|
Could it be, that zerg units simply dont have a great synergy ?
And thats why we are seeing these kind of mono battles all the time ?
Ling/Bling vs Ling/Bling, Roach vs. Roach, now Mutas vs. Mutas.
The Infestor was the only unit in the Zerg arsenal that added synergy to its army but it was nerfed and now its in rare usage.
When you look at terran you have synergies between marines - mrauder - medivacs - mines, synergies between marines and tanks - vikings - medivacs, a spot of raven with seaker missile or point defense can be added to every composition ...
When you look at protoss, the so called deathball is actually also a huge synergy where the count of certain unts vary according to the meta game.
When playing zerg or seeing zerg play you often just get these mono cultures of units of mass zerlings, roach pushes, sometimes roach hydra. Roach - hydra - defiler(what is it called again) showed some promise at the start, but has been shut down to some degree. Of course there are some compositions of units, but they just dont have the same synergy as the other races.
Thats my view on Zrtg as a whole at least.
I really would like the oracle change, because as of now you can shut it down relavely easily.
|
On April 24 2013 03:17 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 02:12 Darksoldierr wrote:On April 24 2013 01:24 Rabiator wrote:On April 24 2013 00:39 ishmoks wrote:Regarding rewarding high level players, check out Artosis blog post "The Raised Skill Ceiling: HotS vs BW" at http://scdojo.tumblr.com/What he wrote makes sense. Sadly he only looks at how the new game mechanics affect high level players ... who can manage the additional power of not having to "battle the (movement) AI and unit selection mechanics" really nicely, but for the average players it is a totally different story. They are overwhelmed by the amount of stuff and thus the biggest part of being good is the ability to split-second-multitask. Just watch TLO streaming and you will see him switching his view 3-4 times per second in constant action while a normal player might switch once every 5 seconds maybe. SC2 has the power, but for most people this amount of power is too much to handle and that is where BW was better, because the stuff you had to "fight" (unit selection limit, movement, low production) leveled the playing field between the players to such an extent that you games werent such easy walkovers as they are in SC2 on the lower end of the scale IF you manage to get one of several stupidly powerful and gimmicky units going. Banelings, warp-ins in the enemy base, Nydus worms are some of the examples, but now we have to add Oracles, Mutalisks, Speed-Medivacs and a few more to the list. I dont want to be rude, but a good Brood War player would have destroyed a causal Brood War player even more than in Sc2. In Sc2 thanks to the lot of all ins, the weaker player (unless the skill difference is that high) has a chance to win. Sc2 is lot more forgiving than BW was. Saying Sc2 is "harder" because you don't fight the AI or UI but units is like saying Football is hard, because the ball is rounded and can go anywhere. Ummm ... the difference between a "good" and a "casual" player is not the question. It is the difference between a casual and a slightly better casual and the ability to have "stupid wins" (the ones ending with ragequit) in SC2 due to the all-or-nothing kind of units AND the ability mass up a critical number with about any kind of unit while your opponent - who is rather sloppy with his mechanics just as you are - does not do so. In BW you didnt have the ability to get a critical number with any kind of unit because you had to "fight the game" with the movement and the unit selection limitations. THAT WAS GOOD ... for casuals but pros dont care for either way!!!! SC2 is obviously harder because you have LOTS MORE to do at the same time ... multitasking is a killer and so are gimmicky units which bypass strategic play. In BW you didnt have blink, burrowed movement, Nydus worms that can surface anywhere, warp-ins, ... all things which add requirements to SC2 which casuals do not have. Thus the game is harder for casuals than BW is. BW was simpler and less gimmicky and thus easier to play, even though it took more effort to play. Just dont think about "using units" but rather think about "playing against units" and then limit yourself to half your thoughts about them and you might see the problem of SC2.
Did you even play broodwar? Just making workers and mine was a pain in the ass (they didnt do it themselves at the start of the game or at any point. There is a reason why white people COULD NOT EVEN TOUCH korean bw players. How is broodwar simpler and easier to play than sc2? They even give you a button to select your whole army and a move in sc2. In bw moving anything more than 12 units was a pain in the ass.
|
On April 24 2013 05:19 omnic wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 05:12 PanzerElite wrote:On April 24 2013 05:02 omnic wrote:On April 24 2013 04:57 PanzerElite wrote:On April 24 2013 04:51 omnic wrote:On April 24 2013 04:46 PanzerElite wrote:On April 24 2013 04:40 omnic wrote:On April 24 2013 04:15 eviltomahawk wrote:On April 24 2013 03:41 IdrA wrote:On April 24 2013 03:17 Rabiator wrote:
[quote]
Ummm ... the difference between a "good" and a "casual" player is not the question. It is the difference between a casual and a slightly better casual and the ability to have "stupid wins" (the ones ending with ragequit) in SC2 due to the all-or-nothing kind of units AND the ability mass up a critical number with about any kind of unit while your opponent - who is rather sloppy with his mechanics just as you are - does not do so. In BW you didnt have the ability to get a critical number with any kind of unit because you had to "fight the game" with the movement and the unit selection limitations. THAT WAS GOOD ... for casuals but pros dont care for either way!!!!
