|
On May 11 2013 01:03 Greendotz wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2013 10:04 avilo wrote:
For the most part right now they made a good decision to leave everything alone. The game is near perfect balance at the moment.
...
Beyond build order openings, the game is perfectly balanced.
...
That's about it though. GJ on them on seeing how players develop the metagame further. Wow, never thought I'd see the day.
I know right? From avilo?? Well all we need now is IdrA to admit it lol
|
On May 11 2013 03:31 Graven wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2013 23:50 Pitrocelli wrote:
This announcement is tipping point for me and i had to uninstall the game.
My current level was slightly behind GM, best rated as 259th (Master) few days ago. (http://sc2ranks.com/eu/603719/Pitro)
I am playing with 21% win-rate vs Terran on my level while i have 60+ vs Z and 70- vs P. (+- 150 games sample size)
I believe all-ins should be way to add variability to your game. If they became standard in metagame i feel it is wrong and game is volatile. Ultra-greedy terran openings are forcing zergs to make allin or be behind. We can see this on GSL (Symbol nydus play) and everywhere else with roach - bling busts.
I always loved ling, bling, muta style while adding fast burrow to expand and map control, baneling mines and infestors instead of hive rush.
Things i hate:
1, Terran scan randomly to push creep and because of ridiculous size of scan he sees baneling mines before line of creep.
2, Hellbat drop is impossible to be cost ineffective. Even if i loose 0 drones and pull them all until the drop is cleared i lost more than 300:100 in mining time.
3, Overseers are so uncomfortable to use. When i compare ease of pressing button and gaining vision to struggles of keeping overseers alive ... Eventually they run into stimmed marines or mine and die .. i have to remake and wait for them with rest of army due to their ridiculous move speed (even upgraded)
4, You loose one fight, you lost the game. .. this never applies vice versa. Ever since terrans realised all they have to do is to rally all barracks after winning fight i loose a lot more games.
5,Great disparities in gas spending. Having to upgrade 4 upgrades instead of terran 2 when i play my style. Terrans had to upgrade vehicle weapons as well, now they just rush to 3:3 bio. They had to use ghost and spend gas. Now ? They don't even need or use them. Zerg, on the other hand must upgrade melee and muta upgrades while making gas heavy units like infestors or banelings to counter mineral sink. (powered by mules)
6, Fact that you almost cant punish widow mines. If you caught sieges out of position you could snipe them. Now you need 3 baneling (150 : 75) to snipe 1 widow mine (75 : 25). If you are being dropped in several places while trying to hold main army, creeps spread etc you don't have chance for more micro intensive techniques .. at least i don't on my level.
7, Fact that you almost cant counter attack now. WM negate fast counter attacks into thinking how to split lings if overseer is needed, where is your overseer located etc.
8, Expand structure on maps. While i have 3 bases close to each other i can defend. Later in game you are getting dropped, trying to deny terran 4 active mining bases ( which if achieved by T is GG) your expands tend to be far more apart from each other. Often times your expands are on different side of map. You need to get your main army thinner and thinner while terran start to go into mass orbital mode, sacrifice scv's and his army is getting bigger and bigger instead.
9, Fact that zerg static defence is loosing in value as time progress. Terran can upgrade armour, toss shields. I cant make spine crowlers do shit in late games against 3:3 bio... but i still make them since i have to spend minerals somehow.
This is why i cant stand playing ZvT anymore .. it may be balanced stat wise (which i dont believe except for top 30 zerg worldwide) but i am forced to do allins and it sure is not balanced effort or satisfaction - wise... whole ZvT feels like big frustration-fest for me. In complete agreement...though to be honest, I'm thrilled when I see Hellbats as I'm typically forced to go into Roach play anyway. I'd much rather see Hellbat drops than bio because it typically means the Terran has less barracks than normal or less mines. The most important point you make it cost-efficiency though and you're absolutely correct. A bio-medevac-mine army needs: bio attack x3, bio armor x3, stim, marine health and possibly maurader slow. Ling, bling, muta needs: melee attack x3, armor x3, air attack x3, air armor x3, ling speed and bling speed. Roach, Hydra, Infestor needs: Range Speed x3, armor x3, Roach speed, Hydra range, Hydra speed and Infestor Mana Made even worse, on a long enough timeline (i.e. once bio is 3/3) Zerg won't trade effectively and will need to progress to Ultra's and their armor upgrade, whereas Terran progresses to essentially nothing (possibly Ravens, but it's rare to see). The anti-Zerg response has always been: "Well, Zerg's aren't supposed to be cost-efficient, they're supposed to be up on bases!" Sadly it's near impossible to stay up on bases against a mid-game Terran with the addition of Medevac boosters (which, btw, isn't an upgrade that Terran needs to spend anything on -- seriously, I'd love to know the reason why I need to invest 300/300 for my Hydra's to not be worthless--400/400 if you include the den itself--but Terran has Medevac boosts at no cost). The entire matchup feels broken to me and the gaming community is relying on the elite pro-Zerg players doing well as proof that it's ok. I want to see Blizzard come forward with TvZ matchup data outside of GM and show me that's it's balanced. As I've mentioned before in this thread, I'm under 30% winrate vs. Terran now and I'm not alone. The numbers speak for themselves...so for any Zerg out there claiming the matchup is balanced, what is your strategy, league and winrate vs. Terran right now?
I have been playing with probably a 30% winrate in TvP in masters the last half year. Although I don't come crying on the forums that the game is broken. Sure I get mad but I have just come to realize I am just bad at the matchup. I don't have good enough micro to beat the protoss deathball. I have also realized by watching pros that my ghosts come late and my Viking count is usually too low.
