, and the^n added the two others. That's why I loved my race. It's the more rewarding to play in my opinion, but also the more frustrating to master. Starcraft is not my job but it's my passion. I have almost 2000 games, it's quite a commitment if you think of it.
Yes my play is not flawless, but my opponents plays aren't perfect too. Therefore it should be equally punitive for each race. You know it's not the case right now, until HOTS - which fixes the issue in the worst way possible - smoothing everything toward easiness.
this post is amazing ^>^
Seems that Bliz didn't see the need for the raven buff at all, which imo is a shame not for balance reasons but because faster and snappy ravens would have been cool, cause ravens are cool.
Big J woooohhh!!!! All LR spam, I'm tricking people into thinking I'm some kind of forum vet when I'm just a chobo. 8888 does look cool though.
Goddamit, thats such a good idea every time I post now I'm gonna feel bad for what a glorious thing it could have been.
MCDayC: 8888 posts... Just thought I had to post that
Yeah it looks amazing. Would be cool if they turned you into a mad now, that you could edit other people's posts instead of ever posting again and therefore staying on 8888 forever! If I ever reach that magic number, I guess I have to PM someone that I can become such a "mod".
On September 01 2012 02:42 pimsc2 wrote: Fayth, I'm sorry but you're Protoss. You probably don't understand why we love to play terran. Because of the glass cannon style. Because of the required multitasking. Because of the constant attention to our units. Because of the only unit microable like broodwar : the marine. Because of the planification of our play. We can't warp 10 templars. We can't get 10 ravens instantly to sink our gas and get a huge AOE boost. We can't warp if we didn't expected an agression in our main.
Templar don't get to Storm instantly. They're also the hardest caster to micro because they're the slowest and by far the most vulnerable. Honestly this tirade is near useless, because I can easily spout off Terran-specific advantages, like losing your entire army and still staying in the game, something Protoss can't enjoy, enjoying a higher mineral income by default, having much better air options, having a unitless detector, denying worker scout earlier, etc. Can't look at the little details. Have to look at how they interact.
Terran isn't really that much harder, otherwise it wouldn't've been so easy for the majority of the pros to Terran dominate the first year and a half. Nothing's mechanically changed since beta really, so Terran have always been as "hard" as they've always been. What has changed is the relative potency of different builds by nerfs and buffs, and Terran have always needed aggression toward Zerg to keep them in check.
On September 01 2012 02:42 pimsc2 wrote: Fayth, I'm sorry but you're Protoss. You probably don't understand why we love to play terran. Because of the glass cannon style. Because of the required multitasking. Because of the constant attention to our units. Because of the only unit microable like broodwar : the marine. Because of the planification of our play. We can't warp 10 templars. We can't get 10 ravens instantly to sink our gas and get a huge AOE boost. We can't warp if we didn't expected an agression in our main.
Templar don't get to Storm instantly. They're also the hardest caster to micro because they're the slowest and by far the most vulnerable. Honestly this tirade is near useless, because I can easily spout off Terran-specific advantages, like losing your entire army and still staying in the game, something Protoss can't enjoy, enjoying a higher mineral income by default, having much better air options, having a unitless detector, denying worker scout earlier, etc. Can't look at the little details. Have to look at how they interact.
Terran isn't really that much harder, otherwise it wouldn't've been so easy for the majority of the pros to Terran dominate the first year and a half. Nothing's mechanically changed since beta really, so Terran have always been as "hard" as they've always been. What has changed is the relative potency of different builds by nerfs and buffs, and Terran have always needed aggression toward Zerg to keep them in check.
Quite you, you can't talk about stuff that terran has that makes their life easier(auto cast on medivacs, stim for two units on one button, marines build out of reactored raxes first). And we all know that storm is easy to use, just like fungle. EMP is the hardest of all the spells to use, because it is on the ghost and that is a terran unit :-P
Templar do need to wait, but they also come at the beginning of the production cycle instead of at the end of it, and have Feedback and Archon Warp ready, so not really the same thing as Ravens requiring ten million researches, coming out of a very expensive production facility and THEN having to wait for their marquee spell. The Raven's 2.25 vs. what miserable thing Templar have (1.875 I guess?) is valid, but the atrocious range on HSM should more than counteract that.
