|
On May 12 2013 19:37 Snowbear wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2013 17:03 Decendos wrote:On May 12 2013 16:51 scypio wrote:
I think there are some things getting mixed up in this thread. We can see some true balance complaints like:
"ZvT is almost unwinnable and all the Zergs will disappear from the tourneys, ladder etc". Tournament results and the long list of the zerg players that seem to be doing fine within the current metagame say otherwise.
And than there is another set of complaints that can be summed up with a statement: "I don't like the current meta/gameplay". This is understandable - for example a coinflip is pretty balanced, but it is not a lot of fun to watch (unless it's at Dreamhack).
Let's say little Johnny doesn't like MMM-based TvP and thinks that the right way to play versus Protoss is a 4-port banshee. Pretty soon you would see Johnny posting on TL with the idea of increasing the range, damage and hp on the banshee by 50% to make his goto strategy viable.
This is exactly what the zergies do: my (WoL) strat is not working, other strats(bust) are stupid: blizzard go nerf hellbat, speedvacs and widow mines!
For me saying things like "well, the game has been out for two months, I've played 100 games on the ladder and nothing's gonna change, blizzard fix this!" seems a bit hasty. And the idea of sacrificing balance in favor of a better gameplay is flawed. except its the other way around. the old WoL style roach or roach bane all ins or roach nydus allins (which symbol already did in WoL and havent changed one bit) are working if T is bad/doesnt scout/plays insanely greedy. the new stuff in midgame doesnt work: swarmhosts, faster hydras dont work AT ALL, regenerating mutas work if you outplay opponent. the guy mentioning all the macro zergs are out while all the "all in/cheesy zerg" got in ro8 is true to the most part (obv not all macro zergs game are macro and the other way around). thats what all zerg players say is stupid: if you are on equal skill AND want to play a standard macro game TvZ is imbalanced. what makes it a bit more balanced are all the all ins Z does. once T figures them out (roach nydus all in etc. is easy scoutable, so is every roach warren with 2 reaper opening), TvZ will get a lot worse. lets see how it gets fixed. its just NO FUN at all to all in every TvZ right now because you will lose most macro games. You AGAIN! - Why are roach bane all ins working better in wol then in hots? Because of the siegetank? Very few terrans go siegetanks these days. Widowmines do jackshit vs well microed roaches. At least you have some allins. Do you know how many allins terrans have vs zerg? 0. - Swarmhosts don't work? Because you tried it 2 times? Let me guess, you were one of those whiners in WOL who claimed ultralisks were bad, right? Then stephano showed you how to STOMP terrans with them, and then you became quiet. What about trying swarmhosts? Or do you need stephano to make you a nice presentation of it? Everytime a genius zerg tried swarmhost against me, I lost (high master level). But keep thinking they don't work, just like ultras didnt work, right? - Hydras don't work? In WOL we had SLOW hydras, and stephano was DESTROYING code S terrans (!!!!!!!) with roach hydra compositions. That was during those times when 1) hydras were SLOW, and 2) terrans went TANKS instead of mines (and lets be honnest, mines are not so effective against roaches). Now you got FAST hydras and terrans going for 0 tanks. I also saw stephano demolish terrans with roach hydra in HOTS. So again, hydras don't work? - Where is the infestor? The missile fungal isn't a big nerf, so why did the unit disapear? - I remember seeing top zergs destroying terrans in macro games. Ofcourse there were a few allins (an allin, something a terran can't do against zerg, so be happy you can), but a lot of games were pure and fun macrogames. This is WOL all over again. Zergs complaining > after more then a year zergs finally starting to understand the game > zergs destroying everyone. I'm 100% sure that zvt will change completely, with swarmhosts, vipers, hydras and ultras being the key units.You will actually laugh with the builds that are used now. It's time for zergs to play HOTS, and not the WOL ling bling muta style. When they do that, and things still don't work, then I suggest to look at the viper.
you seem to have some personal problem with me. next time PM please if you want to talk and dont mess up threads.