In my opinion TvP at masters is the same as ZvT. It just happens to be a little easier for one side. I look at the zergs I lose to and many are still maintaining good winrates in TvZ. Maybe zergs need to just realize their ling bling muta play is weak because they were playing a completly different style in Wol. My bio is weak which is why I struggle against toss and even zergs still.
|
On May 11 2013 04:05 scypio wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2013 03:52 Graven wrote:On May 11 2013 03:44 scypio wrote:
I really like the way the game looks right now. More than ever I find myself thinking about how are the players performing rather than what races they play. I even switched to random as it seems a lot of fun.
Speaking of fun, it's hilarious how the zergs are still whining about the balance and stuff, winning two last major tournaments (MLG and Dreamhack) and taking up half of the spots in GSL Code S ro8. Please, guys... just stop. It's so frustrating to think that some of you feel that the races who win torney's have any relevance on 99.9% of the rest of us. In fact, I'd even argue that the reason Zerg's elite are doing so well now is because elite Terran's are abusing lesser Zerg's on ladder and in practice games and aren't being forced to evolve their bio-mine strat in practice. The strat has no end-game transition...it's just mass bio-mine and drop everywhere until your Zerg opponent rage quits. Elite Zerg's are able to withstand the assualt and punish the Terran's lack of transition, but that doesn't help the rest of us. We see 20 or so Zerg's performing really well against Terran right now and every other Zerg getting rolled and you think that equates to balance? Yes! Also, I remember the days when terrans went extinct from the foreign scene. In those days the Zergs just said: look at GSL you bunch of scrubs and L2P (well, at least until the terrans were dead in GSL too). What happened: second or third tier zergs did take some damage but they are still doing fine. I think they bring a lot of good to the competition. I'm talking about guys like Bly, Slivko or Tefel... maybe there is only 20 of them, but compared to the days of WoL and the way the T's did that is plenty. The matchups did evolve. I remember the days of WoL where TvP was my best matchup. With HotS a lot has changed and my favourite pressure-expand build simply fails almost every time. I know this simply means I need to adapt, not whine about how unwinnable the TvP has become. Just let it go. As long as you are not a pro gamer you can live with having 2 hot matchups and a single bad one. Just take the demotion or whatever like a man. Have fun playing the game, enjoy the few wins you can eek out vs Terrans and the all the others where you smash those noob zergs and tosses into oblivion. And watch your favorite players do the things that you apparently can't.
I don't care what league I'm in, lol...I'd gladly drop down if it would help...but because I do well against Zerg's and Protoss currently, I don't get demoted. I'm stuck in a viscous cycle at this point. When I lose to a Protoss it's because I screwed up or got out-played, but when I lose to a Terran, it's just frustration...it's very rare that I genuinley feel that the Terran was a better player. So dropping down another league so I can steam roll two of my matchups and compete against bad Terrans doesn't sound fun.
|
On May 11 2013 04:12 HolyArrow wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2013 03:52 Graven wrote:On May 11 2013 03:44 scypio wrote:
I really like the way the game looks right now. More than ever I find myself thinking about how are the players performing rather than what races they play. I even switched to random as it seems a lot of fun.
Speaking of fun, it's hilarious how the zergs are still whining about the balance and stuff, winning two last major tournaments (MLG and Dreamhack) and taking up half of the spots in GSL Code S ro8. Please, guys... just stop. It's so frustrating to think that some of you feel that the races who win torney's have any relevance on 99.9% of the rest of us. In fact, I'd even argue that the reason Zerg's elite are doing so well now is because elite Terran's are abusing lesser Zerg's on ladder and in practice games and aren't being forced to evolve their bio-mine strat in practice. The strat has no end-game transition...it's just mass bio-mine and drop everywhere until your Zerg opponent rage quits. Elite Zerg's are able to withstand the assualt and punish the Terran's lack of transition, but that doesn't help the rest of us. We see 20 or so Zerg's performing really well against Terran right now and every other Zerg getting rolled and you think that equates to balance? Balance at the very top level is more important than balance at whatever level you're at (even if you're high Masters or something). I'd rather it be balanced for the people who have dedicated their lives to the game rather than the people who casually play in their free time. If it could be for both, then great, but if it's currently well-balanced at the pro level and not as well balanced at the lower levels, I'd prefer that Blizzard forego balance changes in favor of keeping the equilibrium at the pro level.
Agreed...there is no debate there. Making sure that the pro-scene is balanced is the top priority and no amount of under-league issues should phase that balance. However, I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. I think the game could stay competative at the top while being tweaked.
The issue is that the current imbalance preys on lesser players.
|
On May 11 2013 04:32 Mattumsfox wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2013 03:31 Graven wrote:On May 10 2013 23:50 Pitrocelli wrote:
This announcement is tipping point for me and i had to uninstall the game.
My current level was slightly behind GM, best rated as 259th (Master) few days ago. (http://sc2ranks.com/eu/603719/Pitro)
I am playing with 21% win-rate vs Terran on my level while i have 60+ vs Z and 70- vs P. (+- 150 games sample size)
I believe all-ins should be way to add variability to your game. If they became standard in metagame i feel it is wrong and game is volatile. Ultra-greedy terran openings are forcing zergs to make allin or be behind. We can see this on GSL (Symbol nydus play) and everywhere else with roach - bling busts.
I always loved ling, bling, muta style while adding fast burrow to expand and map control, baneling mines and infestors instead of hive rush.
Things i hate:
1, Terran scan randomly to push creep and because of ridiculous size of scan he sees baneling mines before line of creep.
2, Hellbat drop is impossible to be cost ineffective. Even if i loose 0 drones and pull them all until the drop is cleared i lost more than 300:100 in mining time.
3, Overseers are so uncomfortable to use. When i compare ease of pressing button and gaining vision to struggles of keeping overseers alive ... Eventually they run into stimmed marines or mine and die .. i have to remake and wait for them with rest of army due to their ridiculous move speed (even upgraded)
4, You loose one fight, you lost the game. .. this never applies vice versa. Ever since terrans realised all they have to do is to rally all barracks after winning fight i loose a lot more games.