Some context for the "lose army - still stay in the game" thing? That's believeable with losing SCVs due to MULEs, but how is T able to stay ingame after losing their whole army and toss isn't with a 16+ Zealot warp-in (in the late game at least)? Seems mysterious. So, context context context please.
Toss air is indeed bad, though Terran air isn't exactly stellar either. Not in the way Zerg air just feels solid, for example. But Sky Terran does work somewhat and Banshee harass is good, so I guess it's still better than what Toss get.
Scan is admittedly good, but I'd rather have Obs myself.
To the actual points, the game HAS changed very dramatically from the beginning, most especially due to map changes and the game just becoming more and more figured out and play becoming more refined overall. The early life of the game was very rough, and extremely small-scale compared to the massive, sprawling matches that are played nowadays. Of course Terran was stupidly easy to play when they were much stronger, the maps were idiotically small and otherwise Terran-favoured (rocks, Thor drop cliffs and so on...). So you have a strong faction, very favourable maps, and opponents whose faction was generally weaker and in some ways very flawed (3 range Roaches XD) who don't know how to defend anywhere near as well as people can nowadays. That you win easily is just a logical conclusion from that.
Nowadays Terran has been nerfed to hell and back, other races have had flaws fixed, some ridiculous unnecessary buffs (Queen range...) given, people know how to defend and cut corners properly, the maps are much, much bigger and thus natural, design-derived Terran weaknesses like inflexible and expensive lategame production shine more and more. On the small maps where Terran's ability to get a little bit of anything very fast shines, it's a very different kind of game that gets played.
If the problem of reducing HSM cost to 100 is the fact that spamming 2 in a row from a single raven is considered overpowered, couldn't they just reduce the energy cost AND put a cooldown on it?
Raven change only effect highest level but even at that it hardly change anything.For problem lies at late game compotisition,terran need an effective way to deal with Zerg air.There are many useless upgrades that still in the game so i think of some change: Terran:- 250mm strike canon now only hit air,range 10,125 energy,AOE damage 50 per sec over 10 second,random target in the area(that mean only one targer can be damage at a time) deploy immediately.IT will allow mech to be viable vs toss with thor now no longer couter immotar but can take down collosus and deplete their energy,help Viking fight againts BL,corruptor Optional:What if the energy upgrades for medivac and BC change into speed upgrades but put it in the fusioncore that incres speed 0.25 or 0.5? -HSM change into nanobot pack,cost 75 energy,fire a fast missile (3.0) that if target enemy unit it will work like inddirate that deal 20 damage over 4 sec but if target your own mechanical unit it will continue repair that unit 10hp/sec at 10sec,Upgradeable with Durable material to 6 and 15sec
Protoss:give DT void prison at the campain,reseach at Dark Shrie,cost 125 energy,lock down bio unit for 6 sec so protoss will have a way to deal with BL,Infestor without that gimmi MotherShip
I really don't think blizzard care about the matchup - its so broken at my level (high master) and as a terran i hardly want to queue ladder anymore because its just endless tvz and endless losses vs terrible zergs who just spam infestor..
On September 05 2012 04:58 2v2TLRSimba wrote: I really don't think blizzard care about the matchup - its so broken at my level (high master) and as a terran i hardly want to queue ladder anymore because its just endless tvz and endless losses vs terrible zergs who just spam infestor..
Then Make ghosts and laugh at infestors with no energy.
On September 05 2012 09:34 OpTiKDream wrote: Either way blizzard reconsidered their thoughts about buffing raven + tumor nerf. This should be closed now since the changes wont occur anyways.
Ya all this thread is now is a QQ thread and I do agree changes aren't happening anymore, and hots beta is going to be out soon anyway.
On September 05 2012 09:34 OpTiKDream wrote: Either way blizzard reconsidered their thoughts about buffing raven + tumor nerf. This should be closed now since the changes wont occur anyways.