if you are some master mind that has the solutions to the high level ZvT problem for zergs feel free to post them. i have no problem being wrong but all you say is "try hydras, SHs and infestors" without giving any pro level replays/VODs or your own BOs/replays where it actually works. so please post the replays where you go reaper into factory into MMMM and your opponents go SHs, hydras or infestor and they win. would be awesome to see.
|
i really hate zvp at the moment. There are very little aggressive options for a zerg up till the moment muts come or the protoss is too greedy trying to take 3rd with no units. While the protoss has so many options.
|
On May 13 2013 00:19 MTAC wrote:Show nested quote +Knowing exactly what you're going to be facing several minutes ahead of time should be an advantage, as you'll be able to prepare for it with the units that best counter what you're facing and you'll be ready to use tactics that defeat it, as well as make sure not to use any strats that lose to it. This is simply false. If i tell you i'm gonna 2 Raxing you/4 gate/Bling bust, etc... You're right. Any All-in should be harder to pull off. And cheese should be auto-win right. If you're going for a macro game and say the composition you're aiming for. You should not be in an advantage. I don't think anybody have said 'TvP is always MMM, T should loose cuz i know it even before the game is started' or 'PvZ is always Ling/infestor with few roachs, so P should win etc...'
I did not say that every macro game would be an auto-win if you know your opponent's unit composition. Of course that isn't true.
|
On May 13 2013 00:15 Chocobo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2013 23:20 Dzerzhinsky wrote:On May 12 2013 22:43 Chocobo wrote:On May 12 2013 09:39 AxionSteel wrote:After ages of frustration against zerg in LingsofLiberty, it certainly gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling to see all this QQ in here. Doesn't stop zerg from mopping up the tournaments and doing extremely well in Code S though  I don't know any zergs who are complaining about balance at the pro level. The problem is that the skill required to play effectively in ZvT is too high for the vast majority of active players. This wouldn't be a problem if it affected both races equally, but it only affects zerg. It's nothing like other situations where it's like "yes, banelings are strong, you have to split your army up when you see them coming, or you have to protect yourself with tanks". Those are reasonable challenges that most players can learn to pull off. The skill and precision requires to deal with mines effectively is not. It requires so much effort, and is very punishing for any mistakes. Few diamond and masters players have the skill to ever be able to pull it off. So even though it's completely fair at the pro level, there's a problem for much of the ladder. That's an assertion that it's difficult to prove or disprove, but looking at the only statistics I have, it's also difficult to take it seriously. Zerg remains significantly overrepresented in GM and Masters (aka. 'below pro level') almost everywhere. I don't think those numbers prove much, there are too many factors involved. The ladder population was pretty zerg-heavy before HotS was released and maybe few people have bothered to switch races yet, for example. I'd really be interested in seeing the winrate for each race matchup at different skill levels, specifically the games where more than 2 mines were produced... too bad we don't have access to those numbers. BTW I am referring more to platinum through masters players, I think GM zergs are capable of dealing with mines about as well as the pros. I don't know exactly where the line is for "you must be this skilled to pass", I just know it's over the heads of the vast majority of players.
"Ladder data is showing no sign of imbalance at any skill level." - Dayvie http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/8796589934#1
What are you actually suggesting? Nerfing mines to make it easier at lower levels? Or just an acknowledgement that its hard to play against mines? ZvT certainly does have a greater micro requirement than it did in WoL.