5,Great disparities in gas spending. Having to upgrade 4 upgrades instead of terran 2 when i play my style. Terrans had to upgrade vehicle weapons as well, now they just rush to 3:3 bio. They had to use ghost and spend gas. Now ? They don't even need or use them. Zerg, on the other hand must upgrade melee and muta upgrades while making gas heavy units like infestors or banelings to counter mineral sink. (powered by mules)
6, Fact that you almost cant punish widow mines. If you caught sieges out of position you could snipe them. Now you need 3 baneling (150 : 75) to snipe 1 widow mine (75 : 25). If you are being dropped in several places while trying to hold main army, creeps spread etc you don't have chance for more micro intensive techniques .. at least i don't on my level.
7, Fact that you almost cant counter attack now. WM negate fast counter attacks into thinking how to split lings if overseer is needed, where is your overseer located etc.
8, Expand structure on maps. While i have 3 bases close to each other i can defend. Later in game you are getting dropped, trying to deny terran 4 active mining bases ( which if achieved by T is GG) your expands tend to be far more apart from each other. Often times your expands are on different side of map. You need to get your main army thinner and thinner while terran start to go into mass orbital mode, sacrifice scv's and his army is getting bigger and bigger instead.
9, Fact that zerg static defence is loosing in value as time progress. Terran can upgrade armour, toss shields. I cant make spine crowlers do shit in late games against 3:3 bio... but i still make them since i have to spend minerals somehow.
This is why i cant stand playing ZvT anymore .. it may be balanced stat wise (which i dont believe except for top 30 zerg worldwide) but i am forced to do allins and it sure is not balanced effort or satisfaction - wise... whole ZvT feels like big frustration-fest for me. In complete agreement...though to be honest, I'm thrilled when I see Hellbats as I'm typically forced to go into Roach play anyway. I'd much rather see Hellbat drops than bio because it typically means the Terran has less barracks than normal or less mines. The most important point you make it cost-efficiency though and you're absolutely correct. A bio-medevac-mine army needs: bio attack x3, bio armor x3, stim, marine health and possibly maurader slow. Ling, bling, muta needs: melee attack x3, armor x3, air attack x3, air armor x3, ling speed and bling speed. Roach, Hydra, Infestor needs: Range Speed x3, armor x3, Roach speed, Hydra range, Hydra speed and Infestor Mana Made even worse, on a long enough timeline (i.e. once bio is 3/3) Zerg won't trade effectively and will need to progress to Ultra's and their armor upgrade, whereas Terran progresses to essentially nothing (possibly Ravens, but it's rare to see). The anti-Zerg response has always been: "Well, Zerg's aren't supposed to be cost-efficient, they're supposed to be up on bases!" Sadly it's near impossible to stay up on bases against a mid-game Terran with the addition of Medevac boosters (which, btw, isn't an upgrade that Terran needs to spend anything on -- seriously, I'd love to know the reason why I need to invest 300/300 for my Hydra's to not be worthless--400/400 if you include the den itself--but Terran has Medevac boosts at no cost). The entire matchup feels broken to me and the gaming community is relying on the elite pro-Zerg players doing well as proof that it's ok. I want to see Blizzard come forward with TvZ matchup data outside of GM and show me that's it's balanced. As I've mentioned before in this thread, I'm under 30% winrate vs. Terran now and I'm not alone. The numbers speak for themselves...so for any Zerg out there claiming the matchup is balanced, what is your strategy, league and winrate vs. Terran right now? I have been playing with probably a 30% winrate in TvP in masters the last half year. Although I don't come crying on the forums that the game is broken. Sure I get mad but I have just come to realize I am just bad at the matchup. I don't have good enough micro to beat the protoss deathball. I have also realized by watching pros that my ghosts come late and my Viking count is usually too low. In my opinion TvP at masters is the same as ZvT. It just happens to be a little easier for one side. I look at the zergs I lose to and many are still maintaining good winrates in TvZ. Maybe zergs need to just realize their ling bling muta play is weak because they were playing a completly different style in Wol. My bio is weak which is why I struggle against toss and even zergs still.
Ling-bling-Muta is "weak" vs. Bio-Mine-Medevac because Marines and Mines hard counter Muta's, which are the largest investment in the Zerg composition. The issue is that the "ideal" Zerg response right now to Bio-Mine is illogical, haha. I'm hoping that someone can pioneer an alternative because it's terribly frustrating right now.
And I hate to think that these convos are us crying...it's really just Zerg's opening up the discussion. Presumably, all of us are looking for answers
|
On May 11 2013 04:40 Graven wrote:
Ling-bling-Muta is "weak" vs. Bio-Mine-Medevac because Marines and Mines hard counter Muta's, which are the largest investment in the Zerg composition. The issue is that the "ideal" Zerg response right now to Bio-Mine is illogical, haha. I'm hoping that someone can pioneer an alternative because it's terribly frustrating right now.
And I hate to think that these convos are us crying...it's really just Zerg's opening up the discussion. Presumably, all of us are looking for answers
The one thing you could do is switch to Terran. You should quickly reach a level similar or a little below the one you have as a zerg. And you will soon find out: how do zergs win games at your level. What is the most frustrating thing to play against as a terran. What do the zergs do to snipe does mines, bust through defensive lines, successfully harrass, outmacro, obliterate whole armies with a bunch of ultras that never seem to die.
Than you go back to zerg and try to do those things. I play random and when I lose to something I try to mirror it and look for some weak spots. This makes a lot of frustration go away.
|
On May 11 2013 04:40 Graven wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2013 04:32 Mattumsfox wrote:On May 11 2013 03:31 Graven wrote:On May 10 2013 23:50 Pitrocelli wrote:
This announcement is tipping point for me and i had to uninstall the game.