Ya all this thread is now is a QQ thread and I do agree changes aren't happening anymore, and hots beta is going to be out soon anyway.
If this is closed, there will be another QQ thread. Like there was one before this (Luckyfool), and 1 before that (1 month later), and 1 before that (where did all the terrans go), etc.
Let's face it, non Mvp/Taeja terrans are pretty unhappy about the status quo (unless they switched to Z like me and have fun mucking about like mad).
Raven buffs are still under discussion and Raven vs Fungal growth is still an issue. Now also in HOTS, using ravens to detect swarmhosts adds to the topic.
Raven view range is 11. Fungal growth range is 9. Fungral radius is 2.
As soon as a raven is forced to operate above creep, it is visible to zerg. Then zerg can minimap fungal the raven without getting spotted and without giving the terran a chance to micro the raven away. 9 + 2 = 11 -> fungal hits the raven with 0 reaction time for terran.
So my proposal for Raven buff would be to increase raven view range to something like 13 or even more. I would also suggest to fix the energy problem of raven and to increase infestor cost. Infestor > raven and cheaper. Why that?
On September 01 2012 03:17 ROOTFayth wrote: and how the fuck do you suggest you make other races more mechanically demanding
this is pretty fucking mission impossible
oh and for ur info, it's a lot harder for protoss to defend multi pronged attack by terran than it is to execute them with terran, yet you don't see protoss whining about that
are warp ins not enough for you? Zealots with charge win every a-move battle easily, so I don't see the point where this should be harder for protoss. BTW: it's much harder to defend multi pronged zealot harassment, than to execute it. Because sending zealots with move into shift a-move is not really demanding. If you have trouble with multi pronged attacks as protoss, you should definately focus on your play, since you got the best tools in the game to defend it.
On November 23 2012 22:36 RuffianEO wrote: Raven buffs are still under discussion and Raven vs Fungal growth is still an issue. Now also in HOTS, using ravens to detect swarmhosts adds to the topic.
Raven view range is 11. Fungal growth range is 9. Fungral radius is 2.
As soon as a raven is forced to operate above creep, it is visible to zerg. Then zerg can minimap fungal the raven without getting spotted and without giving the terran a chance to micro the raven away. 9 + 2 = 11 -> fungal hits the raven with 0 reaction time for terran.
So my proposal for Raven buff would be to increase raven view range to something like 13 or even more. I would also suggest to fix the energy problem of raven and to increase infestor cost. Infestor > raven and cheaper. Why that?
Happy smashing of my contribution Cheers
Buffing the vision range is a great idea. Because that really is the problem with fungal in that matchup. You have sometimes little chances to see it coming. good point!
On September 05 2012 09:34 OpTiKDream wrote: Either way blizzard reconsidered their thoughts about buffing raven + tumor nerf. This should be closed now since the changes wont occur anyways.
Ya all this thread is now is a QQ thread and I do agree changes aren't happening anymore, and hots beta is going to be out soon anyway.
If this is closed, there will be another QQ thread. Like there was one before this (Luckyfool), and 1 before that (1 month later), and 1 before that (where did all the terrans go), etc.
Let's face it, non Mvp/Taeja terrans are pretty unhappy about the status quo (unless they switched to Z like me and have fun mucking about like mad).
Of all the arguments ever made about terran being underpowered and hard to use this has to be the most common and frankly nonsensical one of the lot. Terran have always had the most variety of players performing well at the top level. Even right now at the height of all these discussions about terran being terrible they have the best representation in both code S and code A (though admittedly performed slightly worse than zerg overall in code S).
If anything zerg and protoss are the ones who have historically relied on a handful of players to hold the race up. Hell take out MC and protoss in WOL is a sad, sad state of affairs.
Anyway i've just switched to terran after having played zerg and protoss and so far i'm having a great time. I'm still a high diamond/low masters player. I guess i just haven't reached the 1-2% of players where terran are struggling (they are fine diamond and below and they are fine in Korea, the only place they apparently struggle is in high masters and GM outside of Korea).
