TvZ: A Summary of What's (Still) Broken - Page 26

ODKStevez

Ireland1225 Posts

December 27 2012 22:10 GMT

#501

I think looking at Tournament statistics helps but a balance chance should not be made on it. It depends on the games. Anyone can look at a chart and see a terran 100% loss rate for example. This could be the result of a ton of 2rax all ins. Blizzard seems to do this a lot rather than actually have set devs watching matches to see what could improve or even test things themselves. They test on the PTR, where players follow the meta that they are already playing and won't try anything new.

The game needs to be "Every race has an EQUAL OPPORTUNITY to win". Not "Every race need to have equal win rates".

I cannot quote but I do remember Blizzard saying that they had a near 33% win ratio for each race and they thought this was a success. Which this may be the case, it is not a sign of balance.

Let's see what happens in Hots and see where we go from there.

monsta

172 Posts

December 27 2012 22:52 GMT

#502

sory but all this arguments are irrelevant .. ultras are after 20minute mark to incostefficient and BL infestor ist THE SLOWEST ARMY COMBO!! when the zerg is attacking you, the terrans should go for basetrade and zerg will stop his attack >_> (terran insta win a basetrade cause of high dps and lifts) and zerg is just "dancing" without making any damage. and another problem of zerg: if terran goes for his 4th base zerg have to take a 5th, but the bases are so far from each so the zerg cannot protect them all! terra should snipe the hatches and "dance" from left to right --> zerg have no chance cause of the slow army combo and must go for a basetrade, wich terran actually win in usual ... and zerg needed range buff because before this patch the helion banshee haress was to strong and the terran was able to kill 2 queen ez just with helions(!).
sorry for my bad english btw

DieterEilts

Germany283 Posts

December 27 2012 22:55 GMT

#503

thats not true, at the end of the base-trade zerg still has the better army and will in most of the cases still win

wptlzkwjd

Canada1240 Posts

December 27 2012 22:56 GMT

#504

On December 28 2012 07:52 monsta wrote:
sory but all this arguments are irrelevant .. ultras are after 20minute mark to incostefficient and BL infestor ist THE SLOWEST ARMY COMBO!! when the zerg is attacking you, the terrans should go for basetrade and zerg will stop his attack >_> (terran insta win a basetrade cause of high dps and lifts) and zerg is just "dancing" without making any damage. and another problem of zerg: if terran goes for his 4th base zerg have to take a 5th, but the bases are so far from each so the zerg cannot protect them all! terra should snipe the hatches and "dance" from left to right --> zerg have no chance cause of the slow army combo and must go for a basetrade, wich terran actually win in usual ... and zerg needed range buff because before this patch the helion banshee haress was to strong and the terran was able to kill 2 queen ez just with helions(!).
sorry for my bad english btw

That's true. However, zerg can stall with fungals and spines for the army to come back.

decado90

United States480 Posts

December 27 2012 22:57 GMT

#505

Holy shit! Who would have thought the answer to TvZ was that easy.

Now Korean Terrans have no excuse to get dominated by foreign Zergs.

SnipedSoul

Canada2158 Posts

December 27 2012 23:08 GMT

#506

Hard to base trade against 30 spinecrawlers. A few infestors at the top of a ramp can stall for a really long time too.

PyroN

Sweden53 Posts

December 27 2012 23:11 GMT

#507

I Have to agee very much with the thread starter here.

I compared the Terran Raven with the Zerg Infestor and found some interesting things.
I have tought of it, and My idea to balance the match up would be like this.

Fungal Growth now cost 125 Energy(up from 75) >> Terrans Does always have to wait for 125 Energy for the HSM when Zergs can unleash such an extremley powerful spell already at 75. This change would make it much more fair.

Infested Terran now cost 50 Energy up from 25 >> Compared to the Auto-Turret I think they are quite equal in value/dps etc etc but the AT costs 50 already.

I think this could maybe workout....
Lets look at it the other way! Imagine if the Ravens HSM costed 75 Energy and the Auto-Turret 25 Energy. How Fearsome would the Raven then be? Think about it.

Snowbear

Korea (South)1925 Posts

December 27 2012 23:34 GMT

#508

On December 28 2012 08:11 PyroN wrote:
I Have to agee very much with the thread starter here.

