|
On December 05 2012 12:35 Yorbon wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 12:30 xTrim wrote:On December 05 2012 12:05 Bippzy wrote:On December 05 2012 12:00 DaNkS wrote:
hahaha its funny how PVZ as zerg you can easily just 1base baneling all in and win LOL its ridiculous and if you see immortal/ling its really OP against any race man once you have that massive muta count you cant do nothing about it..... stalkers dps is to slow to mutas high dps and splash damage. the only thing is storm but mutas can fly really fast and be annoying. and 60% of the time dodge the storm and take minimal damage. Just playing devil's advocate here: 1. Are all-ins that work easily if not scouted a bad thing? I'm doubtful, it keeps the opponent honest, so I tend to miss the point of the baneling all in complain. 2. If lings were the counter to immortals and mutalisks were unable to be dealt with by protoss, why wouldn't we see this often compared to the ubiquitous BL/infestor? I know this is a thread claiming grievances with the zerg race, but I fail to see how you contribute opinions with any support. 1. I don`t remember which game was in GSL, but some terran did proxy 11/11, zerg did not scout it and 3 hatch before pool... No need to say who won, right? So I don`t buy the "all-ins that work easily if not scouted a bad thing"? Hell we`re talking about GSL player, proxying 11/11 vs a THREE HATCH BEFORE POOL, UNSCOUTED I'm sure you remembered how much damage was dealt before the pool finished.... right?
It doesnt matter... The point is that the proxied 11/11 is a ridiculously aggressive move, very very allin... the zerg DID NOT SCOUT and went for FREAKING GREEDY 3 hatch and won the game without losing ANY of the hatches...
What was it again?? Aggro > greed > Safe > Aggro?? seems like in tvz : T aggro < Z greed and T greed < Z aggro or Z greed
|
On December 05 2012 12:31 Mavvie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 12:25 iTzSnypah wrote:
I had a good laugh at the responses. All these low post count kids make me laugh at their overly complex replies.
I don't like that the majority of Zerg tries to downplay the Queen range buff. It is huge.
I believe the best way to 'fix' TvZ is to reduce Queen range to 3.5. Thus bringing back Hellion openers and slowing down the game. As much as I'm all for change, and I'm too new to the game to have played before 3 queen range, but weren't hellions the most overpowered shit in the game? You could deny Zerg's third while taking a third of your own for free, and Zerg had to invest >300 minerals defensively just to survive the first 4-6 hellions? That's like Protoss having to build 2 more cannons to defend the first few lings of Zerg, seems kind of bullshit. Like my impression was that not only did hellions deny Zerg's third base (which is OK), but they could also trade effectively for drones, every time. Just providing the counterargument, again I never played back then.
Hellions were used for soft contains. What usually happened is Zerg droned up on 2 hatch, made 12-16 speedlings then took a 3rd. Meanwhile the Terran would be teching to Medivacs on 2 bases. Then pressure while starting 3rd at around 10:30ish.
Blue Flame Hellions were batshit OP when Blizzard changed the upgrade picture from red flame to blue flame. Koreans started making them and then bam nerf.
|
On December 05 2012 12:38 xTrim wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 12:35 Yorbon wrote:On December 05 2012 12:30 xTrim wrote:On December 05 2012 12:05 Bippzy wrote:On December 05 2012 12:00 DaNkS wrote:
hahaha its funny how PVZ as zerg you can easily just 1base baneling all in and win LOL its ridiculous and if you see immortal/ling its really OP against any race man once you have that massive muta count you cant do nothing about it..... stalkers dps is to slow to mutas high dps and splash damage. the only thing is storm but mutas can fly really fast and be annoying. and 60% of the time dodge the storm and take minimal damage. Just playing devil's advocate here: 1. Are all-ins that work easily if not scouted a bad thing? I'm doubtful, it keeps the opponent honest, so I tend to miss the point of the baneling all in complain. 2. If lings were the counter to immortals and mutalisks were unable to be dealt with by protoss, why wouldn't we see this often compared to the ubiquitous BL/infestor? I know this is a thread claiming grievances with the zerg race, but I fail to see how you contribute opinions with any support. 1. I don`t remember which game was in GSL, but some terran did proxy 11/11, zerg did not scout it and 3 hatch before pool... No need to say who won, right? So I don`t buy the "all-ins that work easily if not scouted a bad thing"? Hell we`re talking about GSL player, proxying 11/11 vs a THREE HATCH BEFORE POOL, UNSCOUTED I'm sure you remembered how much damage was dealt before the pool finished.... right? It doesnt matter... The point is that the proxied 11/11 is a ridiculously aggressive move, very very allin... the zerg DID NOT SCOUT and went for FREAKING GREEDY 3 hatch and won the game without losing ANY of the hatches... What was it again?? Aggro > greed > Safe > Aggro?? seems like in tvz : T aggro < Z greed and T greed < Z aggro or Z greed Ah, so execution does not matter. Okay.