This issue has been massively overblown and that's why the balance discussion has gotten so muddied. If anything the focus should just be on changing things that make the game less interesting like fungal growth stopping units. Instead people just want to whinge about imbalance.
I think it's too soon to know how deeply the change will affect TvZ late game. Let people get used to the change and adapt their plans accordingly, then we will see.
Ravens are fine in terms of range. No unit should single handed counter all of Z air. Ravens blow up corruptors while vikings go to town on broodlords. Infestors meet fungal-immune-ghost snipes. Overseers? Sac vikings, maybe blow a few PDDs. Basically, a more complex gameplay.
The problem seems to be energy. Which for now, means to delay Zerg, and/or build ravens muuuch earlier for a) detection b) pdd? and c) in antici.............................................................pation!
On September 05 2012 09:34 OpTiKDream wrote: Either way blizzard reconsidered their thoughts about buffing raven + tumor nerf. This should be closed now since the changes wont occur anyways.
Ya all this thread is now is a QQ thread and I do agree changes aren't happening anymore, and hots beta is going to be out soon anyway.
If this is closed, there will be another QQ thread. Like there was one before this (Luckyfool), and 1 before that (1 month later), and 1 before that (where did all the terrans go), etc.
Let's face it, non Mvp/Taeja terrans are pretty unhappy about the status quo (unless they switched to Z like me and have fun mucking about like mad).
Of all the arguments ever made about terran being underpowered and hard to use this has to be the most common and frankly nonsensical one of the lot. Terran have always had the most variety of players performing well at the top level. Even right now at the height of all these discussions about terran being terrible they have the best representation in both code S and code A (though admittedly performed slightly worse than zerg overall in code S).
If anything zerg and protoss are the ones who have historically relied on a handful of players to hold the race up. Hell take out MC and protoss in WOL is a sad, sad state of affairs.
Anyway i've just switched to terran after having played zerg and protoss and so far i'm having a great time. I'm still a high diamond/low masters player. I guess i just haven't reached the 1-2% of players where terran are struggling (they are fine diamond and below and they are fine in Korea, the only place they apparently struggle is in high masters and GM outside of Korea).
This issue has been massively overblown and that's why the balance discussion has gotten so muddied. If anything the focus should just be on changing things that make the game less interesting like fungal growth stopping units. Instead people just want to whinge about imbalance.
Wait, you replied to me but I don't know which of my statements you so vehemently disagree with. Want to clarify? Did you mean that it's fun for you to play TvZ? Do tell me more about your experiences climbing the ladder.
On September 05 2012 09:34 OpTiKDream wrote: Either way blizzard reconsidered their thoughts about buffing raven + tumor nerf. This should be closed now since the changes wont occur anyways.
Ya all this thread is now is a QQ thread and I do agree changes aren't happening anymore, and hots beta is going to be out soon anyway.
If this is closed, there will be another QQ thread. Like there was one before this (Luckyfool), and 1 before that (1 month later), and 1 before that (where did all the terrans go), etc.
Let's face it, non Mvp/Taeja terrans are pretty unhappy about the status quo (unless they switched to Z like me and have fun mucking about like mad).
Of all the arguments ever made about terran being underpowered and hard to use this has to be the most common and frankly nonsensical one of the lot. Terran have always had the most variety of players performing well at the top level. Even right now at the height of all these discussions about terran being terrible they have the best representation in both code S and code A (though admittedly performed slightly worse than zerg overall in code S).
If anything zerg and protoss are the ones who have historically relied on a handful of players to hold the race up. Hell take out MC and protoss in WOL is a sad, sad state of affairs.
Anyway i've just switched to terran after having played zerg and protoss and so far i'm having a great time. I'm still a high diamond/low masters player. I guess i just haven't reached the 1-2% of players where terran are struggling (they are fine diamond and below and they are fine in Korea, the only place they apparently struggle is in high masters and GM outside of Korea).
