|
Northern Ireland26924 Posts
Maybe that specific application of nydus tech is a bit inefficient, but I really do feel lategame nydus useage is a thusfar unexplored option for Zergs. They haven't really had to explore much in the lategame with the refinement of BL/Iinfestor lategame in PvZ, but there's still scope for them to try things.
|
On November 24 2012 10:27 Anomi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 10:19 HappyTimePANDA wrote:
So they want to make sentry immortal pushes even stronger? I don't think this is the way to fix the issues. This will just add new ones If thats the case they just nerf protoss, Its one problem at the time. The immortal all in and the infesters are 2 different problems. You really think the solution is to solve a problem with another problem?. The problem we have today is because they fixed a issue zerg hade with protoss death ball. The change was not even intended to effect TvZ. Is seems the change they made was to drastic and hade effects that was not intended. I don’t believe it was intended to strengthen the late game aspect of broodlords. Infesters need a balance change and if that change end up making other aspect of the game where balance is a issue more visible isn’t that a good thing??
but the problem with the infestor is late game not mid. The immortal sentry push is already balanced, its hard to hold. With infestor not working at all on sentries then it will be even stronger. They need to find a solution that affects late game infestor only, or if they go this route zerg needs a boost to mid somewhere else.
|
This balance map is not very useful. There are no zergs wanting to try LOL every time I join its Protoss or Terran. Zergs don't want to play a version where they are weaker.
|
On November 24 2012 14:40 HappyTimePANDA wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 10:27 Anomi wrote:On November 24 2012 10:19 HappyTimePANDA wrote:
So they want to make sentry immortal pushes even stronger? I don't think this is the way to fix the issues. This will just add new ones If thats the case they just nerf protoss, Its one problem at the time. The immortal all in and the infesters are 2 different problems. You really think the solution is to solve a problem with another problem?. The problem we have today is because they fixed a issue zerg hade with protoss death ball. The change was not even intended to effect TvZ. Is seems the change they made was to drastic and hade effects that was not intended. I don’t believe it was intended to strengthen the late game aspect of broodlords. Infesters need a balance change and if that change end up making other aspect of the game where balance is a issue more visible isn’t that a good thing?? but the problem with the infestor is late game not mid. The immortal sentry push is already balanced, its hard to hold. With infestor not working at all on sentries then it will be even stronger. They need to find a solution that affects late game infestor only, or if they go this route zerg needs a boost to mid somewhere else.
Immortal/sentry hits before infestors pop up.
|
On November 24 2012 14:30 Wombat_NI wrote:
Maybe that specific application of nydus tech is a bit inefficient, but I really do feel lategame nydus useage is a thusfar unexplored option for Zergs. They haven't really had to explore much in the lategame with the refinement of BL/Iinfestor lategame in PvZ, but there's still scope for them to try things.
Nydus tech main weakness is that it unloads units one by one and there is a very short delay between unloading.
Also,it is gas intensive and the worm is easily killed.
Better off getting drops which is way better.
Only person i have seen to do infestor drops in the lategame consistently and also do nydus worm play(all-in or mid-game timing) in ZvP is Life.
|
On November 24 2012 14:45 Scila wrote:
This balance map is not very useful. There are no zergs wanting to try LOL every time I join its Protoss or Terran. Zergs don't want to play a version where they are weaker.
This. I think Zergs have gotten too comfortable with their advantages. As a Terran for the last many seasons, I think I've come to appreciate the pain. The pendulum swings back and forth, and for Zerg it has swung heavily in its favor. Time to come back to normality.
|
On November 24 2012 13:56 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 13:48 Twilight Sparkle wrote:On November 24 2012 13:39 Whitewing wrote:On November 24 2012 13:20 orBitual wrote:On November 24 2012 12:35 Whitewing wrote:On November 24 2012 11:11 zmansman17 wrote:On November 24 2012 10:26 Twilight Sparkle wrote:On November 24 2012 10:13 Survivor61316 wrote:On November 24 2012 09:55 Twilight Sparkle wrote:On November 24 2012 09:37 Survivor61316 wrote:
[quote]
How about instead of putting in that many spore crawlers (even though you wouldnt need that many), you keep 4 corruptors or mutas back to defend against drops? With just 4 of either you can kill the warp prism before it warps in any units as long as you get your first shot off before the wp is halfway through transitioning to phase mode. Even if it does drop/warp in units, an infestor to lock down zealots and an overseer to spot dts plus a few roaches can clean it up. There is no reason you need to have fungal lock down a wp to be able to destroy it, especially if you use mutas, which are faster than a wp and can shoot on the move.. You mean 4 corruptors or mutas at each base, or just 4 of them on the map? Cos the former is not exactly efficient, and the latter won't really work. They're fast, but not that fast. Why would you need 4 at each base? The natural and main, and often 3rd (daybreak, ohana) are so close together you only need one defense force for both of them. Your main army will be near your most heavily saturated base, so that ones already covered. As long as your overlord/seer coverage gives you a few seconds advance warning that a drop is imminent, it should be fairly straightforward and easy to deflect/destroy wp harass. Actually you could be right on that. I think it's a bit map dependent. On November 24 2012 10:16 Anomi wrote:
The main point is that zerg won’t be able to invest all there supply in an immobile army. If u go 200/200 supply infester broodlord only you won’t be able to hold warp prism. What this means that you shouldn’t go 200/200 with brords and infesters and expect to hold harass effectively. Maybe it’s time to invest some of the resources to do your owns harassing or having a small supply of a mobile army to defend drops. Maybe we wills se the uses of latge game nydysworms to defend bases.