|
On May 12 2013 17:03 Sissors wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2013 12:50 vRadiatioNv wrote:On May 12 2013 08:50 aksfjh wrote:On May 12 2013 08:11 Big J wrote:On May 12 2013 03:41 Zarahtra wrote:On May 12 2013 03:21 Rabiator wrote:On May 12 2013 03:16 Chocobo wrote:On May 11 2013 19:49 Godwrath wrote:On May 11 2013 18:06 Chocobo wrote:
Yep. Kinda like how mines are cost efficient vs everything zerg has in the first 15-20 minutes of the game. Erhm, no. Other than broodlords, what is cost efficient against mines for zerg? 1. Spore and Spine Crawlers for the early game ... (They are even good against Hellbat drops since neither of these dies easily to the "vs light" damage and the Medivac dies faster ... which prevents its reuse. Spore Crawlers are great against Phoenix and Oracle too ....) 2. Sending in Overlords to soak up the shots right before your charge ... Just watch a few TvZ games with early harrassment and IMO it is always the "diehard oldschoolers" who try to defend against Hellbat harrassment with Zerglings who are losing the match while the ones who build static defenses seem to be fine. That might be a misperception on my part, but I would suggest you check for yourself. The whole point of HotS seems to be "more harrassment" ... Hellbat, Oracle, Mutalisk regen, Medivac speed, Widow Mine, ... so preparing for that is a requirement and not optional now IMO. Also 2x +3 attack upgrade blings kill a mine(that is less than +3 armor upgrade) which I'd argue isn't that cost inefficient for a zerg(100/50 vs 75/25). It is really obnoxious when a zerg sends 2x blings ontop of a widow mine and blows it up, but terrans quite often in a hurry burry 2x next to each other, so atleast those times it is cost effective. I see it as a great way for a zerg to keep the amount of widow mines on the field in control, rather than letting it spiral. So, just to be clear: I don't think there is any imbalance in the matchup overall, but I do believe that ling/bling/muta (even if you manage to upgrade 3-3+cracklings, 3-0 AND even with small infestor support) can't fight against marine/medivac/mine (or hellbat/tank/marauder variations) and you have to go ultras/broodlords to win after the early 3base Terran phase. That being said, it's not good to trade banes vs mines like that. The equation goes basically like this: 1) marines > lings, mutas, roaches, hydras, queens, swarm hosts 2) marines < banelings, ultralisks, huge infestor count, huge broodlord count Basically, all you want to do as a Terran in those engagements is kill as many banelings efficiently or in equal trades as you can before they touch marines. The rest is just a mob up. On May 12 2013 04:51 plogamer wrote:On May 12 2013 04:48 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 12 2013 03:20 Whitewing wrote:
Be very careful about changing TvZ even if you conclude it is imbalanced. Right now at the highest level, it's the most engaging and exciting matchup to watch. The entire matchup frequently turns into a super long push from terran trying to break zerg while zerg tries to throw the push back one time, with both players micro'ing their faces off to try to be efficient. It's incredibly interesting to watch how they try to out control one another with constant battles and counter attacks. The wrong buff to zerg or nerf to terran could ruin that kind of push and send us back to both players maxxing out before doing anything.
TBH, I think the main problem is that zergs let terrans be too greedy and don't punish it. I kind of agree if they opened with Hellions/Reapers etc. however, you can't always punish it, and it is a lot harder if they opened with 1-2 Siege Tanks(which some of them are doing, mind you) or Mines. It also depends on the map a lot. Or Idra's super greedy opener versus Polt could also be the correct response when scouting 3 cc opener. /edit When it comes to greed, I don't think any race can top the Zerg race. I disagree. When zerg is greedy, zerg gets more mining earlier but no tech at all. When Terran is greedy, they still get their full tech tree much earlier and still have the same amount of CCs, but terran only needs to defend a single entrance (compared to two for outdoor basing zerg). Both races have their ups and downs when playing greedy. I agree with Whitewing on that matter. People should roach rush the fuck out of Terrans. Soulkey, Roro, Symbol and Kangho all have been roach rushing, baneling busting and nydusing their way into Ro8 against Terrans this GSL. Shine made it far similarily (those games against Fantasy...). Life, BBong, DRG, Hyun tried to play macrogames and got destroyed. The macro-metagame right now is very simple. Terrans build 3CCs, double ebays, a few hellions/reapers and go into mass reactored barracks+stim/shields and reactored widow mines/medivacs. Before 9-10mins, a Terran won't have any defences down apart from the hellions and a