This issue has been massively overblown and that's why the balance discussion has gotten so muddied. If anything the focus should just be on changing things that make the game less interesting like fungal growth stopping units. Instead people just want to whinge about imbalance.
Wait, you replied to me but I don't know which of my statements you so vehemently disagree with. Want to clarify? Did you mean that it's fun for you to play TvZ? Do tell me more about your experiences climbing the ladder.
A combative forum poster who assumes every quote is a vehement disagreement, replying to a hypocritical post about how Terran balance is overblown while overblowing Zerg and Protoss balance; especially by quoting "history". Urk, two wrong, blah blah.
On September 05 2012 09:34 OpTiKDream wrote: Either way blizzard reconsidered their thoughts about buffing raven + tumor nerf. This should be closed now since the changes wont occur anyways.
Ya all this thread is now is a QQ thread and I do agree changes aren't happening anymore, and hots beta is going to be out soon anyway.
If this is closed, there will be another QQ thread. Like there was one before this (Luckyfool), and 1 before that (1 month later), and 1 before that (where did all the terrans go), etc.
Let's face it, non Mvp/Taeja terrans are pretty unhappy about the status quo (unless they switched to Z like me and have fun mucking about like mad).
Of all the arguments ever made about terran being underpowered and hard to use this has to be the most common and frankly nonsensical one of the lot. Terran have always had the most variety of players performing well at the top level. Even right now at the height of all these discussions about terran being terrible they have the best representation in both code S and code A (though admittedly performed slightly worse than zerg overall in code S).
If anything zerg and protoss are the ones who have historically relied on a handful of players to hold the race up. Hell take out MC and protoss in WOL is a sad, sad state of affairs.
Anyway i've just switched to terran after having played zerg and protoss and so far i'm having a great time. I'm still a high diamond/low masters player. I guess i just haven't reached the 1-2% of players where terran are struggling (they are fine diamond and below and they are fine in Korea, the only place they apparently struggle is in high masters and GM outside of Korea).
This issue has been massively overblown and that's why the balance discussion has gotten so muddied. If anything the focus should just be on changing things that make the game less interesting like fungal growth stopping units. Instead people just want to whinge about imbalance.
Wait, you replied to me but I don't know which of my statements you so vehemently disagree with. Want to clarify? Did you mean that it's fun for you to play TvZ? Do tell me more about your experiences climbing the ladder.
A combative forum poster who assumes every quote is a vehement disagreement, replying to a hypocritical post about how Terran balance is overblown while overblowing Zerg and Protoss balance; especially by quoting "history". Urk, two wrong, blah blah.
Where have i overblown zerg and protoss balance? I don't think balance for any race is in a bad spot right now.
My post was mostly in reply to the Taeja/MVP comment which is more just a general sentiment i have been reading for months.
On September 05 2012 09:34 OpTiKDream wrote: Either way blizzard reconsidered their thoughts about buffing raven + tumor nerf. This should be closed now since the changes wont occur anyways.
Ya all this thread is now is a QQ thread and I do agree changes aren't happening anymore, and hots beta is going to be out soon anyway.
If this is closed, there will be another QQ thread. Like there was one before this (Luckyfool), and 1 before that (1 month later), and 1 before that (where did all the terrans go), etc.
Let's face it, non Mvp/Taeja terrans are pretty unhappy about the status quo (unless they switched to Z like me and have fun mucking about like mad).
Of all the arguments ever made about terran being underpowered and hard to use this has to be the most common and frankly nonsensical one of the lot. Terran have always had the most variety of players performing well at the top level. Even right now at the height of all these discussions about terran being terrible they have the best representation in both code S and code A (though admittedly performed slightly worse than zerg overall in code S).
If anything zerg and protoss are the ones who have historically relied on a handful of players to hold the race up. Hell take out MC and protoss in WOL is a sad, sad state of affairs.
Anyway i've just switched to terran after having played zerg and protoss and so far i'm having a great time. I'm still a high diamond/low masters player. I guess i just haven't reached the 1-2% of players where terran are struggling (they are fine diamond and below and they are fine in Korea, the only place they apparently struggle is in high masters and GM outside of Korea).