The important thing is that the metagame needs to be changed. So it’s not about how the zerg gets a nerf so there borodlord infester combo can still be applied as it is right now . It’s a nerf that makes that composition not the most optimal one despite your opponents composition.
People have been talking about defensive nyduses for a long time now, and the problem with them is exactly the same as it's always been. They're way too fragile and the unload speed is so slow that you'll actually get there faster by walking unless your army is on the opposite side of the map. And broodlord-corruptor-infestor is still going to be the only strategy Zerg use late game. It'll be weaker, yes, but every Zerg lategame composition relies on infestors, so nerfing infestors affects them all equally. In fact, broodlord-corruptor is probably the least affected by this change. Not at all. Defensive nyduses are great. They only haven't been used because Zerg hasn't had to use them. Now, Zerg will have to finally work harder to deal with the new patch. I've seen games (can't remember who was playing) where the zerg would put one nydus at each base and leave about 5-10 hydralisks and an infestor or two in the nydus for drop defense, and whenever a medivac showed up he popped out, fungaled the units and the hydras cleaned it up super easily. He was able to defend all of his bases with just these units, even defending a few at the same time by being quick about it. Oh, he was able to defend against a medivac with just a nydus at each base, 5-10 hydras, and an infestor or two? He was able to defend against many drops over a long course of time with a nydus at each base, 5-10 hydras and a couple of infestors. 100/100 for den, 150/150 for grooved spines and 150/200 for nydus network means you've set yourself back 400/450 before you've made a single nydus worm or hydralisk. Going by your minimum estimate of 5, the hydras cost an extra 500/250 and a few nydus worms, say 3, is another 300/300, for a total resource investment of 1200 minerals and 1000 gas. It's a terribly inefficient way of defending against drops that probably costs you more resources than it saves. Beats losing drones and hatcheries, opens nydus tech for multi-pronged aggression and unit retreats, and those units can be used in the army later if you need to. They're not great in a fight but they are pretty decent when protected by say.... broodlings. More importantly, it's a lot more supply efficient drop defense than keeping groups of infestors and lings at each base or a bunch of lings and some banes, and it's less costly in terms of resources than putting 4-5 spines and a couple spores at each base.
I completely agree with you, it's just a matter of Zergs actually having to do it. When a player doesn't need to do something to win, or when there are easier/ less APM or resource-focused alternatives, the player will exploit the easiest strategies first, before exploring the more taxing alternatives.
I believe that after these changes are made, Zerg players will have to be more creative with their play, which includes using the defensive nydus. This is a very powerful strategy and yet we hardly see it.
It's similar to a situation many months ago when Protoss players argued that making more than one warp prism was ridiculous. I argued at the time that there would be much greater harass potential with many warp prisms, but many players scoffed at the idea. Of course as we all know, eventually this idea became a viable strategy. As the game progresses, we will indeed see more creativity and innovation with defensive nyduses, no doubt about it.
I don't accept the Zerg player's argument because he includes the cost of hydras as part of the defense, as if this is not a tech that will be researched otherwise. Furthermore, even putting that aside, the drop defense need not include hydras. Perhaps it is just 1-3 infestors with fungal, and Queens (as well as the option to drop infested Terrans). And for the small price of a nydus network, the Zerg can transport itself all over the map (as if Zerg doesn't have enough mobility as it is).