My current level was slightly behind GM, best rated as 259th (Master) few days ago. (http://sc2ranks.com/eu/603719/Pitro)
I am playing with 21% win-rate vs Terran on my level while i have 60+ vs Z and 70- vs P. (+- 150 games sample size)
I believe all-ins should be way to add variability to your game. If they became standard in metagame i feel it is wrong and game is volatile. Ultra-greedy terran openings are forcing zergs to make allin or be behind. We can see this on GSL (Symbol nydus play) and everywhere else with roach - bling busts.
I always loved ling, bling, muta style while adding fast burrow to expand and map control, baneling mines and infestors instead of hive rush.
Things i hate:
1, Terran scan randomly to push creep and because of ridiculous size of scan he sees baneling mines before line of creep.
2, Hellbat drop is impossible to be cost ineffective. Even if i loose 0 drones and pull them all until the drop is cleared i lost more than 300:100 in mining time.
3, Overseers are so uncomfortable to use. When i compare ease of pressing button and gaining vision to struggles of keeping overseers alive ... Eventually they run into stimmed marines or mine and die .. i have to remake and wait for them with rest of army due to their ridiculous move speed (even upgraded)
4, You loose one fight, you lost the game. .. this never applies vice versa. Ever since terrans realised all they have to do is to rally all barracks after winning fight i loose a lot more games.
5,Great disparities in gas spending. Having to upgrade 4 upgrades instead of terran 2 when i play my style. Terrans had to upgrade vehicle weapons as well, now they just rush to 3:3 bio. They had to use ghost and spend gas. Now ? They don't even need or use them. Zerg, on the other hand must upgrade melee and muta upgrades while making gas heavy units like infestors or banelings to counter mineral sink. (powered by mules)
6, Fact that you almost cant punish widow mines. If you caught sieges out of position you could snipe them. Now you need 3 baneling (150 : 75) to snipe 1 widow mine (75 : 25). If you are being dropped in several places while trying to hold main army, creeps spread etc you don't have chance for more micro intensive techniques .. at least i don't on my level.
7, Fact that you almost cant counter attack now. WM negate fast counter attacks into thinking how to split lings if overseer is needed, where is your overseer located etc.
8, Expand structure on maps. While i have 3 bases close to each other i can defend. Later in game you are getting dropped, trying to deny terran 4 active mining bases ( which if achieved by T is GG) your expands tend to be far more apart from each other. Often times your expands are on different side of map. You need to get your main army thinner and thinner while terran start to go into mass orbital mode, sacrifice scv's and his army is getting bigger and bigger instead.
9, Fact that zerg static defence is loosing in value as time progress. Terran can upgrade armour, toss shields. I cant make spine crowlers do shit in late games against 3:3 bio... but i still make them since i have to spend minerals somehow.
This is why i cant stand playing ZvT anymore .. it may be balanced stat wise (which i dont believe except for top 30 zerg worldwide) but i am forced to do allins and it sure is not balanced effort or satisfaction - wise... whole ZvT feels like big frustration-fest for me. In complete agreement...though to be honest, I'm thrilled when I see Hellbats as I'm typically forced to go into Roach play anyway. I'd much rather see Hellbat drops than bio because it typically means the Terran has less barracks than normal or less mines. The most important point you make it cost-efficiency though and you're absolutely correct. A bio-medevac-mine army needs: bio attack x3, bio armor x3, stim, marine health and possibly maurader slow. Ling, bling, muta needs: melee attack x3, armor x3, air attack x3, air armor x3, ling speed and bling speed. Roach, Hydra, Infestor needs: Range Speed x3, armor x3, Roach speed, Hydra range, Hydra speed and Infestor Mana Made even worse, on a long enough timeline (i.e. once bio is 3/3) Zerg won't trade effectively and will need to progress to Ultra's and their armor upgrade, whereas Terran progresses to essentially nothing (possibly Ravens, but it's rare to see). The anti-Zerg response has always been: "Well, Zerg's aren't supposed to be cost-efficient, they're supposed to be up on bases!" Sadly it's near impossible to stay up on bases against a mid-game Terran with the addition of Medevac boosters (which, btw, isn't an upgrade that Terran needs to spend anything on -- seriously, I'd love to know the reason why I need to invest 300/300 for my Hydra's to not be worthless--400/400 if you include the den itself--but Terran has Medevac boosts at no cost). The entire matchup feels broken to me and the gaming community is relying on the elite pro-Zerg players doing well as proof that it's ok. I want to see Blizzard come forward with TvZ matchup data outside of GM and show me that's it's balanced. As I've mentioned before in this thread, I'm under 30% winrate vs. Terran now and I'm not alone. The numbers speak for themselves...so for any Zerg out there claiming the matchup is balanced, what is your strategy, league and winrate vs. Terran right now? I have been playing with probably a 30% winrate in TvP in masters the last half year. Although I don't come crying on the forums that the game is broken. Sure I get mad but I have just come to realize I am just bad at the matchup. I don't have good enough micro to beat the protoss deathball. I have also realized by watching pros that my ghosts come late and my Viking count is usually too low. In my opinion TvP at masters is the same as ZvT. It just happens to be a little easier for one side. I look at the zergs I lose to and many are still maintaining good winrates in TvZ. Maybe zergs need to just realize their ling bling muta play is weak because they were playing a completly different style in Wol. My bio is weak which is why I struggle against toss and even zergs still. Ling-bling-Muta is "weak" vs. Bio-Mine-Medevac because Marines and Mines hard counter Muta's, which are the largest investment in the Zerg composition. The issue is that the "ideal" Zerg response right now to Bio-Mine is illogical, haha. I'm hoping that someone can pioneer an alternative because it's terribly frustrating right now. And I hate to think that these convos are us crying...it's really just Zerg's opening up the discussion. Presumably, all of us are looking for answers
My guess is that the answer will be infestors, either with roach (hydra), or ling, baneling. (I think despite the obvious advantage of locking down units with fungal and then killing them with banelings that with roach hydra it is easier on non-pro level, you can pretty much a-move roach hydra while micro'ing infestors). Aditionally what I am already seeing more on streams is a more diverse tech path. For example with that tech path investing a bit in a spire to make a bunch of mutas while not going full on mutas.