This issue has been massively overblown and that's why the balance discussion has gotten so muddied. If anything the focus should just be on changing things that make the game less interesting like fungal growth stopping units. Instead people just want to whinge about imbalance.
Wait, you replied to me but I don't know which of my statements you so vehemently disagree with. Want to clarify? Did you mean that it's fun for you to play TvZ? Do tell me more about your experiences climbing the ladder.
A combative forum poster who assumes every quote is a vehement disagreement, replying to a hypocritical post about how Terran balance is overblown while overblowing Zerg and Protoss balance; especially by quoting "history". Urk, two wrong, blah blah.
Where have i overblown zerg and protoss balance? I don't think balance for any race is in a bad spot right now.
My post was mostly in reply to the Taeja/MVP comment which is more just a general sentiment i have been reading for months.
If anything zerg and protoss are the ones who have historically relied on a handful of players to hold the race up.
Add the fact that back then, even if Terran could be considered OP, the games were usually not as one-sided as they are now. Or do you deny that?
On September 05 2012 09:34 OpTiKDream wrote: Either way blizzard reconsidered their thoughts about buffing raven + tumor nerf. This should be closed now since the changes wont occur anyways.
Ya all this thread is now is a QQ thread and I do agree changes aren't happening anymore, and hots beta is going to be out soon anyway.
If this is closed, there will be another QQ thread. Like there was one before this (Luckyfool), and 1 before that (1 month later), and 1 before that (where did all the terrans go), etc.
Let's face it, non Mvp/Taeja terrans are pretty unhappy about the status quo (unless they switched to Z like me and have fun mucking about like mad).
Of all the arguments ever made about terran being underpowered and hard to use this has to be the most common and frankly nonsensical one of the lot. Terran have always had the most variety of players performing well at the top level. Even right now at the height of all these discussions about terran being terrible they have the best representation in both code S and code A (though admittedly performed slightly worse than zerg overall in code S).
If anything zerg and protoss are the ones who have historically relied on a handful of players to hold the race up. Hell take out MC and protoss in WOL is a sad, sad state of affairs.
Anyway i've just switched to terran after having played zerg and protoss and so far i'm having a great time. I'm still a high diamond/low masters player. I guess i just haven't reached the 1-2% of players where terran are struggling (they are fine diamond and below and they are fine in Korea, the only place they apparently struggle is in high masters and GM outside of Korea).
This issue has been massively overblown and that's why the balance discussion has gotten so muddied. If anything the focus should just be on changing things that make the game less interesting like fungal growth stopping units. Instead people just want to whinge about imbalance.
Wait, you replied to me but I don't know which of my statements you so vehemently disagree with. Want to clarify? Did you mean that it's fun for you to play TvZ? Do tell me more about your experiences climbing the ladder.
A combative forum poster who assumes every quote is a vehement disagreement, replying to a hypocritical post about how Terran balance is overblown while overblowing Zerg and Protoss balance; especially by quoting "history". Urk, two wrong, blah blah.
Where have i overblown zerg and protoss balance? I don't think balance for any race is in a bad spot right now.
My post was mostly in reply to the Taeja/MVP comment which is more just a general sentiment i have been reading for months.
If anything zerg and protoss are the ones who have historically relied on a handful of players to hold the race up.
Add the fact that back then, even if Terran could be considered OP, the games were usually not as one-sided as they are now. Or do you deny that?
What i said there was 100% fact. Try this, go to the GSL page where they list the players who have come in the top 4 in the GSL. It's terran who has much more variety than the other 2 races. This isn't me saying they are overpowered, it just so happens that they are the players who performed well. I just don't understand where this argument came from that terran rely on only a few players to win (i.e taeja and MVP) when historically they are the race that has most bucked this trend.
I don't think the meta-game is one sided now at all so i'm not sure what exactly you're getting at. Terran is performing worse against zerg overall but there has been plenty of competitive games just as there was when terran was winning. I don't think balance is bad now at all. If anything the big issue is more the way certain matchups play out (namely PvZ) and certain units making the meta game a little bit stale.