Seems like a tiny price to pay for excellent defense, huge mobility and varied attack options...
|
On November 24 2012 12:33 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 10:13 Survivor61316 wrote:On November 24 2012 09:55 Twilight Sparkle wrote:On November 24 2012 09:37 Survivor61316 wrote:On November 24 2012 07:06 m0ck wrote:On November 24 2012 07:03 freetgy wrote:On November 24 2012 05:58 Ameisenmann wrote:On November 24 2012 05:15 shockaslim wrote:
Why don't zergs just invest in spore crawlers if they want to stop warp prism harrass in the late game? The bank in the late game is massive.....its not going to kill you. You really think you can just put spore crawlers everywhere to the point that there's no more spots to warp in stuff? I don't think so. well terran is investing in more than that to fend off muta harass, but saccingg 0.5-1k of your 5k banked to make your base Warpprism proof is too much? spores are already the cheapest building. Speed-prism survives flying over 3 spores. How many spores should be in each base? 10? 15? 20? How about instead of putting in that many spore crawlers (even though you wouldnt need that many), you keep 4 corruptors or mutas back to defend against drops? With just 4 of either you can kill the warp prism before it warps in any units as long as you get your first shot off before the wp is halfway through transitioning to phase mode. Even if it does drop/warp in units, an infestor to lock down zealots and an overseer to spot dts plus a few roaches can clean it up. There is no reason you need to have fungal lock down a wp to be able to destroy it, especially if you use mutas, which are faster than a wp and can shoot on the move.. You mean 4 corruptors or mutas at each base, or just 4 of them on the map? Cos the former is not exactly efficient, and the latter won't really work. They're fast, but not that fast. Why would you need 4 at each base? The natural and main, and often 3rd (daybreak, ohana) are so close together you only need one defense force for both of them. Your main army will be near your most heavily saturated base, so that ones already covered. As long as your overlord/seer coverage gives you a few seconds advance warning that a drop is imminent, it should be fairly straightforward and easy to deflect/destroy wp harass. If Jaedong can make literally one mutalisk in a ZvP for the sole purpose of killing observers, I think people can consider making 2-4 corrupters or mutalisks soley for warp prism defense. Terrans build 1-2 vikings all the time to defend against warp prisms, why shouldn't zerg do the same?
I'm not sure, but I think youre agreeing with me?? Cant tell if youre being sarcastic or not lol 
But yeah, terrans and protoss already have to invest a hardy amount of resources into defending against drops, its about time the zerg joined them in having to do so, instead of skating by in the power of one unit to do all the work for them. Its not that there aren't other counters to stopping drops, they've just been so unimaginative and lazy for so long, they don't want to have to put in the work and apm doing something else..
|
United States7483 Posts
On November 24 2012 14:11 orBitual wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 13:56 Whitewing wrote:On November 24 2012 13:48 Twilight Sparkle wrote:On November 24 2012 13:39 Whitewing wrote:On November 24 2012 13:20 orBitual wrote:On November 24 2012 12:35 Whitewing wrote:On November 24 2012 11:11 zmansman17 wrote:On November 24 2012 10:26 Twilight Sparkle wrote:On November 24 2012 10:13 Survivor61316 wrote:On November 24 2012 09:55 Twilight Sparkle wrote:
[quote]
You mean 4 corruptors or mutas at each base, or just 4 of them on the map? Cos the former is not exactly efficient, and the latter won't really work. They're fast, but not that fast. Why would you need 4 at each base? The natural and main, and often 3rd (daybreak, ohana) are so close together you only need one defense force for both of them. Your main army will be near your most heavily saturated base, so that ones already covered. As long as your overlord/seer coverage gives you a few seconds advance warning that a drop is imminent, it should be fairly straightforward and easy to deflect/destroy wp harass. Actually you could be right on that. I think it's a bit map dependent. On November 24 2012 10:16 Anomi wrote:
The main point is that zerg won’t be able to invest all there supply in an immobile army. If u go 200/200 supply infester broodlord only you won’t be able to hold warp prism. What this means that you shouldn’t go 200/200 with brords and infesters and expect to hold harass effectively. Maybe it’s time to invest some of the resources to do your owns harassing or having a small supply of a mobile army to defend drops. Maybe we wills se the uses of latge game nydysworms to defend bases.
The important thing is that the metagame needs to be changed. So it’s not about how the zerg gets a nerf so there borodlord infester combo can still be applied as it is right now . It’s a nerf that makes that composition not the most optimal one despite your opponents composition.