SC2 is obviously harder because you have LOTS MORE to do at the same time ... multitasking is a killer and so are gimmicky units which bypass strategic play. In BW you didnt have blink, burrowed movement, Nydus worms that can surface anywhere, warp-ins, ... all things which add requirements to SC2 which casuals do not have. Thus the game is harder for casuals than BW is. BW was simpler and less gimmicky and thus easier to play, even though it took more effort to play.
Just dont think about "using units" but rather think about "playing against units" and then limit yourself to half your thoughts about them and you might see the problem of SC2. rofl Well that settles it. Yeah it does, because BW was way harder than sc2 and anybody who doesn't think so never played BW at anything beyond the lowest level of play. Blink/marine splitting/nydus worms/warp-ins are all incredibly easy and anybody that tries to suggest that these are the reasons why it's harder to play is talking out of their ass. Yh but it is waaaaay harder to dominate in sc2. No, it's really not. While Mvp was the King of Wol, he wasn't as dominant as his bw counterparts. Yh bw was harder mechanically, but it's harder to be consistent in sc2. Prove me wrong... O, wait you can't. haha That probably has something to do with the fact that SC2 is still in the baby stage of being an esport. The game itself is volatile only because it hasn't been out for that long. Give it 4-5 years after blizzard stops making changes and you'll see players dominating. Alternatively just keep watching flash who is already basically a code S tier player even though he's been playing the game for half as long as anybody else. Code S tier doesn't mean domination, Flash is doing very bad in SPL. Because it's easier it's harder for mechanically better players to stand out. Or your name is Mvp and you just pull out wins with knowledge instead of ultra fancy mechanics. And after 4 or 5 years mechanically superior players still won't be able to just dominate over others because mechanics will only carry you so far. Mkp? Yes Mvp is still awesome while his wrist exploded, but Mkp's control > Mvp's (handicapped Mvp). Sc2 also needs you to be smart you can't do the same thing over and over in this game. Being code S tier when you have had half the time to play the game as anybody else does though because it suggests that flash is getting better faster than anybody else in the scene and if you think mechanics are "flashy" and are not the main reason why a player wins games than we have nothing else to talk about. This is why so many pros stopped posting on forums. You seem to forget that his skillset is also transferred over from sc1 to sc2, the way you talk about Flash is like he began from scratch in sc2 which isn't true. Yeah sorry but sadly Mkp with his awesome control hasn't won a single gsl trophy yet Mvp has won 4. You mean NA/EU pro's? they're irrelevant.
|
zvz is a really skilled matchup right now, its too bad that its so predictable
|
On April 24 2013 05:27 PanzerElite wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 05:19 omnic wrote:On April 24 2013 05:12 PanzerElite wrote:On April 24 2013 05:02 omnic wrote:On April 24 2013 04:57 PanzerElite wrote:On April 24 2013 04:51 omnic wrote:On April 24 2013 04:46 PanzerElite wrote:On April 24 2013 04:40 omnic wrote:On April 24 2013 04:15 eviltomahawk wrote:On April 24 2013 03:41 IdrA wrote:
[quote]
rofl Well that settles it. Yeah it does, because BW was way harder than sc2 and anybody who doesn't think so never played BW at anything beyond the lowest level of play. Blink/marine splitting/nydus worms/warp-ins are all incredibly easy and anybody that tries to suggest that these are the reasons why it's harder to play is talking out of their ass. Yh but it is waaaaay harder to dominate in sc2. No, it's really not. While Mvp was the King of Wol, he wasn't as dominant as his bw counterparts. Yh bw was harder mechanically, but it's harder to be consistent in sc2. Prove me wrong... O, wait you can't. haha That probably has something to do with the fact that SC2 is still in the baby stage of being an esport. The game itself is volatile only because it hasn't been out for that long. Give it 4-5 years after blizzard stops making changes and you'll see players dominating. Alternatively just keep watching flash who is already basically a code S tier player even though he's been playing the game for half as long as anybody else. Code S tier doesn't mean domination, Flash is doing very bad in SPL. Because it's easier it's harder for mechanically better players to stand out. Or your name is Mvp and you just pull out wins with knowledge instead of ultra fancy mechanics. And after 4 or 5 years mechanically superior players still won't be able to just dominate over others because mechanics will only carry you so far. Mkp? Yes Mvp is still awesome while his wrist exploded, but Mkp's control > Mvp's (handicapped Mvp). Sc2 also needs you to be smart you can't do the same thing over and over in this game. Being code S tier when you have had half the time to play the game as anybody else does though because it suggests that flash is getting better faster than anybody else in the scene and if you think mechanics are "flashy" and are not the main reason why a player wins games than we have nothing else to talk about. This is why so many pros stopped posting on forums. You seem to forget that his skillset is also transferred over from sc1 to sc2, the way you talk about Flash is like he began from scratch in sc2 which isn't true. Yeah sorry but sadly Mkp with his awesome control hasn't won a single gsl trophy yet Mvp has won 4. You mean NA/EU pro's? they're irrelevant.