But really I expect infestors to become more popular again. ITs are heavily nerfed, but the fungal has even more range. With the speed of the projectile actively dodging it with bio is pretty much impossible, passive dodging (ie, you just happened to make a turn just when the zerg casts) will happen and limit its effectiveness. But I think in general it is a matter of practising with it, where to cast for best hits.
Luckily due to IT nerf we won't go back to the era of: make 20 infestors, ???, profit. How many you want exactly for fungals is something that will need to be discovered, it also depends on your casting skill, but I really think they are underused right now.
|
On May 11 2013 04:53 scypio wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2013 04:40 Graven wrote:
Ling-bling-Muta is "weak" vs. Bio-Mine-Medevac because Marines and Mines hard counter Muta's, which are the largest investment in the Zerg composition. The issue is that the "ideal" Zerg response right now to Bio-Mine is illogical, haha. I'm hoping that someone can pioneer an alternative because it's terribly frustrating right now.
And I hate to think that these convos are us crying...it's really just Zerg's opening up the discussion. Presumably, all of us are looking for answers The one thing you could do is switch to Terran. You should quickly reach a level similar or a little below the one you have as a zerg. And you will soon find out: how do zergs win games at your level. What is the most frustrating thing to play against as a terran. What do the zergs do to snipe does mines, bust through defensive lines, successfully harrass, outmacro, obliterate whole armies with a bunch of ultras that never seem to die. Than you go back to zerg and try to do those things. I play random and when I lose to something I try to mirror it and look for some weak spots. This makes a lot of frustration go away.
I think that's great advice for all competative gaming...and I tended to play a lot of random in WC3 and currently play random in all SC2 team games. It's always helpful to see things from the other side and your advice would solve 90% of all gaming-related QQ. My concern, however, is that there is a genuine imbalance right now and it extends beyond perspective.
As for Ultra's, I already know they wrech Terran's, haha...the problem is getting to Ultra's before your economy is in shambles or you've already lost the game.
|
On May 11 2013 05:40 Sissors wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2013 04:40 Graven wrote:On May 11 2013 04:32 Mattumsfox wrote:On May 11 2013 03:31 Graven wrote:On May 10 2013 23:50 Pitrocelli wrote:
This announcement is tipping point for me and i had to uninstall the game.
My current level was slightly behind GM, best rated as 259th (Master) few days ago. (http://sc2ranks.com/eu/603719/Pitro)
I am playing with 21% win-rate vs Terran on my level while i have 60+ vs Z and 70- vs P. (+- 150 games sample size)
I believe all-ins should be way to add variability to your game. If they became standard in metagame i feel it is wrong and game is volatile. Ultra-greedy terran openings are forcing zergs to make allin or be behind. We can see this on GSL (Symbol nydus play) and everywhere else with roach - bling busts.
I always loved ling, bling, muta style while adding fast burrow to expand and map control, baneling mines and infestors instead of hive rush.
Things i hate:
1, Terran scan randomly to push creep and because of ridiculous size of scan he sees baneling mines before line of creep.
2, Hellbat drop is impossible to be cost ineffective. Even if i loose 0 drones and pull them all until the drop is cleared i lost more than 300:100 in mining time.
3, Overseers are so uncomfortable to use. When i compare ease of pressing button and gaining vision to struggles of keeping overseers alive ... Eventually they run into stimmed marines or mine and die .. i have to remake and wait for them with rest of army due to their ridiculous move speed (even upgraded)
4, You loose one fight, you lost the game. .. this never applies vice versa. Ever since terrans realised all they have to do is to rally all barracks after winning fight i loose a lot more games.
5,Great disparities in gas spending. Having to upgrade 4 upgrades instead of terran 2 when i play my style. Terrans had to upgrade vehicle weapons as well, now they just rush to 3:3 bio. They had to use ghost and spend gas. Now ? They don't even need or use them. Zerg, on the other hand must upgrade melee and muta upgrades while making gas heavy units like infestors or banelings to counter mineral sink. (powered by mules)
6, Fact that you almost cant punish widow mines. If you caught sieges out of position you could snipe them. Now you need 3 baneling (150 : 75) to snipe 1 widow mine (75 : 25). If you are being dropped in several places while trying to hold main army, creeps spread etc you don't have chance for more micro intensive techniques .. at least i don't on my level.
7, Fact that you almost cant counter attack now. WM negate fast counter attacks into thinking how to split lings if overseer is needed, where is your overseer located etc.
8, Expand structure on maps. While i have 3 bases close to each other i can defend. Later in game you are getting dropped, trying to deny terran 4 active mining bases ( which if achieved by T is GG) your expands tend to be far more apart from each other. Often times your expands are on different side of map. You need to get your main army thinner and thinner while terran start to go into mass orbital mode, sacrifice scv's and his army is getting bigger and bigger instead.
9, Fact that zerg static defence is loosing in value as time progress. Terran can upgrade armour, toss shields. I cant make spine crowlers do shit in late games against 3:3 bio... but i still make them since i have to spend minerals somehow.