People have been talking about defensive nyduses for a long time now, and the problem with them is exactly the same as it's always been. They're way too fragile and the unload speed is so slow that you'll actually get there faster by walking unless your army is on the opposite side of the map. And broodlord-corruptor-infestor is still going to be the only strategy Zerg use late game. It'll be weaker, yes, but every Zerg lategame composition relies on infestors, so nerfing infestors affects them all equally. In fact, broodlord-corruptor is probably the least affected by this change. Not at all. Defensive nyduses are great. They only haven't been used because Zerg hasn't had to use them. Now, Zerg will have to finally work harder to deal with the new patch. I've seen games (can't remember who was playing) where the zerg would put one nydus at each base and leave about 5-10 hydralisks and an infestor or two in the nydus for drop defense, and whenever a medivac showed up he popped out, fungaled the units and the hydras cleaned it up super easily. He was able to defend all of his bases with just these units, even defending a few at the same time by being quick about it. Oh, he was able to defend against a medivac with just a nydus at each base, 5-10 hydras, and an infestor or two? He was able to defend against many drops over a long course of time with a nydus at each base, 5-10 hydras and a couple of infestors. 100/100 for den, 150/150 for grooved spines and 150/200 for nydus network means you've set yourself back 400/450 before you've made a single nydus worm or hydralisk. Going by your minimum estimate of 5, the hydras cost an extra 500/250 and a few nydus worms, say 3, is another 300/300, for a total resource investment of 1200 minerals and 1000 gas. It's a terribly inefficient way of defending against drops that probably costs you more resources than it saves. Beats losing drones and hatcheries, opens nydus tech for multi-pronged aggression and unit retreats, and those units can be used in the army later if you need to. They're not great in a fight but they are pretty decent when protected by say.... broodlings. More importantly, it's a lot more supply efficient drop defense than keeping groups of infestors and lings at each base or a bunch of lings and some banes, and it's less costly in terms of resources than putting 4-5 spines and a couple spores at each base. I guess if your plan for stopping a 200 mineral 2 supply warp prism is a 1400 mineral 1400+ gas investment, gl hf.
You completely miss the point. When you play zerg, cost efficiency doesn't matter much until late game: your econ is stronger than your opponents for most of the game. Once you have your late game uber army, your army is as cost efficient if not more cost efficient than your opponents, but you lose mobility. Drops become the premier way to combat you. Investing a bit into completely shutting down drops entirely and forcing your opponent to commit heavily to attack you at all. Your opponent becomes forced into over-investing in drops to even do a little damage, making it very costly to attack that way (you can always load more into the nydus worms too). He doesn't want to fight your army, and needs to drop to buy time. You've denied him that, he has no option for doing damage that's remotely efficient for him.
You don't have to think of cost in terms of pure cost to cost comparison. You can think of cost in terms of how your opponent is forced to respond. How does your opponent drop you when you can have a drop crushing force at any base nearly instantly? Why do you think protoss builds so many stalkers and research blink in PvT despite the fact that stalkers do absolute shit for damage and can't do anything at all to marines or marauders healed by medivacs? It's because the primary way terran can beat protoss is through abuse of mobility, so they invest in something to counter that, despite the fact that a 200/200 supply protoss army is probably stronger with other units in place of stalkers (more HT, more archons, more zealots, or pretty much anything else).
People think too much in terms of direct responses and not enough in terms of forces (refering to forcing a specific response or denying a response). One of the best reasons to open mutalisks is that it shuts drops down as long as the mutas are out, but most people concentrate too much on the harass potential and how much damage you do with them. Why is it, that in code S games when zergs go mutas, they do very little actual harassing and mostly just poke with them around the corners?
|
Also, they put put it on Antiga Shipyard, which is not a good map IMO, i'd be more inclined to play it if it was on a map where late game isn't discouraged.