Sure he didn't start over from scratch in sc2 but guess what? neither did most of the sc2 pros. By far the majority of sc2 players were sc1 pros. Don't even compare MKP to flash. MKP has always been a pro that specifically focused on micro more than macro. Flash since he first began to dominate in BW (after he finally figured out how to FE in every MU safely) has always been a player that focuses heavily on macro while having extremely good micro. Comparing them is like trying to compare apples to a five star restaurants lobster dinner.
|
On April 24 2013 02:06 Erik.TheRed wrote:
My main problem with the oracle is how it has this window of time where if it hasn't payed off by killing a ton of workers, it won't help at all vs any straight up counter attack (especially stim timings and the like). In fact the stargate is almost completely worthless vs terran if you haven't managed to make the oracles pay off early on and don't start to gain utility again until lategame with revelation in max army battles.
What if they added some other interesting utility to the oracle like a channeled shield generator that might actually help defend against marine/marauder or roach hydra counters? Maybe reduce the damage of the oracle attack as well and make it a normal attack rather than energy based. I think that would create for a more interesting and skill-based unit that can really pay for itself throughout the entire game if it's microd well.
Agree with this.
IMO Protoss was more fun in Beta when Oracle had timewarp and MScore has detection,
It allowed you to play any of the 3 tech routes.
|
On April 24 2013 04:06 Existor wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 03:57 wUndertUnge wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On April 24 2013 03:48 Existor wrote:
Is it not better to discuss what the solution can be to Mutalisks in ZvZ matchup? Rather than trying useless buff to Spores. Why developers do not understand, that 15-20 mutalisks can one-shot Spore crawlers no matter how many they have damage?
If you add anti-bio splash to Spores, then Mutalisk will die in ZvZ completely, and it will turn back into Hydralisk-Roach battles again. Well, lets discuss some ideas around buffing Mutalisks counters for ZvZ.
_________________________________________________
More defensive semi-mobile anti-bio-air options
1. Queen damage against biological air units is increased to 27 (three times more than current anti-air damage). I want to remember - only against biological air units.
Queens can heal other Queens, also they can be upgraded with armor upgrades, and they have biggest anti-air range of all AA Zerg units. Their range is 7, when Hydralisk range after upgrade is only 6. Try to use that factor, and maybe buff it into soft-counter for Mutalisks.
2. Add slow effect to Spore Crawlers against air-biological units. And stay with current +15 damage to bio-air units. Spore Crawlers will be able to slow down a bit flying muta, especially when in big numbers, some Mutalisks will be slowed down, and you will be able to snipe them with buffed Queens against bio-air.
Result. Spore Crawlers do more damage to biological air units and they slow a bit all affected units for a short time, like 2-3 seconds. Queens with Spores can do more damage, especially against some slowed Mutalisks.
_________________________________________________
Corruptor as real anti-Mutalisk counter. Buff it against Mutalisks!
• Make Corruption ability slow down by 50% all aircraft units. It will also balance Corruptors against Phoenixes. Right now Corruptors can't counter Phoenixes as they supposed to do.
• Or make Corruption ability slow down by 50% only biological air units.
• Another good idea - extend "+6 damage against massive targets" to "+6 damage against biological and massive targets", in other word, make Corruptors do bonus damage to biological aircraft too.
_________________________________________________
Mobile Spore Crawlers
1. Allow Spore Crawlers to attack when uprooted.
2. Increase rooting time from 6 seconds back to 12 seconds.
3. When uprooted, Spore Crawlers still lose their ability to detect.
4. Remove +15 bonus damage against biological targets.
5. Probably increase cost of Spore Crawlers to 100 minerals (+50 from Drone)
6. Slighty decrease Spore Crawler speed on creep. Probably make it 2.25
7. Probably disallow to attack off-creep.
Result
• Spore Crawlers still can not be strong anti-air unit off-creep, because they are very slow, like Queens.