This is why i cant stand playing ZvT anymore .. it may be balanced stat wise (which i dont believe except for top 30 zerg worldwide) but i am forced to do allins and it sure is not balanced effort or satisfaction - wise... whole ZvT feels like big frustration-fest for me. In complete agreement...though to be honest, I'm thrilled when I see Hellbats as I'm typically forced to go into Roach play anyway. I'd much rather see Hellbat drops than bio because it typically means the Terran has less barracks than normal or less mines. The most important point you make it cost-efficiency though and you're absolutely correct. A bio-medevac-mine army needs: bio attack x3, bio armor x3, stim, marine health and possibly maurader slow. Ling, bling, muta needs: melee attack x3, armor x3, air attack x3, air armor x3, ling speed and bling speed. Roach, Hydra, Infestor needs: Range Speed x3, armor x3, Roach speed, Hydra range, Hydra speed and Infestor Mana Made even worse, on a long enough timeline (i.e. once bio is 3/3) Zerg won't trade effectively and will need to progress to Ultra's and their armor upgrade, whereas Terran progresses to essentially nothing (possibly Ravens, but it's rare to see). The anti-Zerg response has always been: "Well, Zerg's aren't supposed to be cost-efficient, they're supposed to be up on bases!" Sadly it's near impossible to stay up on bases against a mid-game Terran with the addition of Medevac boosters (which, btw, isn't an upgrade that Terran needs to spend anything on -- seriously, I'd love to know the reason why I need to invest 300/300 for my Hydra's to not be worthless--400/400 if you include the den itself--but Terran has Medevac boosts at no cost). The entire matchup feels broken to me and the gaming community is relying on the elite pro-Zerg players doing well as proof that it's ok. I want to see Blizzard come forward with TvZ matchup data outside of GM and show me that's it's balanced. As I've mentioned before in this thread, I'm under 30% winrate vs. Terran now and I'm not alone. The numbers speak for themselves...so for any Zerg out there claiming the matchup is balanced, what is your strategy, league and winrate vs. Terran right now? I have been playing with probably a 30% winrate in TvP in masters the last half year. Although I don't come crying on the forums that the game is broken. Sure I get mad but I have just come to realize I am just bad at the matchup. I don't have good enough micro to beat the protoss deathball. I have also realized by watching pros that my ghosts come late and my Viking count is usually too low. In my opinion TvP at masters is the same as ZvT. It just happens to be a little easier for one side. I look at the zergs I lose to and many are still maintaining good winrates in TvZ. Maybe zergs need to just realize their ling bling muta play is weak because they were playing a completly different style in Wol. My bio is weak which is why I struggle against toss and even zergs still. Ling-bling-Muta is "weak" vs. Bio-Mine-Medevac because Marines and Mines hard counter Muta's, which are the largest investment in the Zerg composition. The issue is that the "ideal" Zerg response right now to Bio-Mine is illogical, haha. I'm hoping that someone can pioneer an alternative because it's terribly frustrating right now. And I hate to think that these convos are us crying...it's really just Zerg's opening up the discussion. Presumably, all of us are looking for answers My guess is that the answer will be infestors, either with roach (hydra), or ling, baneling. (I think despite the obvious advantage of locking down units with fungal and then killing them with banelings that with roach hydra it is easier on non-pro level, you can pretty much a-move roach hydra while micro'ing infestors). Aditionally what I am already seeing more on streams is a more diverse tech path. For example with that tech path investing a bit in a spire to make a bunch of mutas while not going full on mutas. But really I expect infestors to become more popular again. ITs are heavily nerfed, but the fungal has even more range. With the speed of the projectile actively dodging it with bio is pretty much impossible, passive dodging (ie, you just happened to make a turn just when the zerg casts) will happen and limit its effectiveness. But I think in general it is a matter of practising with it, where to cast for best hits. Luckily due to IT nerf we won't go back to the era of: make 20 infestors, ???, profit. How many you want exactly for fungals is something that will need to be discovered, it also depends on your casting skill, but I really think they are underused right now.
I've been under that similar line of thinking for a little while now -- Infestors paired with anything do great against bio...the issue is that creating an army of Roach-Hydra-Infestor and a pack of lings to defend from drops is impossible before drops start coming. Hydra's and Infestors are very gas dependant, on top of the entire army composition requiring heavy gas upgrades. It's rare that you face a passive bio-mine-medevac player. There's just a gap in time between when you have Roach-Ling and when you have Roach-Ling-Hydra-Infestor where Zerg tends to get overrun. And if you race for faster Hydra-Infestor, a simple timing push will crush you.
The synergy stength of Bio-Mine-Medevac is just a very frustrating army to deal with. You constantly feel like you're on the defensive, and that's after Terran has started with Reaper into Hellion harrass. To be honest, as a Zerg player I often feel like I'm the evil atificial intelligence that someone is trying to beat in a one-player video game, lol. The only early opportunity for Zerg to go on the attack is an all-in. We're forced to constantly mitigate damage long enough to where we can gain a significant enough economic advantage to strike.
|
I am really interested to see how this will work out. I mean mutas can kill spores pretty fast when you have a good number of mutas. So I am wondering how many mutas a spore can kill before it dies to mutas.
|
On May 11 2013 03:31 Graven wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2013 23:50 Pitrocelli wrote:
This announcement is tipping point for me and i had to uninstall the game.
My current level was slightly behind GM, best rated as 259th (Master) few days ago. (http://sc2ranks.com/eu/603719/Pitro)
I am playing with 21% win-rate vs Terran on my level while i have 60+ vs Z and 70- vs P. (+- 150 games sample size)
I believe all-ins should be way to add variability to your game. If they became standard in metagame i feel it is wrong and game is volatile. Ultra-greedy terran openings are forcing zergs to make allin or be behind. We can see this on GSL (Symbol nydus play) and everywhere else with roach - bling busts.
I always loved ling, bling, muta style while adding fast burrow to expand and map control, baneling mines and infestors instead of hive rush.
Things i hate:
1, Terran scan randomly to push creep and because of ridiculous size of scan he sees baneling mines before line of creep.
2, Hellbat drop is impossible to be cost ineffective. Even if i loose 0 drones and pull them all until the drop is cleared i lost more than 300:100 in mining time.
3, Overseers are so uncomfortable to use. When i compare ease of pressing button and gaining vision to struggles of keeping overseers alive ... Eventually they run into stimmed marines or mine and die .. i have to remake and wait for them with rest of army due to their ridiculous move speed (even upgraded)
4, You loose one fight, you lost the game. .. this never applies vice versa. Ever since terrans realised all they have to do is to rally all barracks after winning fight i loose a lot more games.
