| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
CuSToM
United States1478 Posts
On December 05 2012 13:43 Otsegoflesh wrote: obviously terran was op during wings of liberty, zerg is op during heart of the swarm, and protoss will be op during legacy of the void. but I don't want to wait that long >  | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25405 Posts
Would be terrible, terrible design to approach the game like that. | ||
|
Zombo Joe
Canada850 Posts
| ||
|
Scrandom
Canada2819 Posts
| ||
|
Shady Sands
United States4021 Posts
| ||
|
Coffeeling
Finland250 Posts
On December 05 2012 10:49 FeyverN wrote: Probably, but what people aren't realizing is that Zerg is mechanically broken. There is nothing you can do about it unless you redesign the whole SC2 game (not gonna happen, not in a million expansions!). The fact of the matter is that Zerg sort of gets an unfair advantage at the start of the game, where you HAVE to do damage against them or else you will lose. I'm not sure if that contributes to fundamentals of the game or if it is simply poor balance design. Regardless, the whole "Zerg late game imba" thing? Yeah, it's true. I agree with you guys. It is unfair that Terran has to get 10 ravens to seeker missile my brood lords just to watch me remax on Ultralisks and /lol as I a move past their Thors, marines, auto-turrets whatever. Granted in ZvP, that matchup is naturally imbalanced. I don't think Protoss will ever be able to beat Zerg in the late game. As for Tempests (I know i'm trailing off subject here), they are planned to get nerfed so Zerg can have an easier time in the late game. I don't know how I got into a serious discussion in a joke thread, but there ya go. The "go broken" potential of the Zerg economy can possibly be fine given certain preconditions. But to be fine it needs to be a reward for good play in the way countering blings with godlike Marine splits is. The potential has to be a reward. The two ways of setting the Zerg economy back from brokenness to fairness are actual damage and forcing the Zerg player to invest larvae into army and static defenses. In the past, fending off even light pressure with Zerg required some larvae. So the production capability got split between army and econ and tech, just like it is with Terran. If Zerg managed to do something great and utterly murder a push with light resource use they could go nuts in econ and that's okay in my book. It's an interesting nuance in it's own right and most of the time fair games got played. This is assuming Zerg units are fair and they don't have an overbearing doom comp accessible very fast. But nowadays they don't need to invest those larvae so the only other way to limit the economy is direct damage, they can just drone and tech like mad and instead of 14 minute risky hive or 17 minute safe, they get 12 minute safe with a shitton of Infestors. And that is horrible. The fundamental balancing mechanism of the Zerg is broken, and Terran also has much less time to set up their own production infrastructure that in the late game is slower, clunkier and more expensive. That is the fundamental problem here. Infestor design being retarded (big AoE damaging root is fine how? Esp. when same unit is capable of huge burst damage on the rooted units?) is an issue. As is the late game Zerg comp consisting basically 100% of threats, ie. stuff that threatens to win the game and that the opponent is scared of no matter what, made off the sleek and flexible production infrastructure Zerg has. Against it Terran has, what, narrow anti-one-unit counters made off their clunky and expensive production that they nowadays don't even have time to properly set up? Which they are needed to set up while harassing like madmen to the point of all-inning because nothing else phases the Zerg to invest larvae anymore? Long story short, it's a clusterfuck that needs a LOT of work to fix. Work that Blizzard isn't willing to do. Bandaids will be applied, the fundamental issues left unaddressed, and the game will continue to feel a bit odd even if it ends up being ostensibly balanced in HotS, which I very much doubt. Protoss being based off stupid gimmicks that break the fundamentals of the genre doesn't help. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25405 Posts
'Patchzergs' styles are a manifestation of design problems, but that have merely been put into bigger focus with the Queen patch. Hell, if you want to address that, reverting the Queen patch would do a better job. It mightn't solve everything, but I mean would Zerg suffer to anywhere near the same degree if it was reverted, than Terrans have suffered since it was added? | ||