• Spore Crawlers can not detect while uprooted.
• Spore Crawlers become a new Zerg weapon against aircraft, especially against Sky-Protoss, which is strong right now, especially with Storms and other splash weapons that eradicate Hydralisks quickly, and Void Rays who destroy Corruptors even more quickly too. Spore Crawlers are armored too, but they are immune to Storms, but they do ZERO damage to ground units, so it's like ground-to-air tanking units, which can be destroyed by everything, like Stalkers, Zealots, Archons (with bonus damage against bio), or even Void Rays with their new charge.
• When they become mobile and strong anti-air, they can not attack off-creep, so it means, that Zergs must spread creep to use Spore Crawlers in combat. I like some of these ideas, esp. the queen and corrupter buffs. It should at least be tested internally at Blizz. The spore crawlers attacking while uprooted miffs me a bit. I know you wrote no defending while off of creep, but then there's almost 0 reason to keep them rooted in ZvZ or ZvT at all. This sounds kind of broken. Why? Banshees still can snipe them, spores are more expensive and slower at all (off creep they are still slow, on creep they are like non-stimmed Marines). Against Protoss? Make stalkers / zealots / archons / void-rays / carriers / immortals / dark-templars (no detect in uprooted state) / other anti-ground unit - everyone counters spores easily, especially when they are more expensive, like spines.
Well, couldn't something like 15+30/45 vs bio spores already solve the problem?
Like, let's examine the problems you face in ZvZ against a mutalisk player:
WoL: He has mapcontrol, gets a little bit of damage done, usually gets a faster third but is also vulnerable to roach attacks. Those roach attacks are possible, because roaches are not a dead techpath!
Eventually he has to transition because the ground zerg player gets the better straight up engagement army and can counter bigger flocks of mutas off cheap investment (well positioned, defensive infestors).
HotS: He has mapcontrol, gets a little bit of damage done, usually gets a faster third. Roach attacks are basically not viable anymore, due to how far roach investments set you back. There is no way to really stop mutalisk harassment while being safe on 3bases, due to how you need roaches vs ling/bling and hydras vs mutalisks. You simply cannot have the antiair and the anti-zergling everywhere.
Now what could "really strong" spores change? You may not need hydras/infestors for a long time as spores could keep you safe and the ling/bling/muta player would have to worry about premutalisk roach attacks and therefore tech slower. roach+1-2spores+1-2queens might keep you reasonably safe vs ling/bling/muta. You could make the extra investment into ground units and upgrades and take a later third and then slowly transition into antiair, as spores would be extremly costefficient against mutas, and roaches against zerglings/banelings and therefore make up for the fact that you are behind in eco and the muta/ling/bling player has the mobility to concentrate his attacks.
|
On April 24 2013 05:34 omnic wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 05:27 PanzerElite wrote:On April 24 2013 05:19 omnic wrote:On April 24 2013 05:12 PanzerElite wrote:On April 24 2013 05:02 omnic wrote:On April 24 2013 04:57 PanzerElite wrote:On April 24 2013 04:51 omnic wrote:On April 24 2013 04:46 PanzerElite wrote:On April 24 2013 04:40 omnic wrote:On April 24 2013 04:15 eviltomahawk wrote:
[quote]
Well that settles it. Yeah it does, because BW was way harder than sc2 and anybody who doesn't think so never played BW at anything beyond the lowest level of play. Blink/marine splitting/nydus worms/warp-ins are all incredibly easy and anybody that tries to suggest that these are the reasons why it's harder to play is talking out of their ass. Yh but it is waaaaay harder to dominate in sc2. No, it's really not. While Mvp was the King of Wol, he wasn't as dominant as his bw counterparts. Yh bw was harder mechanically, but it's harder to be consistent in sc2. Prove me wrong... O, wait you can't. haha That probably has something to do with the fact that SC2 is still in the baby stage of being an esport. The game itself is volatile only because it hasn't been out for that long. Give it 4-5 years after blizzard stops making changes and you'll see players dominating. Alternatively just keep watching flash who is already basically a code S tier player even though he's been playing the game for half as long as anybody else. Code S tier doesn't mean domination, Flash is doing very bad in SPL. Because it's easier it's harder for mechanically better players to stand out. Or your name is Mvp and you just pull out wins with knowledge instead of ultra fancy mechanics. And after 4 or 5 years mechanically superior players still won't be able to just dominate over others because mechanics will only carry you so far. Mkp? Yes Mvp is still awesome while his wrist exploded, but Mkp's control > Mvp's (handicapped Mvp). Sc2 also needs you to be smart you can't do the same thing over and over in this game. Being code S tier when you have had half the time to play the game as anybody else does though because it suggests that flash is getting better faster than anybody else in the scene and if you think mechanics are "flashy" and are not the main reason why a player wins games than we have nothing else to talk about. This is why so many pros stopped posting on forums. You seem to forget that