5,Great disparities in gas spending. Having to upgrade 4 upgrades instead of terran 2 when i play my style. Terrans had to upgrade vehicle weapons as well, now they just rush to 3:3 bio. They had to use ghost and spend gas. Now ? They don't even need or use them. Zerg, on the other hand must upgrade melee and muta upgrades while making gas heavy units like infestors or banelings to counter mineral sink. (powered by mules)
6, Fact that you almost cant punish widow mines. If you caught sieges out of position you could snipe them. Now you need 3 baneling (150 : 75) to snipe 1 widow mine (75 : 25). If you are being dropped in several places while trying to hold main army, creeps spread etc you don't have chance for more micro intensive techniques .. at least i don't on my level.
7, Fact that you almost cant counter attack now. WM negate fast counter attacks into thinking how to split lings if overseer is needed, where is your overseer located etc.
8, Expand structure on maps. While i have 3 bases close to each other i can defend. Later in game you are getting dropped, trying to deny terran 4 active mining bases ( which if achieved by T is GG) your expands tend to be far more apart from each other. Often times your expands are on different side of map. You need to get your main army thinner and thinner while terran start to go into mass orbital mode, sacrifice scv's and his army is getting bigger and bigger instead.
9, Fact that zerg static defence is loosing in value as time progress. Terran can upgrade armour, toss shields. I cant make spine crowlers do shit in late games against 3:3 bio... but i still make them since i have to spend minerals somehow.
This is why i cant stand playing ZvT anymore .. it may be balanced stat wise (which i dont believe except for top 30 zerg worldwide) but i am forced to do allins and it sure is not balanced effort or satisfaction - wise... whole ZvT feels like big frustration-fest for me. In complete agreement...though to be honest, I'm thrilled when I see Hellbats as I'm typically forced to go into Roach play anyway. I'd much rather see Hellbat drops than bio because it typically means the Terran has less barracks than normal or less mines. The most important point you make it cost-efficiency though and you're absolutely correct. A bio-medevac-mine army needs: bio attack x3, bio armor x3, stim, marine health and possibly maurader slow. Ling, bling, muta needs: melee attack x3, armor x3, air attack x3, air armor x3, ling speed and bling speed. Roach, Hydra, Infestor needs: Range Speed x3, armor x3, Roach speed, Hydra range, Hydra speed and Infestor Mana Made even worse, on a long enough timeline (i.e. once bio is 3/3) Zerg won't trade effectively and will need to progress to Ultra's and their armor upgrade, whereas Terran progresses to essentially nothing (possibly Ravens, but it's rare to see). The anti-Zerg response has always been: "Well, Zerg's aren't supposed to be cost-efficient, they're supposed to be up on bases!" Sadly it's near impossible to stay up on bases against a mid-game Terran with the addition of Medevac boosters (which, btw, isn't an upgrade that Terran needs to spend anything on -- seriously, I'd love to know the reason why I need to invest 300/300 for my Hydra's to not be worthless--400/400 if you include the den itself--but Terran has Medevac boosts at no cost). The entire matchup feels broken to me and the gaming community is relying on the elite pro-Zerg players doing well as proof that it's ok. I want to see Blizzard come forward with TvZ matchup data outside of GM and show me that's it's balanced. As I've mentioned before in this thread, I'm under 30% winrate vs. Terran now and I'm not alone. The numbers speak for themselves...so for any Zerg out there claiming the matchup is balanced, what is your strategy, league and winrate vs. Terran right now?
The problem isnt mines or drops, the problem is greed. Seriously, rewatch any of the latest gsl TvZs. Zergs win a lot with roach, baneling, nydus busts.
If you however let a 3cc, double ups, no tank, 2marines in a bunker opening go unpunished, you are simply behind unless you have 3base 70drones and double ups going at 9min. Which you wont if the terran built a reaper or hellion to go with his build.
|
Good choice by Blizzard the game is pretty fun to watch and does look pretty decently balanced so let it just evolve on its own. I think hellbats should be changed though like removing medivacs healing them or something because tvt has actually gotten more boring then wings. Its just whoever gets their drop into enemy base wins because you can not stop drops cost efficiently ever with how fast hellbats slaughter scvs.
|
I like this decision by Blizzard. Even if the game has been out for a while, there is still so much being figured out and it's really only ZvZ that is actually suffering in a way that makes it not fun to play or watch 
|
On May 11 2013 03:37 Pitrocelli wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2013 02:48 1Dhalism wrote:On May 10 2013 23:50 Pitrocelli wrote:
This announcement is tipping point for me and i had to uninstall the game.
My current level was slightly behind GM, best rated as 259th (Master) few days ago. (http://sc2ranks.com/eu/603719/Pitro)
I am playing with 21% win-rate vs Terran on my level while i have 60+ vs Z and 70- vs P. (+- 150 games sample size)
those numbers are too ridiculous to be taken as an indication of balance. When the disparity between your winrate and the winrate we see in pro scene is that abnormally large the only conclusion to make is that you do not understand ZvT. Granted, 150 games is not in any way a meaningful sample size. I forgot to mention (but it somehow can be deduced from previous post) that I refused to use all-ins in my ladder ZvT games since i have been trying solid style instead of all-in metagamish volatile style which I don't want to use in BO1 tournaments. If i scouted CC first i responded with 3 hatch instead of bust etc. Adding rouch based allin in different timing every game would artificially pump my win-rate to somehow standard 45% for sure but i prefer uninstalling over doing style I believe to be broken in long run. I have been doing a simple ritual after every ZvT game. I checked my opponent TvZ win-rate. Only one has been below 50%, 3 have been 51-60% and all the rest had 61% + winrate while most had 65+. One opponent had 95% win-rate in TvZ.. I dare you finding zerg with 95% ZvT win-rate. I maybe still have screens, dunno if they got erased after uninstall. I am pretty sure my understanding of game is not perfect but is better than that of 99% of players. Point me to exact logic flaws in points from my previous post.
i know how you feel because i can tell you ive played during the worst zerg days and im a horrible whiner myself. But my winrate in any matchup never dipped that low.