the fact that no hatch was killed is the biggest argument against your point.
|
And as to the "Unforgiving Nature" section, if you go 3OC you are being extraordinarily greedy and of course you can be punished. If you get your 3rd CC up before adding on Barracks 2&3, you are doing the Zerg equivalent of Hatch-Pool-Hatch, which is easily punishable. And even if you get it slightly later, you're still very vulnerable to early Roaches or Baneling timings. If you play greedy, which Terrans usually do, you can be punished, but so can Zerg's if they play even more greedy than usual. Also, you listed all of the things that can go wrong with a Terran army vs. Zerg without mentioning that Zerg's 100% need to engage where they want/on their own terms or else they will almost always lose. Think running all your Zerglings into a line of Tanks. They're almost instantly gone, and the opponent didn't even have to "spam f", the Tanks auto-fired. I do think there is a definite end-game balance problem, but the matchup is far more balanced until then than people are willing to admit.
|
On December 05 2012 12:38 xTrim wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 12:35 Yorbon wrote:On December 05 2012 12:30 xTrim wrote:On December 05 2012 12:05 Bippzy wrote:On December 05 2012 12:00 DaNkS wrote:
hahaha its funny how PVZ as zerg you can easily just 1base baneling all in and win LOL its ridiculous and if you see immortal/ling its really OP against any race man once you have that massive muta count you cant do nothing about it..... stalkers dps is to slow to mutas high dps and splash damage. the only thing is storm but mutas can fly really fast and be annoying. and 60% of the time dodge the storm and take minimal damage. Just playing devil's advocate here: 1. Are all-ins that work easily if not scouted a bad thing? I'm doubtful, it keeps the opponent honest, so I tend to miss the point of the baneling all in complain. 2. If lings were the counter to immortals and mutalisks were unable to be dealt with by protoss, why wouldn't we see this often compared to the ubiquitous BL/infestor? I know this is a thread claiming grievances with the zerg race, but I fail to see how you contribute opinions with any support. 1. I don`t remember which game was in GSL, but some terran did proxy 11/11, zerg did not scout it and 3 hatch before pool... No need to say who won, right? So I don`t buy the "all-ins that work easily if not scouted a bad thing"? Hell we`re talking about GSL player, proxying 11/11 vs a THREE HATCH BEFORE POOL, UNSCOUTED I'm sure you remembered how much damage was dealt before the pool finished.... right? It doesnt matter... The point is that the proxied 11/11 is a ridiculously aggressive move, very very allin... the zerg DID NOT SCOUT and went for FREAKING GREEDY 3 hatch and won the game without losing ANY of the hatches... What was it again?? Aggro > greed > Safe > Aggro?? seems like in tvz : T aggro < Z greed and T greed < Z aggro or Z greed
I know it is hard but try to think a for a second. How is it possible to zerg didn't lose hatches? Did he upgraded his drones or something so they did over 9000 ranged damage?
No, it was because the execution was beyond horrible and should NEVER be used to proof anything.
|
All your arguments against zerg are fundamental design aspects of the race. You can't change that. This is how it was even in BW. The only 'timing' you could pull of in BW was an early game marine medic push. The way SC2 itself is designed and played, zerg is in fact http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/Sauron_(strategy) .
What needs to be absolutely changed are the units. Things like gglords fundamentally breaking siege tanks, by spawning free units on your marines for tanks to kill with FF. And fungal planting units. That is just dumb design.
|
Another faulty argument leading to faulty conclusion.
Love the wonderfully scientific qq posts of TL
|
On December 05 2012 11:47 Lumi wrote:
The Lings of Liberty thread is a troll, lol. It's statistics are laughable. Also, IPL5 had huge Zerg saturation going into it which makes the results pretty inevitable. And you have those exact IPL5 numbers covering a lot of the gap in your overall race winrates in the last 4 months. Should check the seeding on each of th ose to get a better feel for the whole story. Numbers have stories behidn them. Just taking whoevers graphs look like it supports what you think isn't really reflective of someone having dedication to the full, exact story involved. For every tournament you're showing that has zerg favored saturation, or win rates, or championship wins; There are tournaments that show the exact same for other races. Please make some effort to be honest with yourself, and subsequently the people you talk to, about what's going on.
lol @ logic flaw - and WHY do you think there was a huge Zerg saturation ?
Because Zerg had an easier time defeating their Terran opponents in qualifiers.
I love when people go like "Oh you can't take that tournament as example cause it only had 4 terrans in it" well, wonder WHY ? Maybe cause they all failed to quality ?
By the way I love that at BWC there were only 4 terrans. Said a lot about the state of T.