his skillset is also transferred over from sc1 to sc2, the way you talk about Flash is like he began from scratch in sc2 which isn't true. Yeah sorry but sadly Mkp with his awesome control hasn't won a single gsl trophy yet Mvp has won 4. You mean NA/EU pro's? they're irrelevant. Sure he didn't start over from scratch in sc2 but guess what? neither did anybody else. By far the majority of sc2 players were sc1 pros. Don't even compare MKP to flash. MKP has always been a pro that specifically focused on micro more than macro. Flash since he first began to dominate in BW (after he finally figured out how to FE in every MU safely) has always been a player that focuses heavily on macro while having extremely good micro. Comparing them is like trying to compare apples to a five star restaurants lobster dinner. Kespa fanboy much? Mkp has extremely good micro backed up by good macro. Also your lobster dinner gets out purchased by apples. Where's JD, where's Bisu? Mechanically they belong to the best. Guess what they're still irrelevant at this stage. In the end it's much harder to dominate in sc2 because you're not only carried by zomg imba mechanics. Because it's easier it's harder to stand out.
|
I don't really think the problem with burrow is that it's not cheap/fast enough. It's more the fact that it's not that good outside of doing roach pressure builds, which already work with how burrow is now, but I guess it could be utilized more with a cheaper burrow.
|
On April 24 2013 05:45 Zheryn wrote:
I don't really think the problem with burrow is that it's not cheap/fast enough. It's more the fact that it's not that good outside of doing roach pressure builds, which already work with how burrow is now, but I guess it could be utilized more with a cheaper burrow.
It's also extremely useful for defending earlyish Protoss pushes / all-ins....
|
I think buffing hydra AA is good move. Helps vs muts and vs skytoss too.
|
On April 24 2013 05:45 PanzerElite wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 05:34 omnic wrote:On April 24 2013 05:27 PanzerElite wrote:On April 24 2013 05:19 omnic wrote:On April 24 2013 05:12 PanzerElite wrote:On April 24 2013 05:02 omnic wrote:On April 24 2013 04:57 PanzerElite wrote:On April 24 2013 04:51 omnic wrote:On April 24 2013 04:46 PanzerElite wrote:On April 24 2013 04:40 omnic wrote:
[quote]
Yeah it does, because BW was way harder than sc2 and anybody who doesn't think so never played BW at anything beyond the lowest level of play. Blink/marine splitting/nydus worms/warp-ins are all incredibly easy and anybody that tries to suggest that these are the reasons why it's harder to play is talking out of their ass. Yh but it is waaaaay harder to dominate in sc2. No, it's really not. While Mvp was the King of Wol, he wasn't as dominant as his bw counterparts. Yh bw was harder mechanically, but it's harder to be consistent in sc2. Prove me wrong... O, wait you can't. haha That probably has something to do with the fact that SC2 is still in the baby stage of being an esport. The game itself is volatile only because it hasn't been out for that long. Give it 4-5 years after blizzard stops making changes and you'll see players dominating. Alternatively just keep watching flash who is already basically a code S tier player even though he's been playing the game for half as long as anybody else. Code S tier doesn't mean domination, Flash is doing very bad in SPL. Because it's easier it's harder for mechanically better players to stand out. Or your name is Mvp and you just pull out wins with knowledge instead of ultra fancy mechanics. And after 4 or 5 years mechanically superior players still won't be able to just dominate over others because mechanics will only carry you so far. Mkp? Yes Mvp is still awesome while his wrist exploded, but Mkp's control > Mvp's (handicapped Mvp). Sc2 also needs you to be smart you can't do the same thing over and over in this game. Being code S tier when you have had half the time to play the game as anybody else does though because it suggests that flash is getting better faster than anybody else in the scene and if you think mechanics are "flashy" and are not the main reason why a player wins games than we have nothing else to talk about. This is why so many pros stopped posting on forums. You seem to forget that his skillset is also transferred over from sc1 to sc2, the way you talk about Flash is like he began from scratch in sc2 which isn't true. Yeah sorry but sadly Mkp with his awesome control hasn't won a single gsl trophy yet Mvp has won 4. You mean NA/EU pro's? they're irrelevant. Sure he didn't start over from scratch in sc2 but guess what? neither did anybody else. By far the majority of sc2 players were sc1 pros. Don't even compare MKP to flash. MKP has always been a pro that specifically focused on micro more than macro. Flash since he first began to dominate in BW (after he finally figured out how to FE in every MU safely) has always been a player that focuses heavily on macro while having extremely good micro. Comparing them is like trying to compare apples to a five star restaurants lobster dinner. Kespa fanboy much? Mkp has extremely good micro backed up by good macro. Also your lobster dinner gets out purchased by apples. Where's JD, where's Bisu? Mechanically they belong to the best. Guess what they're still irrelevant at this stage. In the end it's much harder to dominate in sc2 because you're not only carried by zomg imba mechanics. Because it's easier it's harder to stand out.