It could be that ZvT is imbalanced. I'm not gonna comment on that. It could be that you know how to play ZvT.
But 21% is simply unnatural. Whether its because its a matchup that doesnt click for you, maybe it was a downward spiral where you lost confidence in yourself and give up at the loading screen, or just feel rage i don't know.
But you cant blame imbalance on that. You have to step back and reexamine your play from ground up. There is like ~20% winrate lost there that is your fault.
I dunno if thats helpful or relevant seeing how you uninstalled. If this irritated you i apologize.
|
On May 11 2013 12:56 1Dhalism wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2013 03:37 Pitrocelli wrote:On May 11 2013 02:48 1Dhalism wrote:On May 10 2013 23:50 Pitrocelli wrote:
This announcement is tipping point for me and i had to uninstall the game.
My current level was slightly behind GM, best rated as 259th (Master) few days ago. (http://sc2ranks.com/eu/603719/Pitro)
I am playing with 21% win-rate vs Terran on my level while i have 60+ vs Z and 70- vs P. (+- 150 games sample size)
those numbers are too ridiculous to be taken as an indication of balance. When the disparity between your winrate and the winrate we see in pro scene is that abnormally large the only conclusion to make is that you do not understand ZvT. Granted, 150 games is not in any way a meaningful sample size. I forgot to mention (but it somehow can be deduced from previous post) that I refused to use all-ins in my ladder ZvT games since i have been trying solid style instead of all-in metagamish volatile style which I don't want to use in BO1 tournaments. If i scouted CC first i responded with 3 hatch instead of bust etc. Adding rouch based allin in different timing every game would artificially pump my win-rate to somehow standard 45% for sure but i prefer uninstalling over doing style I believe to be broken in long run. I have been doing a simple ritual after every ZvT game. I checked my opponent TvZ win-rate. Only one has been below 50%, 3 have been 51-60% and all the rest had 61% + winrate while most had 65+. One opponent had 95% win-rate in TvZ.. I dare you finding zerg with 95% ZvT win-rate. I maybe still have screens, dunno if they got erased after uninstall. I am pretty sure my understanding of game is not perfect but is better than that of 99% of players. Point me to exact logic flaws in points from my previous post. i know how you feel because i can tell you ive played during the worst zerg days and im a horrible whiner myself. But my winrate in any matchup never dipped that low. It could be that ZvT is imbalanced. I'm not gonna comment on that. It could be that you know how to play ZvT. But 21% is simply unnatural. Whether its because its a matchup that doesnt click for you, maybe it was a downward spiral where you lost confidence in yourself and give up at the loading screen, or just feel rage i don't know. But you cant blame imbalance on that. You have to step back and reexamine your play from ground up. There is like ~20% winrate lost there that is your fault. I dunno if thats helpful or relevant seeing how you uninstalled. If this irritated you i apologize.
I forgot to mention (but it somehow can be deduced from previous post) that I refused to use all-ins in my ladder ZvT games since i have been trying solid style instead of all-in metagamish volatile style which I don't want to use in BO1 tournaments. If i scouted CC first i responded with 3 hatch instead of bust etc. Adding rouch based allin in different timing every game would artificially pump my win-rate to somehow standard 45% for sure but i prefer uninstalling over doing style I believe to be broken in long run.
It's right there. People need to stop attempting to take the "moral highground" in a strategy game.
|
On May 11 2013 04:27 tuho12345 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2013 01:03 Greendotz wrote:On May 10 2013 10:04 avilo wrote:
For the most part right now they made a good decision to leave everything alone. The game is near perfect balance at the moment.
...
Beyond build order openings, the game is perfectly balanced.
...
That's about it though. GJ on them on seeing how players develop the metagame further. Wow, never thought I'd see the day. I know right? From avilo?? Well all we need now is IdrA to admit it lol
Of course he doesn't want anything changed. Terran is ridiculously overpowered right now.
So disgusted that they're not fixing TvZ.
|
On May 11 2013 04:27 tuho12345 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2013 01:03 Greendotz wrote:On May 10 2013 10:04 avilo wrote:
For the most part right now they made a good decision to leave everything alone. The game is near perfect balance at the moment.
...
Beyond build order openings, the game is perfectly balanced.
...
That's about it though. GJ on them on seeing how players develop the metagame further. Wow, never thought I'd see the day. I know right? From avilo?? Well all we need now is IdrA to admit it lol
actually, what you're saying doesn't make any sense.
a lot of people feel TvZ favors terran. for a terran to say it's 'perfectly balanced' is just more of the same...
|
On May 11 2013 04:25 ixi.genocide wrote:
Did they change the way that Apm is calculated or did I just get worse. I wish they would stop messing with Apm, it's odd to see me get 1/3 the apm after the change.
There has been reports of the apm before being bugged, for instance when playing team games there would be an overall apm cut when someone left the game. I've already read somewhere about the fact that it seemed to be some sort of multiplier at certain moments in the game. The apm cuts in team games I've experienced myself and the comments about apm multipliers seemed fairly legit but I'm afraid I cant find the source of it  .
Knowing how fast I am myself though the current numbers seem to be more accurate.
|
I don't understand this.
Surely buffing the spore crawlers gives a huge nerf to Protoss? So that stargate, oracles and warp prism harass are even less viable now?
|
On May 11 2013 17:25 Morlock wrote:
I don't understand this.
Surely buffing the spore crawlers gives a huge nerf to Protoss? So that stargate, oracles and warp prism harass are even less viable now?
The spore crawler buff is only plus damage to bio, so it only affects the ZvZ matchup.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