On December 05 2012 12:44 RParks42 wrote:
And as to the "Unforgiving Nature" section, if you go 3OC you are being extraordinarily greedy and of course you can be punished. If you get your 3rd CC up before adding on Barracks 2&3, you are doing the Zerg equivalent of Hatch-Pool-Hatch, which is easily punishable. And even if you get it slightly later, you're still very vulnerable to early Roaches or Baneling timings. If you play greedy, which Terrans usually do, you can be punished, but so can Zerg's if they play even more greedy than usual. Also, you listed all of the things that can go wrong with a Terran army vs. Zerg without mentioning that Zerg's 100% need to engage where they want/on their own terms or else they will almost always lose. Think running all your Zerglings into a line of Tanks. They're almost instantly gone, and the opponent didn't even have to "spam f", the Tanks auto-fired. I do think there is a definite end-game balance problem, but the matchup is far more balanced until then than people are willing to admit.
You signed up recently and only did posts defending Zergs in all the threads around TL.
You are a very enthusiast Zerg user for sure :D
|
On December 05 2012 12:25 iTzSnypah wrote:
I had a good laugh at the responses. All these low post count kids make me laugh at their overly complex replies.
I don't like that the majority of Zerg tries to downplay the Queen range buff. It is huge.
I believe the best way to 'fix' TvZ is to reduce Queen range to 3.5. Thus bringing back Hellion openers and slowing down the game.
What's even more interesting is that many of them will even claim it was necessary. If we look at the January-April TvZ stats (using TLPD charts for reference) for Korea, we get:
51/49 in January
57/43 in February
46/54 in March
46/54 in April
International statistics show very close to 50/50 during the same time period, with the biggest disparity being 54/46 in Zerg's favor in March.
This means that in the two months leading up to the queen buff, Zergs were actually favored in Korea, the very place where TL's own Zerg contingent always points to when trying to claim that Terran is still fine and dandy. The overlord buff is something that most of the community (myself included) was fine with, but why they decided to buff queens so massively remains a total mystery to me. It was a point in time where everyone loved watching TvZ and the numbers showed that Zerg was performing well in the matchup at the professional level, and Blizzard killed most of its entertainment value while also paving the road for the imbalanced matchup we have today.
|
You guys are so ignorant the patch has been out for a day and everyones calling imbalance. My personal opinion i like to see people come up with crazy new stuff to get over this "zerg imbalance". Just wait and everything will level out. No ones complained about infestors til now and they havent been changed in so long.
|
Let's see how things develop before immediately announcing that the patch is not enough. I suspect many of your concerns may be addressed by the advantage of zerg eco (very strong and easy to achieve late game) being devalued by a weakened late game army. I think you should have taken a breath before writing your ill-timed theory craft piece. Why not wait more than "a couple hours" to evaluate the situation and the ramifications of the patch? 
|
On December 05 2012 13:00 forsooth wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 12:25 iTzSnypah wrote:
I had a good laugh at the responses. All these low post count kids make me laugh at their overly complex replies.
I don't like that the majority of Zerg tries to downplay the Queen range buff. It is huge.
I believe the best way to 'fix' TvZ is to reduce Queen range to 3.5. Thus bringing back Hellion openers and slowing down the game. What's even more interesting is that many of them will even claim it was necessary. If we look at the January-April TvZ stats (using TLPD charts for reference) for Korea, we get: 51/49 in January 57/43 in February 46/54 in March 46/54 in April International statistics show very close to 50/50 during the same time period, with the biggest disparity being 54/46 in Zerg's favor in March. This means that in the two months leading up to the queen buff, Zergs were actually favored in Korea, the very place where TL's own Zerg contingent always points to when trying to claim that Terran is still fine and dandy. The overlord buff is something that most of the community (myself included) was fine with, but why they decided to buff queens so massively remains a total mystery to me. It was a point in time where everyone loved watching TvZ and the numbers showed that Zerg was performing well in the matchup at the professional level, and Blizzard killed most of its entertainment value while also paving the road for the imbalanced matchup we have today.
I believe the reason for the queen buff was that the reactor hellion opening was too strong. Terrans did it every game and there was nothing zerg could do to stop it. basically the standard buildorder for terran was too fixed and safe... I mean its ok if something like 14p is standard but not if a buildorder can be played every single game until 7 minutes into the game. in retro perspective 5 might have been too much though and maybe 4 would have been more appropriate
|
I'm sorry that Bliz spoiled your thunder by releasing this patch 
|
I think the main problem is not that it's so imblalanced but that it's boring to play and boring to watch.
Now, I'm not trying to say SC2 should be like BW, but in BW going Corsair Reaver against zerg could be really op. HOWEVER, this was only if you were really good, I mean really, really good. Even top pros could not pull it off or at least make it look OP all the time. And it was fun to try, because it was hard. Though I always sucked at it.