On September 05 2012 09:34 OpTiKDream wrote: Either way blizzard reconsidered their thoughts about buffing raven + tumor nerf. This should be closed now since the changes wont occur anyways.
Ya all this thread is now is a QQ thread and I do agree changes aren't happening anymore, and hots beta is going to be out soon anyway.
If this is closed, there will be another QQ thread. Like there was one before this (Luckyfool), and 1 before that (1 month later), and 1 before that (where did all the terrans go), etc.
Let's face it, non Mvp/Taeja terrans are pretty unhappy about the status quo (unless they switched to Z like me and have fun mucking about like mad).
Of all the arguments ever made about terran being underpowered and hard to use this has to be the most common and frankly nonsensical one of the lot. Terran have always had the most variety of players performing well at the top level. Even right now at the height of all these discussions about terran being terrible they have the best representation in both code S and code A (though admittedly performed slightly worse than zerg overall in code S).
If anything zerg and protoss are the ones who have historically relied on a handful of players to hold the race up. Hell take out MC and protoss in WOL is a sad, sad state of affairs.
Anyway i've just switched to terran after having played zerg and protoss and so far i'm having a great time. I'm still a high diamond/low masters player. I guess i just haven't reached the 1-2% of players where terran are struggling (they are fine diamond and below and they are fine in Korea, the only place they apparently struggle is in high masters and GM outside of Korea).
This issue has been massively overblown and that's why the balance discussion has gotten so muddied. If anything the focus should just be on changing things that make the game less interesting like fungal growth stopping units. Instead people just want to whinge about imbalance.
Wait, you replied to me but I don't know which of my statements you so vehemently disagree with. Want to clarify? Did you mean that it's fun for you to play TvZ? Do tell me more about your experiences climbing the ladder.
A combative forum poster who assumes every quote is a vehement disagreement, replying to a hypocritical post about how Terran balance is overblown while overblowing Zerg and Protoss balance; especially by quoting "history". Urk, two wrong, blah blah.
Where have i overblown zerg and protoss balance? I don't think balance for any race is in a bad spot right now.
My post was mostly in reply to the Taeja/MVP comment which is more just a general sentiment i have been reading for months.
If anything zerg and protoss are the ones who have historically relied on a handful of players to hold the race up.
Add the fact that back then, even if Terran could be considered OP, the games were usually not as one-sided as they are now. Or do you deny that?
What i said there was 100% fact. Try this, go to the GSL page where they list the players who have come in the top 4 in the GSL. It's terran who has much more variety than the other 2 races. This isn't me saying they are overpowered, it just so happens that they are the players who performed well. I just don't understand where this argument came from that terran rely on only a few players to win (i.e taeja and MVP) when historically they are the race that has most bucked this trend.
I don't think the meta-game is one sided now at all so i'm not sure what exactly you're getting at. Terran is performing worse against zerg overall but there has been plenty of competitive games just as there was when terran was winning. I don't think balance is bad now at all. If anything the big issue is more the way certain matchups play out (namely PvZ) and certain units making the meta game a little bit stale.
Do you honestly not see that Zergs overwhelming crush Terrans (when they win) almost all the time? I'm talking about how each individual games play out - it wasn't as one sided as it is currently.
And what people say about Taeja and MVP also seem to be factual.
/edit
I'm sure you'll be watching some tourneys, maybe dreamhack that is playing right now. Keep an eye on ZvTs and how things play out.. then again, foreign Zergs beating korean Terrans shouldn't be treated as an indication of balance. But whatever, let's see how it goes.
On September 05 2012 09:34 OpTiKDream wrote: Either way blizzard reconsidered their thoughts about buffing raven + tumor nerf. This should be closed now since the changes wont occur anyways.
Ya all this thread is now is a QQ thread and I do agree changes aren't happening anymore, and hots beta is going to be out soon anyway.