|
m0ck
4194 Posts
On December 05 2012 19:44 Wombat_NI wrote: 100% agreed. 'Patchzergs' styles are a manifestation of design problems, but that have merely been put into bigger focus with the Queen patch. Hell, if you want to address that, reverting the Queen patch would do a better job. It mightn't solve everything, but I mean would Zerg suffer to anywhere near the same degree if it was reverted, than Terrans have suffered since it was added? Yes, let's go back to coin-flip bling-wars and roach-busts against hellion and quick 3CCs. So great. Wombat, you have to get a grip. If one zerg is imbalanced, all zergs are imbalanced, and the zerg players you like who aren't winning simply are not good enough. DRG plays infestor and BL too, he just doesn't win with it. If Scarlett & Vortix are patch-zergs, Life, Sniper & Symbol are patch-zergs. That is the biggest problem of this article, the implication of "Korea = master race" and that if foreign players are winning, there's a patch-problem. Never mind that the graphs are meaningless as absolutes (what is the relation between the number of matches played and matches won?). Never mind that the foreign zerg-players were always better than the foreign terrans, even when the patch-terrans were running rampant. Never mind that to this day, zerg is still the least represented race in GSL overall. But then, there is no reason to confront those issues. After all, it's all irony anyways. It's not just balance-whine, it's cowardly balance-whine. | ||
|
DidYuhim
Ukraine1905 Posts
On December 05 2012 13:43 Otsegoflesh wrote: obviously terran was op during wings of liberty, zerg is op during heart of the swarm, and protoss will be op during legacy of the void. This post contains so much agony and rage, I can't even explain. | ||
|
Goshdarnit
United States540 Posts
| ||
|
plogamer
Canada3132 Posts
On December 05 2012 20:01 m0ck wrote: Yes, let's go back to coin-flip bling-wars and roach-busts against hellion and quick 3CCs. So great. Wombat, you have to get a grip. If one zerg is imbalanced, all zergs are imbalanced, and the zerg players you like who aren't winning simply are not good enough. DRG plays infestor and BL too, he just doesn't win with it. If Scarlett & Vortix are patch-zergs, Life, Sniper & Symbol are patch-zergs. That is the biggest problem of this article, the implication of "Korea = master race" and that if foreign players are winning, there's a patch-problem. Never mind that the graphs are meaningless as absolutes (what is the relation between the number of matches played and matches won?). Never mind that the foreign zerg-players were always better than the foreign terrans, even when the patch-terrans were running rampant. Never mind that to this day, zerg is still the least represented race in GSL overall. But then, there is no reason to confront those issues. After all, it's all irony anyways. It's not just balance-whine, it's cowardly balance-whine. Zerg foreigners were always better? Huk, Thorzain, White Ra, without even thinking about it, off the top of my head. If zerg foreigners have improved, all foreigners should improve. Unless they are in completely different teams, drink different water, or something else that would magically make only the zergs better. If you cannot acknowledge the fact that Koreans are better at SC2 (mainly due to Broodwar's effect of progaming in the Korean scene), then you are ignorant of the fact that Korean zergs are still beating foreign zergs. While non-zerg Koreans magically cannot beat zergs, foreign or Korean. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On December 05 2012 20:08 plogamer wrote: Zerg foreigners were always better? Huk, Thorzain, White Ra, without even thinking about it, off the top of my head. If zerg foreigners have improved, all foreigners should improve. Unless they are in completely different teams, drink different water, or something else that would magically make only the zergs better. If you cannot acknowledge the fact that Koreans are better at SC2 (mainly due to Broodwar's effect of progaming in the Korean scene), then you are ignorant of the fact that Korean zergs are still beating foreign zergs. While non-zerg Koreans magically cannot beat zergs, foreign or Korean. Oh come on. Could we stop with the stupid whining? -) Just look at the first page: foreign Protoss are doing very well as vs Koreans as well. -) and I didn't know that the definition of "cannot beat" was "52% winrate for Protoss in PvZ, 39% for Terran in TvZ". Sorry, but Protoss is just winning as much as Zerg these days and it's basically only TvZ that has winrate problems. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25405 Posts