Not a kespa fan, I'm a broodwar fanboy. Sure MKP had great micro and good macro but over the long run macro is always more important than micro this is just as true for pros as it is for casual players. If somebody is in any league below masters league it's going to be a macro problem 99% of the time. Look at the maps and all of the FE builds. It's all macro oriented for a reason. As for bisu/JD this shows how little you actually understand about BW. Bisu was never known for his amazing mechanics he was known for creating a revolutionary build in pvz. JD while having great mechanics had been starting to slump long before starcraft 2 came out and even then he wasn't known as a mechanical player. He was a cut throat player that had absolutely amazing zvz.
"zomg imba mechanics"
Oh I see now.... You're an idiot. Disregard my post(s).
User was warned for this post
|
On April 24 2013 05:22 Holy_AT wrote:
Could it be, that zerg units simply dont have a great synergy ?
And thats why we are seeing these kind of mono battles all the time ?
Ling/Bling vs Ling/Bling, Roach vs. Roach, now Mutas vs. Mutas.
The Infestor was the only unit in the Zerg arsenal that added synergy to its army but it was nerfed and now its in rare usage.
When you look at terran you have synergies between marines - mrauder - medivacs - mines, synergies between marines and tanks - vikings - medivacs, a spot of raven with seaker missile or point defense can be added to every composition ...
When you look at protoss, the so called deathball is actually also a huge synergy where the count of certain unts vary according to the meta game.
When playing zerg or seeing zerg play you often just get these mono cultures of units of mass zerlings, roach pushes, sometimes roach hydra. Roach - hydra - defiler(what is it called again) showed some promise at the start, but has been shut down to some degree. Of course there are some compositions of units, but they just dont have the same synergy as the other races.
Thats my view on Zrtg as a whole at least.
I really would like the oracle change, because as of now you can shut it down relavely easily.
yes and no. Zergs lack of Bonus damage allows them to fight everything with everything, their varying factor is the armor type. So where other races might need 2 units because they need Bonus damage against something, Zerg can use just one. This gives Zerg a more swarmy feel, because there is more of one type.
There still is a ton of synergy between units though. Muta Corruptor for example. You can really see that those 2 units are designed to work together to fight other air compositions. Roach and Hydra were basically meant to work together (before Blizzard messed up and gave Roaches range 4, because Zergs amoved 1 supply roach blobs over the map and died because 20% was attacking)
Also Queens work in every composition because they are just psy armor and Heal. Also Infestors and Vipers are the perfect double team, though unaffordable gas wise.
At the end Zerg might be a race that needs less different types. But they still need more then one type. Because the opponent can deal with one type really easily. Ultras no issue, add in something as fast that deals damage (Mutas or Lings) and they get really scary.
Even Muta wars are not decided by Mutas currently, but by the Lings and Banelings below. So it is far from Mono. But Muta wars are silly anyway. Corruptors add so much power to Muta balls against Mutas. Saves tons of gas allowing a tech switch. Of course your positioning needs to be really good.
But a reason why it often is Mono is because of the players. They seem to love to just press one button. It is even really rare for them to produce workers alongside units. It is either one or the other.
I really dislike what they made with Swarmhosts though. Swarmhosts are basically lategame Roaches now. Bit harder to control, but way more damage and supply efficient. I liked their plan that was supposed to use Locusts as tanks. But right now they tank as in, they do so much damage that you better kill them first.
Anyway learned a new way how you can deny Hellbat harassment today. Have one anti air building in the mineral line so that workers path through but Hellbats can't.
|
While I don't mind the changes and I definitely see them as ways to improve the units they affect without messing with balance in a detrimental way, I am kind of sad that there isn't much more on the table for the PBTM this time around. I was really hoping to see bigger changes being asked of; aside from the Oracle increase, issues with Protoss still haven't been heard about much.
|
United Kingdom12022 Posts
On April 24 2013 05:22 Holy_AT wrote:
Could it be, that zerg units simply dont have a great synergy ?