If this is closed, there will be another QQ thread. Like there was one before this (Luckyfool), and 1 before that (1 month later), and 1 before that (where did all the terrans go), etc.
Let's face it, non Mvp/Taeja terrans are pretty unhappy about the status quo (unless they switched to Z like me and have fun mucking about like mad).
Of all the arguments ever made about terran being underpowered and hard to use this has to be the most common and frankly nonsensical one of the lot. Terran have always had the most variety of players performing well at the top level. Even right now at the height of all these discussions about terran being terrible they have the best representation in both code S and code A (though admittedly performed slightly worse than zerg overall in code S).
If anything zerg and protoss are the ones who have historically relied on a handful of players to hold the race up. Hell take out MC and protoss in WOL is a sad, sad state of affairs.
Anyway i've just switched to terran after having played zerg and protoss and so far i'm having a great time. I'm still a high diamond/low masters player. I guess i just haven't reached the 1-2% of players where terran are struggling (they are fine diamond and below and they are fine in Korea, the only place they apparently struggle is in high masters and GM outside of Korea).
This issue has been massively overblown and that's why the balance discussion has gotten so muddied. If anything the focus should just be on changing things that make the game less interesting like fungal growth stopping units. Instead people just want to whinge about imbalance.
Wait, you replied to me but I don't know which of my statements you so vehemently disagree with. Want to clarify? Did you mean that it's fun for you to play TvZ? Do tell me more about your experiences climbing the ladder.
A combative forum poster who assumes every quote is a vehement disagreement, replying to a hypocritical post about how Terran balance is overblown while overblowing Zerg and Protoss balance; especially by quoting "history". Urk, two wrong, blah blah.
Where have i overblown zerg and protoss balance? I don't think balance for any race is in a bad spot right now.
My post was mostly in reply to the Taeja/MVP comment which is more just a general sentiment i have been reading for months.
If anything zerg and protoss are the ones who have historically relied on a handful of players to hold the race up.
Add the fact that back then, even if Terran could be considered OP, the games were usually not as one-sided as they are now. Or do you deny that?
What i said there was 100% fact. Try this, go to the GSL page where they list the players who have come in the top 4 in the GSL. It's terran who has much more variety than the other 2 races. This isn't me saying they are overpowered, it just so happens that they are the players who performed well. I just don't understand where this argument came from that terran rely on only a few players to win (i.e taeja and MVP) when historically they are the race that has most bucked this trend.
I don't think the meta-game is one sided now at all so i'm not sure what exactly you're getting at. Terran is performing worse against zerg overall but there has been plenty of competitive games just as there was when terran was winning. I don't think balance is bad now at all. If anything the big issue is more the way certain matchups play out (namely PvZ) and certain units making the meta game a little bit stale.
Do you honestly not see that Zergs overwhelming crush Terrans (when they win) almost all the time? I'm talking about how each individual games play out - it wasn't as one sided as it is currently.
And what people say about Taeja and MVP also seem to be factual.
/edit
I'm sure you'll be watching some tourneys, maybe dreamhack that is playing right now. Keep an eye on ZvTs and how things play out.. then again, foreign Zergs beating korean Terrans shouldn't be treated as an indication of balance. But whatever, let's see how it goes.
Well yes i disagree with that premise and it's almost impossible to prove either way without citing specific examples. The Taeja/MVP stuff is not factual, you just ignored what i said regarding it. It especially makes no sense in light of what is happening in the GSL this season.
I think it's a silly point anyway. Terran also seem to crush protoss whenever they win (have you been watching code A?). That tends to be the nature of SC2, things tend to snowball and it ends up with one side getting crushed. This isn't really exclusive to one matchup.
Again though the issue shouldn't be so much about balance but rather the effect that the infestor has on the matchup and on SC2 in general and how that can be fixed (the raven buff is no the answer imo).
Edit:Can't watch the tournaments on now unfortunately. I'm on night duty at the hospital at 2 in the morning lol. Shame as i was looking forward to it.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b85/cool_dude100/popcorn.gif)
!
.
Dark Archon