On December 05 2012 20:01 m0ck wrote: Yes, let's go back to coin-flip bling-wars and roach-busts against hellion and quick 3CCs. So great. Wombat, you have to get a grip. If one zerg is imbalanced, all zergs are imbalanced, and the zerg players you like who aren't winning simply are not good enough. DRG plays infestor and BL too, he just doesn't win with it. If Scarlett & Vortix are patch-zergs, Life, Sniper & Symbol are patch-zergs. That is the biggest problem of this article, the implication of "Korea = master race" and that if foreign players are winning, there's a patch-problem. Never mind that the graphs are meaningless as absolutes (what is the relation between the number of matches played and matches won?). Never mind that the foreign zerg-players were always better than the foreign terrans, even when the patch-terrans were running rampant. Never mind that to this day, zerg is still the least represented race in GSL overall. But then, there is no reason to confront those issues. After all, it's all irony anyways. It's not just balance-whine, it's cowardly balance-whine. Not at all, I have always loved DRG because he's a monster. However his skillset isn't as rewarded as other Zergs are, his Mutalisk micro and mechanical chops are not AS rewarded relative to other Zergs. Leenock has always been a monster too. How come two Code S level Zergs, who were competitive even in the days where Zerg apparently sucked, are not DOMINATING with those skills, now? Scarlett isn't a fair example either, as tbh she's very good mechanically, or at least her creep spread would attest to that. I believe she'd be, if not as good as she is now relative to Koreans, still a very good player. A player this fast, this clean, should be unbeatable if the Zerg patches scaled properly upwards. Why isn't he? | ||
|
-NegativeZero-
United States2141 Posts
On December 05 2012 20:16 Big J wrote: Oh come on. Could we stop with the stupid whining? -) Just look at the first page: foreign Protoss are doing very well as vs Koreans as well. -) and I didn't know that the definition of "cannot beat" was "52% winrate for Protoss in PvZ, 39% for Terran in TvZ". Sorry, but Protoss is just winning as much as Zerg these days and it's basically only TvZ that has winrate problems. You can't just look at straight win-rates, it's important to consider how they are winning. PvZ is "balanced" because P has the advantage in the early/mid game with various all-ins (especially immortal/sentry) while Z has the advantage in the late game. Obviously this is bad game design, and both problems should be fixed. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On December 05 2012 20:20 -NegativeZero- wrote: You can't just look at straight win-rates, it's important to consider how they are winning. PvZ is "balanced" because P has the advantage in the early/mid game with various all-ins (especially immortal/sentry) while Z has the advantage in the late game. Obviously this is bad game design, and both problems should be fixed. Completly agree. So can we please stop saying that "Korean non-zergs can't win against Zerg"? Because obviously they (at least the Protoss), win a lot. | ||
|
m0ck
4194 Posts
On December 05 2012 20:08 plogamer wrote: Zerg foreigners were always better? Huk, Thorzain, White Ra, without even thinking about it, off the top of my head. If zerg foreigners have improved, all foreigners should improve. Unless they are in completely different teams, drink different water, or something else that would magically make only the zergs better. If you cannot acknowledge the fact that Koreans are better at SC2 (mainly due to Broodwar's effect of progaming in the Korean scene), then you are ignorant of the fact that Korean zergs are still beating foreign zergs. While non-zerg Koreans magically cannot beat zergs, foreign or Korean. Obviously there are more Korean players at the top level. There are more professional players. And there are more Korean players with the mechanics necessary to play at the top level. I never claimed otherwise. It is also true that early in the life of the game, naniwa, thorzain and white-ra had a bigger impact than today. What is characteristic of those players? They are all below or just above ~200 APM players. What has hurt them more than anything is the focus on late-game, which is more APM intensive. They can't keep up. Stephano, Nerchio & Vortix? All 300+ APM. But, when Korean zergs where getting hammered, the foreign zergs still did comparatively better. As for foreign zergs beating Korean zergs: Snute beat Life just this weekend, Stephano beat Life and DRG. Vortix beat revival 3-0 last weekend. Foreign zergs have no problem beating Korean zergs. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25405 Posts