And thats why we are seeing these kind of mono battles all the time ?
Ling/Bling vs Ling/Bling, Roach vs. Roach, now Mutas vs. Mutas.
The Infestor was the only unit in the Zerg arsenal that added synergy to its army but it was nerfed and now its in rare usage.
Infestors never added synergy to the army. Infestors were the army >_>
|
On April 24 2013 01:14 Bagi wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 01:05 danl9rm wrote:On April 23 2013 23:40 mprs wrote:On April 23 2013 22:33 Bagi wrote:
A 50/50 burrow at hatch tech could bring a ton of variety to zerg early game plays. At that price, there's no reason NOT to get it early on. Well, I think you still want players to make a cost analysis, otherwise you might as well just give it to them for free. I'd be ok with that :p Free siege tech, free burrow?  Would be fun against protoss, burrow your scout drone to block their nexus until observers are out. Alternatively burrow it to prevent wall-off and just early pool every game.
Don't be silly.
"...burrow your scout drone[S] to block their" everything 
|
On April 24 2013 04:57 PanzerElite wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 04:51 omnic wrote:On April 24 2013 04:46 PanzerElite wrote:On April 24 2013 04:40 omnic wrote:On April 24 2013 04:15 eviltomahawk wrote:On April 24 2013 03:41 IdrA wrote:On April 24 2013 03:17 Rabiator wrote:On April 24 2013 02:12 Darksoldierr wrote:On April 24 2013 01:24 Rabiator wrote:On April 24 2013 00:39 ishmoks wrote:Regarding rewarding high level players, check out Artosis blog post "The Raised Skill Ceiling: HotS vs BW" at http://scdojo.tumblr.com/What he wrote makes sense. Sadly he only looks at how the new game mechanics affect high level players ... who can manage the additional power of not having to "battle the (movement) AI and unit selection mechanics" really nicely, but for the average players it is a totally different story. They are overwhelmed by the amount of stuff and thus the biggest part of being good is the ability to split-second-multitask. Just watch TLO streaming and you will see him switching his view 3-4 times per second in constant action while a normal player might switch once every 5 seconds maybe. SC2 has the power, but for most people this amount of power is too much to handle and that is where BW was better, because the stuff you had to "fight" (unit selection limit, movement, low production) leveled the playing field between the players to such an extent that you games werent such easy walkovers as they are in SC2 on the lower end of the scale IF you manage to get one of several stupidly powerful and gimmicky units going. Banelings, warp-ins in the enemy base, Nydus worms are some of the examples, but now we have to add Oracles, Mutalisks, Speed-Medivacs and a few more to the list. I dont want to be rude, but a good Brood War player would have destroyed a causal Brood War player even more than in Sc2. In Sc2 thanks to the lot of all ins, the weaker player (unless the skill difference is that high) has a chance to win. Sc2 is lot more forgiving than BW was. Saying Sc2 is "harder" because you don't fight the AI or UI but units is like saying Football is hard, because the ball is rounded and can go anywhere. Ummm ... the difference between a "good" and a "casual" player is not the question. It is the difference between a casual and a slightly better casual and the ability to have "stupid wins" (the ones ending with ragequit) in SC2 due to the all-or-nothing kind of units AND the ability mass up a critical number with about any kind of unit while your opponent - who is rather sloppy with his mechanics just as you are - does not do so. In BW you didnt have the ability to get a critical number with any kind of unit because you had to "fight the game" with the movement and the unit selection limitations. THAT WAS GOOD ... for casuals but pros dont care for either way!!!! SC2 is obviously harder because you have LOTS MORE to do at the same time ... multitasking is a killer and so are gimmicky units which bypass strategic play. In BW you didnt have blink, burrowed movement, Nydus worms that can surface anywhere, warp-ins, ... all things which add requirements to SC2 which casuals do not have. Thus the game is harder for casuals than BW is. BW was simpler and less gimmicky and thus easier to play, even though it took more effort to play. Just dont think about "using units" but rather think about "playing against units" and then limit yourself to half your thoughts about them and you might see the problem of SC2. rofl Well that settles it. Yeah it does, because BW was way harder than sc2 and anybody who doesn't think so never played BW at anything beyond the lowest level of play. Blink/marine splitting/nydus worms/warp-ins are all incredibly easy and anybody that tries to suggest that these are the reasons why it's harder to play is talking out of their ass. Yh but it is waaaaay harder to dominate in sc2. No, it's really not. While Mvp was the King of Wol, he wasn't as dominant as his bw counterparts. Yh bw was harder mechanically, but it's harder to be consistent in sc2. Prove me wrong... O, wait you can't. haha
That is because there are shitload random all ins and timings. And even the so called metagame was constantly evolving during the last two - three years. So was in BW, but as much lower speed.