The thing about infestors is they are a bit op, no honest person can argue otherwise, and they are easy to be op with. The same goes for broolord/infestor, it's a bit op and it's really easy to use in that fashion which makes it kinda boring. Contrary to sair/reaver which is very hard to use yet it is a bit op with done correctly this makes it enjoyable to play and to watch because you can appreciate the skill it requires.
tl;dr BLord/infestor easy and a bit op = boring, Sair/reaver = very hard and a bit op = interesting
|
I expected this thread to be started by Avilo.
|
On December 05 2012 13:11 coasts wrote:
tl;dr BLord/infestor easy and a bit op = boring, Sair/reaver = very hard and a bit op = interesting
Pretty much this. There's nothing wrong with having super strong things or strategies in the game but then they need to also be difficult to use or execute. I really can't tell the difference from a patchzerg, korean zerg or random master zerg when it comes to the infestor usage (except the multi-pronged harassment and similar things).
|
I remember a time when TvZ was the greatest matchup to watch, by far. Now it doesn't even come close to its former self that it was about 8 months ago. Hellion contains, prior to the Queen buff, were good but it wasn't broken. It allowed a safe transition for the Terran into macro play while slowing down the Zergs superior economic macro abilities. Bad Zerg players simply had trouble with Hellions because they relied on 1) lings and 2) bad control to deal with the contain. Good Zerg players either 1) used lings with proper control+spine push+Queens or 2) made 4-5 Roaches and pushed the Hellions away(Stephano did this and would crush face). As someone who watches more than he plays, I don't see how anyone can say that the game is currently more enjoyable from a spectators perspective than it was 8+ months ago, in fact, it is worse in all non-mirror matchups(imo, except maybe TvP but it has stale metagame). The Queen buff allowed certain play styles to become much stronger and we are now seeing the full effects of it.
|
First things first. First fix PvZ which is much more broken than TvZ, then we can look at TvZ.
|
On December 05 2012 13:06 Kaitokid wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 13:00 forsooth wrote:On December 05 2012 12:25 iTzSnypah wrote:
I had a good laugh at the responses. All these low post count kids make me laugh at their overly complex replies.
I don't like that the majority of Zerg tries to downplay the Queen range buff. It is huge.
I believe the best way to 'fix' TvZ is to reduce Queen range to 3.5. Thus bringing back Hellion openers and slowing down the game. What's even more interesting is that many of them will even claim it was necessary. If we look at the January-April TvZ stats (using TLPD charts for reference) for Korea, we get: 51/49 in January 57/43 in February 46/54 in March 46/54 in April International statistics show very close to 50/50 during the same time period, with the biggest disparity being 54/46 in Zerg's favor in March. This means that in the two months leading up to the queen buff, Zergs were actually favored in Korea, the very place where TL's own Zerg contingent always points to when trying to claim that Terran is still fine and dandy. The overlord buff is something that most of the community (myself included) was fine with, but why they decided to buff queens so massively remains a total mystery to me. It was a point in time where everyone loved watching TvZ and the numbers showed that Zerg was performing well in the matchup at the professional level, and Blizzard killed most of its entertainment value while also paving the road for the imbalanced matchup we have today. I believe the reason for the queen buff was that the reactor hellion opening was too strong. Terrans did it every game and there was nothing zerg could do to stop it. basically the standard buildorder for terran was too fixed and safe... I mean its ok if something like 14p is standard but not if a buildorder can be played every single game until 7 minutes into the game. in retro perspective 5 might have been too much though and maybe 4 would have been more appropriate
Before the Queen buff, major tournaments were skewed towards Terran even if the win rates didn't show it.
http://i.imgur.com/gNBWe.jpg
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Premier_Tournaments
For several months before the Queen buff (May 10th), Terrans were quite dominant. And they were dominating Zerg with basically the same opening build every game with a few 11/11 Rax mixed in. However, after the Queen buff, roles were reversed and Zerg was quite dominant against Terran.
I honestly feel like the Queen buff was a good thing (for balance) and that it would be silly to change it at this point in the game. Although, Terran still feels like it needs a small buff or two. But, we'll have to wait and see what the patch does to the metagame and whether or not it solves Zerg dominance.
|
You signed up recently and only did posts defending Zergs in all the threads around TL.
You are a very enthusiast Zerg user for sure :D
I do realize I've been defending Zerg and this may make me seem biased, but let me assure you I'm not. I 100% believe there is an imbalance in TvZ, just that most people's reasoning as to why is either incomplete or flawed. Mainly I think people compare TvZ and PvZ way too much and don't understand why things work differently between the match-up, as each has its own unique pace and set of reactions to decisions
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