On December 05 2012 20:20 -NegativeZero- wrote: You can't just look at straight win-rates, it's important to consider how they are winning. PvZ is "balanced" because P has the advantage in the early/mid game with various all-ins (especially immortal/sentry) while Z has the advantage in the late game. Obviously this is bad game design, and both problems should be fixed. That's bad design in that specific matchup PvT on the other hand has that asymmetric balance, but imo is actually a well-designed, functioning matchup for a variety of factors. | ||
|
InVerno
258 Posts
On December 05 2012 20:16 Big J wrote: Oh come on. Could we stop with the stupid whining? -) Just look at the first page: foreign Protoss are doing very well as vs Koreans as well. -) and I didn't know that the definition of "cannot beat" was "52% winrate for Protoss in PvZ, 39% for Terran in TvZ". Sorry, but Protoss is just winning as much as Zerg these days and it's basically only TvZ that has winrate problems. You have seen who are the names of the foreigners Protoss beating koreans? Huk \ Sase \ Naniwa. Without these 3, the protoss column will fall same for the terran one. And guess what, Sase Naniwa & Huk trained in Korea in a KR teamhouse for months and months. I bet you can say the same thing for the huge amont of various names in the Zerg side. Oh wait... | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On December 05 2012 20:32 InVerno wrote: You have seen who are the names of the foreigners Protoss beating koreans? Huk \ Sase \ Naniwa. Without these 3, the protoss column will fall same for the terran one. And guess what, Sase Naniwa & Huk trained in Korea in a KR teamhouse for months and months. I bet you can say the same thing for the huge amont of various names in the Zerg side. Oh wait... Huk and Sase are winning games these days? Sorry, but just making up stuff is not an arguement, post a complete list of foreigner Protoss vs Koreans first... | ||
|
m0ck
4194 Posts
On December 05 2012 20:18 Wombat_NI wrote: Not at all, I have always loved DRG because he's a monster. However his skillset isn't as rewarded as other Zergs are, his Mutalisk micro and mechanical chops are not AS rewarded relative to other Zergs. Leenock has always been a monster too. How come two Code S level Zergs, who were competitive even in the days where Zerg apparently sucked, are not DOMINATING with those skills, now? Scarlett isn't a fair example either, as tbh she's very good mechanically, or at least her creep spread would attest to that. I believe she'd be, if not as good as she is now relative to Koreans, still a very good player. A player this fast, this clean, should be unbeatable if the Zerg patches scaled properly upwards. Why isn't he? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-ofosFtuqs Leenock is pretty close to dominating, and he is doing it by playing patch-zerg'y. He isn't the fastest player (at least didn't use to be), and he plays to his strengths. As should every player. I don't know why DRG isn't dominating, but I doubt that it is because zerg is currently strong. DRG's speed is amazing (400 APM, like Sniper), and he does many things well. But he also has weaknesses. We've probably both of us seen him make pretty big mistakes that cost him games. His army control is also not the best. Probably, he is a better player with lair-tech than hive-tech. But lair tech isn't very strong, particularly against protoss (where he has always been relatively weak). There is no shame in using and abusing units to the fullest potential in the Korean scene. When cheese was maligned in the foreign community, Korean players cheesed more and better than any foreigners. Who turtles more than Curious? I think it really is something that is holding foreign players back. We hold our "own" players to some standard of "proper" play that the Korean players are never judged by. And I think it bullies the foreign players into playing middle-of-the-road, rather than taking the necessary risks. | ||
| ||
|
|
Wardi Open
Wardi Open
RotterdaM Event
Replay Cast
WardiTV Summer Champion…
RSL Revival
PiGosaur Monday
WardiTV Summer Champion…
The PondCast
WardiTV Summer Champion…
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