BW rewarded the better player more, thats it. Saying Sc2 is harder is such a weird statement, one should think, you never ever played BW multiplayer on higher level than just causal
|
Blizzard: "We tuned in to the GSTL that one time that FXOLucky did that cool burrow push on 2 bases, and we thought that was awesome and we're changing the cost so that more people do that"
Quite a dumb line of thought, but I don't disagree with the end product of improving burrow.
|
If Hydras had +1 armor, would't it help a lot specially against voids, mutalisks, and stimmed marines?
|
On April 24 2013 05:55 omnic wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 05:45 PanzerElite wrote:On April 24 2013 05:34 omnic wrote:On April 24 2013 05:27 PanzerElite wrote:On April 24 2013 05:19 omnic wrote:On April 24 2013 05:12 PanzerElite wrote:On April 24 2013 05:02 omnic wrote:On April 24 2013 04:57 PanzerElite wrote:On April 24 2013 04:51 omnic wrote:On April 24 2013 04:46 PanzerElite wrote:
[quote]
Yh but it is waaaaay harder to dominate in sc2.
No, it's really not. While Mvp was the King of Wol, he wasn't as dominant as his bw counterparts. Yh bw was harder mechanically, but it's harder to be consistent in sc2. Prove me wrong... O, wait you can't. haha That probably has something to do with the fact that SC2 is still in the baby stage of being an esport. The game itself is volatile only because it hasn't been out for that long. Give it 4-5 years after blizzard stops making changes and you'll see players dominating. Alternatively just keep watching flash who is already basically a code S tier player even though he's been playing the game for half as long as anybody else. Code S tier doesn't mean domination, Flash is doing very bad in SPL. Because it's easier it's harder for mechanically better players to stand out. Or your name is Mvp and you just pull out wins with knowledge instead of ultra fancy mechanics. And after 4 or 5 years mechanically superior players still won't be able to just dominate over others because mechanics will only carry you so far. Mkp? Yes Mvp is still awesome while his wrist exploded, but Mkp's control > Mvp's (handicapped Mvp). Sc2 also needs you to be smart you can't do the same thing over and over in this game. Being code S tier when you have had half the time to play the game as anybody else does though because it suggests that flash is getting better faster than anybody else in the scene and if you think mechanics are "flashy" and are not the main reason why a player wins games than we have nothing else to talk about. This is why so many pros stopped posting on forums. You seem to forget that his skillset is also transferred over from sc1 to sc2, the way you talk about Flash is like he began from scratch in sc2 which isn't true. Yeah sorry but sadly Mkp with his awesome control hasn't won a single gsl trophy yet Mvp has won 4. You mean NA/EU pro's? they're irrelevant. Sure he didn't start over from scratch in sc2 but guess what? neither did anybody else. By far the majority of sc2 players were sc1 pros. Don't even compare MKP to flash. MKP has always been a pro that specifically focused on micro more than macro. Flash since he first began to dominate in BW (after he finally figured out how to FE in every MU safely) has always been a player that focuses heavily on macro while having extremely good micro. Comparing them is like trying to compare apples to a five star restaurants lobster dinner. Kespa fanboy much? Mkp has extremely good micro backed up by good macro. Also your lobster dinner gets out purchased by apples. Where's JD, where's Bisu? Mechanically they belong to the best. Guess what they're still irrelevant at this stage. In the end it's much harder to dominate in sc2 because you're not only carried by zomg imba mechanics. Because it's easier it's harder to stand out. Not a kespa fan, I'm a broodwar fanboy. Sure MKP had great micro and good macro but over the long run macro is always more important than micro this is just as true for pros as it is for casual players. If somebody is in any league below masters league it's going to be a macro problem 99% of the time. Look at the maps and all of the FE builds. It's all macro oriented for a reason. As for bisu/JD this shows how little you actually understand about BW. Bisu was never known for his amazing mechanics he was known for creating a revolutionary build in pvz. JD while having great mechanics had been starting to slump long before starcraft 2 came out and even then he wasn't known as a mechanical player. He was a cut throat player that had absolutely amazing zvz. "zomg imba mechanics" Oh I see now.... You're an idiot. Disregard my post(s).
I'm sorry but you're just an elitist 'bw is better period~!' idiot. Just keep pretending that sc2 is super easy, if it were so easy some players would dominate the rest. Mvp, the guy has some serious health problems and still was the best wol player ever though others were far better mechanically in terms of macro and micro. You can't argue with that, the end. Keep believing your own nonsense that it's all so easy. Hey why don't you then go qualify for Code S? ROLF.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