|
United States7483 Posts
On November 24 2012 15:02 Survivor61316 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 12:33 Whitewing wrote:On November 24 2012 10:13 Survivor61316 wrote:On November 24 2012 09:55 Twilight Sparkle wrote:On November 24 2012 09:37 Survivor61316 wrote:On November 24 2012 07:06 m0ck wrote:On November 24 2012 07:03 freetgy wrote:On November 24 2012 05:58 Ameisenmann wrote:On November 24 2012 05:15 shockaslim wrote:
Why don't zergs just invest in spore crawlers if they want to stop warp prism harrass in the late game? The bank in the late game is massive.....its not going to kill you. You really think you can just put spore crawlers everywhere to the point that there's no more spots to warp in stuff? I don't think so. well terran is investing in more than that to fend off muta harass, but saccingg 0.5-1k of your 5k banked to make your base Warpprism proof is too much? spores are already the cheapest building. Speed-prism survives flying over 3 spores. How many spores should be in each base? 10? 15? 20? How about instead of putting in that many spore crawlers (even though you wouldnt need that many), you keep 4 corruptors or mutas back to defend against drops? With just 4 of either you can kill the warp prism before it warps in any units as long as you get your first shot off before the wp is halfway through transitioning to phase mode. Even if it does drop/warp in units, an infestor to lock down zealots and an overseer to spot dts plus a few roaches can clean it up. There is no reason you need to have fungal lock down a wp to be able to destroy it, especially if you use mutas, which are faster than a wp and can shoot on the move.. You mean 4 corruptors or mutas at each base, or just 4 of them on the map? Cos the former is not exactly efficient, and the latter won't really work. They're fast, but not that fast. Why would you need 4 at each base? The natural and main, and often 3rd (daybreak, ohana) are so close together you only need one defense force for both of them. Your main army will be near your most heavily saturated base, so that ones already covered. As long as your overlord/seer coverage gives you a few seconds advance warning that a drop is imminent, it should be fairly straightforward and easy to deflect/destroy wp harass. If Jaedong can make literally one mutalisk in a ZvP for the sole purpose of killing observers, I think people can consider making 2-4 corrupters or mutalisks soley for warp prism defense. Terrans build 1-2 vikings all the time to defend against warp prisms, why shouldn't zerg do the same? I'm not sure, but I think youre agreeing with me?? Cant tell if youre being sarcastic or not lol But yeah, terrans and protoss already have to invest a hardy amount of resources into defending against drops, its about time the zerg joined them in having to do so, instead of skating by in the power of one unit to do all the work for them. Its not that there aren't other counters to stopping drops, they've just been so unimaginative and lazy for so long, they don't want to have to put in the work and apm doing something else..
I was agreeing with you.
|
On November 24 2012 14:47 plogamer wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 14:40 HappyTimePANDA wrote:On November 24 2012 10:27 Anomi wrote:On November 24 2012 10:19 HappyTimePANDA wrote:
So they want to make sentry immortal pushes even stronger? I don't think this is the way to fix the issues. This will just add new ones If thats the case they just nerf protoss, Its one problem at the time. The immortal all in and the infesters are 2 different problems. You really think the solution is to solve a problem with another problem?. The problem we have today is because they fixed a issue zerg hade with protoss death ball. The change was not even intended to effect TvZ. Is seems the change they made was to drastic and hade effects that was not intended. I don’t believe it was intended to strengthen the late game aspect of broodlords. Infesters need a balance change and if that change end up making other aspect of the game where balance is a issue more visible isn’t that a good thing?? but the problem with the infestor is late game not mid. The immortal sentry push is already balanced, its hard to hold. With infestor not working at all on sentries then it will be even stronger. They need to find a solution that affects late game infestor only, or if they go this route zerg needs a boost to mid somewhere else. Immortal/sentry hits before infestors pop up.
This so much ^^
This change does not affect the sentry/immortal timing push, and seriously if a zerg cant intercept and deflect a late game drop by getting advance notice of its incoming from good overlord spread, and then using a few of its shit ton of corruptors positioned in a defensive role to kill it before units can warp in without infestors rooting the wp, then they are frankly unimaginative and lazy..
|
On November 24 2012 14:45 Scila wrote:
This balance map is not very useful. There are no zergs wanting to try LOL every time I join its Protoss or Terran. Zergs don't want to play a version where they are weaker.
Who does?
|
On November 24 2012 15:03 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 14:11 orBitual wrote:On November 24 2012 13:56 Whitewing wrote:On November 24 2012 13:48 Twilight Sparkle wrote:On November 24 2012 13:39 Whitewing wrote:On November 24 2012 13:20 orBitual wrote:On November 24 2012 12:35 Whitewing wrote:On November 24 2012 11:11 zmansman17 wrote:On November 24 2012 10:26 Twilight Sparkle wrote:On November 24 2012 10:13 Survivor61316 wrote:
[quote]
Why would you need 4 at each base? The natural and main, and often 3rd (daybreak, ohana) are so close together you only need one defense force for both of them. Your main army will be near your most heavily saturated base, so that ones already covered. As long as your overlord/seer coverage gives you a few seconds advance warning that a drop is imminent, it should be fairly straightforward and easy to deflect/destroy wp harass. Actually you could be right on that. I think it's a bit map dependent. On November 24 2012 10:16 Anomi wrote:
The main point is that zerg won’t be able to invest all there supply in an immobile army. If u go 200/200 supply infester broodlord only you won’t be able to hold warp prism. What this means that you shouldn’t go 200/200 with brords and infesters and expect to hold harass effectively. Maybe it’s time to invest some of the resources to do your owns harassing or having a small supply of a mobile army to defend drops. Maybe we wills se the uses of latge game nydysworms to defend bases.