handful of widow mines/marines. On the flip side, a zerg invests into multiple queens, speed, speedlings, sometimes roaches/defenses relatively early without there even being any actual thread apart from those few hellions/reapers and just falls behind. But if you just blindly allin with roaches, a Terran often won't even have the production to react to anything you do because that build can't really produce anything that does not come from a reactored factory, before 9-10mins. And if a Terran even goes more greedy (like instead of defensive mines, even drops mines/hellbats early with this or gets his upgrades even faster or even more barracks early on, or just 4hellions), it's just a freewin, even if you just put on some semiallinish roach aggression with a third behind it, or a really late roach allin that hits at 10+mins. The only thing I want to add to this is the fact that, while having access to the tech, Terran can't utilize it in quite the explosive nature that Zerg (and even Protoss) can, nor is it as central of a role in winning. The only upgrade/tech that plays a huge, instant role is stim, and maybe combat shields and a tank. Having a starport or being able to produce hellbats isn't going to change the game when the first unit rolls out, unlike finishing a spire or making that first colossus (with range). I agree with pretty much everything Big J said except I do feel that TvZ is just slightly in favor of Terran (as most stats show) and just needs a tiny, tiny adjustment. Most stats don't show that. Only one sets of stats shown that, which was proven again and again to lack statistical significance (when you removed WCS qualifiers it was pretty much 50/50). And at what level do you think TvZ favors Terran? Since even the most hardcore zerg supporters here have a very hard time defending that at pro level terran would be stronger, with half the Code S RO8 for example being zerg. And at every level above silver it is kinda weird that way more people play zerg than terran if zerg would be so much weaker. But what kind of tiny ajustments do you want to boost zerg without allowing them to dominate pro levels and become even more popular on 'normal' levels? And not to nerf terran against toss would also be nice. Oh and take into account due to their production nature zerg always needs longer to adapt to new metagames so I would also consider it a pré if zerg don't dominate the next 6 months yet again. @Decendos, terran has never been able to go for a pure macro game against any of the other races. So why should zerg be allowed to do it?
I've seen many different statistics posted on this site and very few of them don't show Terran being favored over Zerg. Most seem to be ~54-56% which is extremely close of course.
I think Terran is probably slightly favored at all levels but it's harder to see in lower level stats because the lower leagues are so volatile. At the pro level Life and many other pro players (including many Terrans) claim and Zerg is slightly underpowered. As for "half of Code S being Zerg" let's face it, Terran has a smaller player pool than the other races for whatever reason so there were bound to be more Zergs in the GSL.
I disagree with people saying it takes Zerg so much longer to adapt especially in the case of HoTS where Zerg didn't receive many new units or adjustments. It is much easier for Zerg to use Ling/Muta since they have been since WoL whereas Terran received huge changes. It's going to take Terran longer to figure out how best to utilize Medivacs, Hellbats, Mines, and Ravens and also how many of each of these units they should have in their compositions. For example, I've seen Bio + Mine and Bio + Hellbats but very rarely do I see Bio + Mines + Hellbats. Terrans are still figuring out what works best. It's much easier for Zerg to learn what works vs Hellbats or what works vs Mines than it is for Terran to learn exactly how many of each they should have for the perfect composition. I feel Terrans will only get better whereas Zergs may not since they don't have as much to learn.
As for small changes, I think a good start would be to make Mines visible on the minimap before they go off. Multipronged aggression is nearly impossible right now with mines on the map because you must have your screen on your units to avoid them (Overseers aren't the answer either since they are slower than lings and mutas). At least if they appeared on the minimap you would have a chance of reacting and pulling your units back. Correct me if I'm wrong but Spider Mines in BW would unburrow before they attacked so not only can you see them on the minimap before they go off but you can actually attack them as well. You should at least be able to see Widow Mines on the minimap before they go off imo. I don't think this would be a huge nerf or anything since it would take absurd reflexes to notice and pull units back fast enough to avoid mines.