I compared the Terran Raven with the Zerg Infestor and found some interesting things.
I have tought of it, and My idea to balance the match up would be like this.

Fungal Growth now cost 125 Energy(up from 75) >> Terrans Does always have to wait for 125 Energy for the HSM when Zergs can unleash such an extremley powerful spell already at 75. This change would make it much more fair.

Infested Terran now cost 50 Energy up from 25 >> Compared to the Auto-Turret I think they are quite equal in value/dps etc etc but the AT costs 50 already.

I think this could maybe workout....
Lets look at it the other way! Imagine if the Ravens HSM costed 75 Energy and the Auto-Turret 25 Energy. How Fearsome would the Raven then be? Think about it.

A stronger raven would bring a lot of balance in tvz. But..But.. What about TvP then? Well, the raven has no use there, since the HT is a hardcounter, so a raven buff won't affect tvp.

For some reason blizzard refuses to buff the raven, and I can't think of 1...

Mavvie

Canada923 Posts

December 27 2012 23:55 GMT

#509

Or maybe they're different casters and should have different spells/energy requirements?

HT's super powerful 20 dps/sec AoE spell only costs 75 too. HSM takes more but is a guaranteed hit against broodlords/infestors.

It's like saying that yamato cannon should cost 25 energy because snipe is only 25 energy! And that makes sense!

edit: To clarify, I'm not against your changes. Just saying that the numbers should be 125 and 50 "because the raven has those" is a retarded comparison. They're different units with different spells, why should they cost the same energy?

fighter2_40

United States420 Posts

December 27 2012 23:59 GMT

#510

Ultras after 20 minute mark is cost inefficient if both players are maxed. Remaxing with ultras is really deadly or getting 3/3 max ultra infestor before terran maxes is also a really hard timing to stop.

Broodlord is slow but it is so goddamn cost efficient that you can leave like 3 broodlords, a few infestors and burrowed banes at home and defend fine vs anything except totally maxed terran using all of their units on base trading (including vikings). Terran does not insta win in a base trade at all, once zerg is in your production you just lose unless you killed basically all the expos and main.

At this point of the game zerg doesn't actually have to be one base up on terran. The tech is very cost efficient if you go infestors. Being 1 base up is something that you need vs toss / an old ideology that is not completely true anymore. Drops are bad vs mass spines which free up supply and cost none to defend.

Queen buff was meh, hellions are pretty shit vs queens now unless you're going all in and make 2 factory hellions. They should have increase range 1 instead of 2 right away or do something like buff queen speed even more on creep so that queens can't be kited by hellions on creep but wont be good off creep.

Look, the OP makes some good points, I dont agree with all of them as terran should be a race that requires more "attention". The unforgiving aspects I'm inclined to agree with. I'm not a terran fanboy I play random and this is how i feel about the matchup from both zerg's perspective and terran's

PyroN

Sweden53 Posts

December 28 2012 00:32 GMT

#511

On December 28 2012 08:55 Mavvie wrote:

Show nested quote +

Sure they are different casters with different spells, but they are also the "Main Spellcasters" for the their representive race.

Thats why I compared them at the first time.
Also It was just an Idea I had. The spells for the infestor doesn´t need to be exactly the same cost as the Raven but......

The unit has to be looked over again.

I know that, You know that and Dustin Browder knows that :D

remarq

3 Posts

December 28 2012 20:35 GMT

#512

I think zerg players are sick of hearing the infestor OP talk because I am seeing less infestor armies lately. I am having far fewer confrontations with mass infestors regardless of my (terran) army composition. The infestors aren't all that present even if the circumstance would be greatly beneficial for my zerg opponent to pump out the controversial caster.

Anyone else noticing or doing this?

aksfjh

United States4853 Posts

December 28 2012 23:17 GMT

#513

On December 29 2012 05:35 remarq wrote:
I think zerg players are sick of hearing the infestor OP talk because I am seeing less infestor armies lately. I am having far fewer confrontations with mass infestors regardless of my (terran) army composition. The infestors aren't all that present even if the circumstance would be greatly beneficial for my zerg opponent to pump out the controversial caster.

Anyone else noticing or doing this?

They don't need infestors to win the game. We see it a lot in pro games as well. Once every 2 to 3 games we'll see BL/infestor, but the other wins are achieved through busts and classic positional play.