The important thing is that the metagame needs to be changed. So it’s not about how the zerg gets a nerf so there borodlord infester combo can still be applied as it is right now . It’s a nerf that makes that composition not the most optimal one despite your opponents composition.
People have been talking about defensive nyduses for a long time now, and the problem with them is exactly the same as it's always been. They're way too fragile and the unload speed is so slow that you'll actually get there faster by walking unless your army is on the opposite side of the map. And broodlord-corruptor-infestor is still going to be the only strategy Zerg use late game. It'll be weaker, yes, but every Zerg lategame composition relies on infestors, so nerfing infestors affects them all equally. In fact, broodlord-corruptor is probably the least affected by this change. Not at all. Defensive nyduses are great. They only haven't been used because Zerg hasn't had to use them. Now, Zerg will have to finally work harder to deal with the new patch. I've seen games (can't remember who was playing) where the zerg would put one nydus at each base and leave about 5-10 hydralisks and an infestor or two in the nydus for drop defense, and whenever a medivac showed up he popped out, fungaled the units and the hydras cleaned it up super easily. He was able to defend all of his bases with just these units, even defending a few at the same time by being quick about it. Oh, he was able to defend against a medivac with just a nydus at each base, 5-10 hydras, and an infestor or two? He was able to defend against many drops over a long course of time with a nydus at each base, 5-10 hydras and a couple of infestors. 100/100 for den, 150/150 for grooved spines and 150/200 for nydus network means you've set yourself back 400/450 before you've made a single nydus worm or hydralisk. Going by your minimum estimate of 5, the hydras cost an extra 500/250 and a few nydus worms, say 3, is another 300/300, for a total resource investment of 1200 minerals and 1000 gas. It's a terribly inefficient way of defending against drops that probably costs you more resources than it saves. Beats losing drones and hatcheries, opens nydus tech for multi-pronged aggression and unit retreats, and those units can be used in the army later if you need to. They're not great in a fight but they are pretty decent when protected by say.... broodlings. More importantly, it's a lot more supply efficient drop defense than keeping groups of infestors and lings at each base or a bunch of lings and some banes, and it's less costly in terms of resources than putting 4-5 spines and a couple spores at each base. I guess if your plan for stopping a 200 mineral 2 supply warp prism is a 1400 mineral 1400+ gas investment, gl hf. You completely miss the point. When you play zerg, cost efficiency doesn't matter much until late game: your econ is stronger than your opponents for most of the game. Once you have your late game uber army, your army is as cost efficient if not more cost efficient than your opponents, but you lose mobility. Drops become the premier way to combat you. Investing a bit into completely shutting down drops entirely and forcing your opponent to commit heavily to attack you at all. Your opponent becomes forced into over-investing in drops to even do a little damage, making it very costly to attack that way (you can always load more into the nydus worms too). He doesn't want to fight your army, and needs to drop to buy time. You've denied him that, he has no option for doing damage that's remotely efficient for him. You don't have to think of cost in terms of pure cost to cost comparison. You can think of cost in terms of how your opponent is forced to respond. How does your opponent drop you when you can have a drop crushing force at any base nearly instantly? Why do you think protoss builds so many stalkers and research blink in PvT despite the fact that stalkers do absolute shit for damage and can't do anything at all to marines or marauders healed by medivacs? It's because the primary way terran can beat protoss is through abuse of mobility, so they invest in something to counter that, despite the fact that a 200/200 supply protoss army is probably stronger with other units in place of stalkers (more HT, more archons, more zealots, or pretty much anything else). People think too much in terms of direct responses and not enough in terms of forces (refering to forcing a specific response or denying a response). One of the best reasons to open mutalisks is that it shuts drops down as long as the mutas are out, but most people concentrate too much on the harass potential and how much damage you do with them. Why is it, that in code S games when zergs go mutas, they do very little actual harassing and mostly just poke with them around the corners?
You could do any number of absurd things to completely shut down drops. There is not enough space here to discuss all the hypothetical strategic scenarios the game could be in, and yours is so extreme that a cursory glance shows that not only has the Protoss's 'force' via warp prism been successful, it's been more successful than if he had actually killed a hatchery, or two hatcheries, or three hatcheries, a lair, hive, infestation pit, and greater spire, at least economically.
|
This takes care of some extent the BL + infestor problem, but there is still a problem with BLs. I say make archons able to "levitate" over melee units like zerglings + broodling similar to what colossus do (obviously not up cliffs though). This will make the snipping of BLs possible without the broodlings locking units in place, while still give zerg the possibility of sniping the archon's. This will make no difference to the effectiveness of the archon toilet, and might lead to a place where it is no longer needed.