|
On May 13 2013 01:03 vRadiatioNv wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2013 17:03 Sissors wrote:On May 12 2013 12:50 vRadiatioNv wrote:On May 12 2013 08:50 aksfjh wrote:On May 12 2013 08:11 Big J wrote:On May 12 2013 03:41 Zarahtra wrote:On May 12 2013 03:21 Rabiator wrote:On May 12 2013 03:16 Chocobo wrote:On May 11 2013 19:49 Godwrath wrote:On May 11 2013 18:06 Chocobo wrote:
Yep. Kinda like how mines are cost efficient vs everything zerg has in the first 15-20 minutes of the game. Erhm, no. Other than broodlords, what is cost efficient against mines for zerg? 1. Spore and Spine Crawlers for the early game ... (They are even good against Hellbat drops since neither of these dies easily to the "vs light" damage and the Medivac dies faster ... which prevents its reuse. Spore Crawlers are great against Phoenix and Oracle too ....) 2. Sending in Overlords to soak up the shots right before your charge ... Just watch a few TvZ games with early harrassment and IMO it is always the "diehard oldschoolers" who try to defend against Hellbat harrassment with Zerglings who are losing the match while the ones who build static defenses seem to be fine. That might be a misperception on my part, but I would suggest you check for yourself. The whole point of HotS seems to be "more harrassment" ... Hellbat, Oracle, Mutalisk regen, Medivac speed, Widow Mine, ... so preparing for that is a requirement and not optional now IMO. Also 2x +3 attack upgrade blings kill a mine(that is less than +3 armor upgrade) which I'd argue isn't that cost inefficient for a zerg(100/50 vs 75/25). It is really obnoxious when a zerg sends 2x blings ontop of a widow mine and blows it up, but terrans quite often in a hurry burry 2x next to each other, so atleast those times it is cost effective. I see it as a great way for a zerg to keep the amount of widow mines on the field in control, rather than letting it spiral. So, just to be clear: I don't think there is any imbalance in the matchup overall, but I do believe that ling/bling/muta (even if you manage to upgrade 3-3+cracklings, 3-0 AND even with small infestor support) can't fight against marine/medivac/mine (or hellbat/tank/marauder variations) and you have to go ultras/broodlords to win after the early 3base Terran phase. That being said, it's not good to trade banes vs mines like that. The equation goes basically like this: 1) marines > lings, mutas, roaches, hydras, queens, swarm hosts 2) marines < banelings, ultralisks, huge infestor count, huge broodlord count Basically, all you want to do as a Terran in those engagements is kill as many banelings efficiently or in equal trades as you can before they touch marines. The rest is just a mob up. On May 12 2013 04:51 plogamer wrote:On May 12 2013 04:48 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 12 2013 03:20 Whitewing wrote:
Be very careful about changing TvZ even if you conclude it is imbalanced. Right now at the highest level, it's the most engaging and exciting matchup to watch. The entire matchup frequently turns into a super long push from terran trying to break zerg while zerg tries to throw the push back one time, with both players micro'ing their faces off to try to be efficient. It's incredibly interesting to watch how they try to out control one another with constant battles and counter attacks. The wrong buff to zerg or nerf to terran could ruin that kind of push and send us back to both players maxxing out before doing anything.
TBH, I think the main problem is that zergs let terrans be too greedy and don't punish it. I kind of agree if they opened with Hellions/Reapers etc. however, you can't always punish it, and it is a lot harder if they opened with 1-2 Siege Tanks(which some of them are doing, mind you) or Mines. It also depends on the map a lot. Or Idra's super greedy opener versus Polt could also be the correct response when scouting 3 cc opener. /edit When it comes to greed, I don't think any race can top the Zerg race. I disagree. When zerg is greedy, zerg gets more mining earlier but no tech at all. When Terran is greedy, they still get their full tech tree much earlier and still have the same amount of CCs, but terran only needs to defend a single entrance (compared to two for outdoor basing zerg). Both races have their ups and downs when playing greedy. I agree with Whitewing on that matter. People should roach rush the fuck out of Terrans. Soulkey, Roro, Symbol and Kangho all have been roach rushing, baneling busting and nydusing their way into Ro8 against Terrans this GSL. Shine made it far similarily (those games against Fantasy...). Life, BBong, DRG, Hyun tried to play macrogames and got destroyed. The macro-metagame right now is very simple. Terrans build 3CCs, double ebays, a few hellions/reapers and go into mass reactored barracks+stim/shields and reactored widow mines/medivacs. Before 9-10mins, a Terran won't have any defences down apart from the hellions and a handful of widow mines/marines. On the flip side, a zerg invests into multiple queens, speed, speedlings, sometimes roaches/defenses