|
On November 24 2012 14:56 zmansman17 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 13:56 Whitewing wrote:On November 24 2012 13:48 Twilight Sparkle wrote:On November 24 2012 13:39 Whitewing wrote:On November 24 2012 13:20 orBitual wrote:On November 24 2012 12:35 Whitewing wrote:On November 24 2012 11:11 zmansman17 wrote:On November 24 2012 10:26 Twilight Sparkle wrote:On November 24 2012 10:13 Survivor61316 wrote:On November 24 2012 09:55 Twilight Sparkle wrote:
[quote]
You mean 4 corruptors or mutas at each base, or just 4 of them on the map? Cos the former is not exactly efficient, and the latter won't really work. They're fast, but not that fast. Why would you need 4 at each base? The natural and main, and often 3rd (daybreak, ohana) are so close together you only need one defense force for both of them. Your main army will be near your most heavily saturated base, so that ones already covered. As long as your overlord/seer coverage gives you a few seconds advance warning that a drop is imminent, it should be fairly straightforward and easy to deflect/destroy wp harass. Actually you could be right on that. I think it's a bit map dependent. On November 24 2012 10:16 Anomi wrote:
The main point is that zerg won’t be able to invest all there supply in an immobile army. If u go 200/200 supply infester broodlord only you won’t be able to hold warp prism. What this means that you shouldn’t go 200/200 with brords and infesters and expect to hold harass effectively. Maybe it’s time to invest some of the resources to do your owns harassing or having a small supply of a mobile army to defend drops. Maybe we wills se the uses of latge game nydysworms to defend bases.
The important thing is that the metagame needs to be changed. So it’s not about how the zerg gets a nerf so there borodlord infester combo can still be applied as it is right now . It’s a nerf that makes that composition not the most optimal one despite your opponents composition.
People have been talking about defensive nyduses for a long time now, and the problem with them is exactly the same as it's always been. They're way too fragile and the unload speed is so slow that you'll actually get there faster by walking unless your army is on the opposite side of the map. And broodlord-corruptor-infestor is still going to be the only strategy Zerg use late game. It'll be weaker, yes, but every Zerg lategame composition relies on infestors, so nerfing infestors affects them all equally. In fact, broodlord-corruptor is probably the least affected by this change. Not at all. Defensive nyduses are great. They only haven't been used because Zerg hasn't had to use them. Now, Zerg will have to finally work harder to deal with the new patch. I've seen games (can't remember who was playing) where the zerg would put one nydus at each base and leave about 5-10 hydralisks and an infestor or two in the nydus for drop defense, and whenever a medivac showed up he popped out, fungaled the units and the hydras cleaned it up super easily. He was able to defend all of his bases with just these units, even defending a few at the same time by being quick about it. Oh, he was able to defend against a medivac with just a nydus at each base, 5-10 hydras, and an infestor or two? He was able to defend against many drops over a long course of time with a nydus at each base, 5-10 hydras and a couple of infestors. 100/100 for den, 150/150 for grooved spines and 150/200 for nydus network means you've set yourself back 400/450 before you've made a single nydus worm or hydralisk. Going by your minimum estimate of 5, the hydras cost an extra 500/250 and a few nydus worms, say 3, is another 300/300, for a total resource investment of 1200 minerals and 1000 gas. It's a terribly inefficient way of defending against drops that probably costs you more resources than it saves. Beats losing drones and hatcheries, opens nydus tech for multi-pronged aggression and unit retreats, and those units can be used in the army later if you need to. They're not great in a fight but they are pretty decent when protected by say.... broodlings. More importantly, it's a lot more supply efficient drop defense than keeping groups of infestors and lings at each base or a bunch of lings and some banes, and it's less costly in terms of resources than putting 4-5 spines and a couple spores at each base. I completely agree with you, it's just a matter of Zergs actually having to do it. When a player doesn't need to do something to win, or when there are easier/ less APM or resource-focused alternatives, the player will exploit the easiest strategies first, before exploring the more taxing alternatives. I believe that after these changes are made, Zerg players will have to be more creative with their play, which includes using the defensive nydus. This is a very powerful strategy and yet we hardly see it. It's similar to a situation many months ago when Protoss players argued that making more than one warp prism was ridiculous. I argued at the time that there would be much greater harass potential with many warp prisms, but many players scoffed at the idea. Of course as we all know, eventually this idea became a viable strategy. As the game progresses, we will indeed see more creativity and innovation with defensive nyduses, no doubt about it. I don't accept the Zerg player's argument because he includes the cost of hydras as part of the defense, as if this is not a tech that will be researched otherwise. Furthermore, even putting that aside, the drop defense need not include hydras. Perhaps it is just 1-3 infestors with fungal, and Queens (as well as the option to drop infested Terrans). And for the small price of a nydus network, the Zerg can transport itself all over the map (as if Zerg doesn't have enough mobility as it is). Seems like a tiny price to pay for excellent defense, huge mobility and varied attack options...
You realize the period where Warp Prism got buffed is where people actually started to use them more?
Turrets absolutely decimated Warp Prism due to their measly HP and marines killed them so fast.
Before that buff literally no one was using Warp Prism except for HerO and Whitera.
After the buff, they had a +60 shield.
That was damn huge and obviously gave more incentive for Protoss players to go for WP play.
After that, WP play become standard for ZvP and PvT mid-late game.
They should lowered the Nydus Canal and Worm cost.
Should give people more incentive to do defensive nydus play.
|
On November 24 2012 15:08 Survivor61316 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 14:47 plogamer wrote:On November 24 2012 14:40 HappyTimePANDA wrote:On November 24 2012 10:27 Anomi wrote:On November 24 2012 10:19 HappyTimePANDA wrote:
So they want to make sentry immortal pushes even stronger? I don't think this is the way to fix the issues. This will just add new ones If thats the case they just nerf protoss, Its one problem at the time. The immortal all in and the infesters are 2 different problems. You really think the solution is to solve a problem with another problem?. The problem we have today is because they fixed a issue zerg hade with protoss death ball. The change was not even intended to effect TvZ. Is seems the change they made was to drastic and hade effects that was not intended. I don’t believe it was intended to strengthen the late game aspect of broodlords. Infesters need a balance change and if that change end up making other aspect of the game where balance is a issue more visible isn’t that a good thing?? but the problem with the infestor is late game not mid. The immortal sentry push is already balanced, its hard to hold. With infestor not working at all on sentries then it will be even stronger. They need to find a solution that affects late game infestor only, or if they go this route zerg needs a boost to mid somewhere else. Immortal/sentry hits before infestors pop up. This so much ^^ This change does not affect the sentry/immortal timing push, and seriously if a zerg cant intercept and deflect a late game drop by getting advance notice of its incoming from good overlord spread, and then using a few of its shit ton of corruptors positioned in a defensive role to kill it before units can warp in without infestors rooting the wp, then they are frankly unimaginative and lazy..
New?
Ever heard of 3-base pushes that involves sentry-immortal-collosus?
Saying that it won't affect the sentry/immortal timing push means you clearly do not have extensive knowledge of ZvP.
|
On November 24 2012 15:08 Survivor61316 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 14:47 plogamer wrote:On November 24 2012 14:40 HappyTimePANDA wrote:On November 24 2012 10:27 Anomi wrote:On November 24 2012 10:19 HappyTimePANDA wrote:
So they want to make sentry immortal pushes even stronger? I don't think this is the way to fix the issues. This will just add new ones If thats the case they just nerf protoss, Its one problem at the time. The immortal all in and the infesters are 2 different problems. You really think the solution is to solve a problem with another problem?. The problem we have today is because they fixed a issue zerg hade with protoss death ball. The change was not even intended to effect TvZ. Is seems the change they made was to drastic and hade effects that was not intended. I don’t believe it was intended to strengthen the late game aspect of broodlords. Infesters need a balance change and if that change end up making other aspect of the game where balance is a issue more visible isn’t that a good thing?? but the problem with the infestor is late game not mid. The immortal sentry push is already balanced, its hard to hold. With infestor not working at all on sentries then it will be even stronger. They need to find a solution that affects late game infestor only, or if they go this route zerg needs a boost to mid somewhere else. Immortal/sentry hits before infestors pop up. This so much ^^ This change does not affect the sentry/immortal timing push, and seriously if a zerg cant intercept and deflect a late game drop by getting advance notice of its incoming from good overlord spread, and then using a few of its shit ton of corruptors positioned in a defensive role to kill it before units can warp in without infestors rooting the wp, then they are frankly unimaginative and lazy..
immortal sentry is forced to attack before infestors can come out because infestors shut it down. without that threat it can sit in the center of the map building units/mana essentially until max and theres nothing zerg can really do about it. once theres 4-5 immortals and infinite forcefield roach ling is literally useless. on a map where you can threaten while controlling counter attacks delayed sentry immortal allins will be essentially invincible if the fungal change goes through.
|
My only worry would be that the HSM change is a little too much, but I will have to test it out and see!
|
A MUCH better idea is to halve fungal duration on psionic units rather than make them immune to it.
That way they use their mind over matter shit to break free of the fungus, rather than auto-magically dodge it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