relatively early without there even being any actual thread apart from those few hellions/reapers and just falls behind. But if you just blindly allin with roaches, a Terran often won't even have the production to react to anything you do because that build can't really produce anything that does not come from a reactored factory, before 9-10mins. And if a Terran even goes more greedy (like instead of defensive mines, even drops mines/hellbats early with this or gets his upgrades even faster or even more barracks early on, or just 4hellions), it's just a freewin, even if you just put on some semiallinish roach aggression with a third behind it, or a really late roach allin that hits at 10+mins. The only thing I want to add to this is the fact that, while having access to the tech, Terran can't utilize it in quite the explosive nature that Zerg (and even Protoss) can, nor is it as central of a role in winning. The only upgrade/tech that plays a huge, instant role is stim, and maybe combat shields and a tank. Having a starport or being able to produce hellbats isn't going to change the game when the first unit rolls out, unlike finishing a spire or making that first colossus (with range). I agree with pretty much everything Big J said except I do feel that TvZ is just slightly in favor of Terran (as most stats show) and just needs a tiny, tiny adjustment. Most stats don't show that. Only one sets of stats shown that, which was proven again and again to lack statistical significance (when you removed WCS qualifiers it was pretty much 50/50). And at what level do you think TvZ favors Terran? Since even the most hardcore zerg supporters here have a very hard time defending that at pro level terran would be stronger, with half the Code S RO8 for example being zerg. And at every level above silver it is kinda weird that way more people play zerg than terran if zerg would be so much weaker. But what kind of tiny ajustments do you want to boost zerg without allowing them to dominate pro levels and become even more popular on 'normal' levels? And not to nerf terran against toss would also be nice. Oh and take into account due to their production nature zerg always needs longer to adapt to new metagames so I would also consider it a pré if zerg don't dominate the next 6 months yet again. @Decendos, terran has never been able to go for a pure macro game against any of the other races. So why should zerg be allowed to do it? I've seen many different statistics posted on this site and very few of them don't show Terran being favored over Zerg. Most seem to be ~54-56% which is extremely close of course. I think Terran is probably slightly favored at all levels but it's harder to see in lower level stats because the lower leagues are so volatile. At the pro level Life and many other pro players (including many Terrans) claim and Zerg is slightly underpowered. As for "half of Code S being Zerg" let's face it, Terran has a smaller player pool than the other races for whatever reason so there were bound to be more Zergs in the GSL.
Lets face it, you just made it up. Zerg has smallest player base especially in Korea
I disagree with people saying it takes Zerg so much longer to adapt especially in the case of HoTS where Zerg didn't receive many new units or adjustments. It is much easier for Zerg to use Ling/Muta since they have been since WoL whereas Terran received huge changes. It's going to take Terran longer to figure out how best to utilize Medivacs, Hellbats, Mines, and Ravens and also how many of each of these units they should have in their compositions. For example, I've seen Bio + Mine and Bio + Hellbats but very rarely do I see Bio + Mines + Hellbats. Terrans are still figuring out what works best. It's much easier for Zerg to learn what works vs Hellbats or what works vs Mines than it is for Terran to learn exactly how many of each they should have for the perfect composition. I feel Terrans will only get better whereas Zergs may not since they don't have as much to learn.
Last year of Wol ZvT looked : 3 fast bases, 15th minutes hive, infestors + ultra/bl. TvZ looked mass bio + eventual tanks. Now ZvT looks totally different, TvZ looks similiar with mines instead of tanks.
|
Terran, compared to Zerg, is globally underrepresented in Master's league by 5%. Not surprisingly this doesn't exist in lower leagues, and with Zerg doing how it is in tournaments combined with Zerg continuing the dominate the upper ladder leagues even 2 months after the release I can assure you that Terran is not favored at any level.
What you're experiencing is simply shock value that Zergs need unit control now after two years of not having to do virtually any micro.
On May 13 2013 01:11 keglu wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2013 01:03 vRadiatioNv wrote:On May 12 2013 17:03 Sissors wrote:On May 12 2013 12:50 vRadiatioNv wrote:On May 12 2013 08:50 aksfjh wrote:On May 12 2013 08:11 Big J wrote:On May 12 2013 03:41 Zarahtra wrote:On May 12 2013 03:21 Rabiator wrote:On May 12 2013 03:16 Chocobo wrote:On May 11 2013 19:49 Godwrath wrote:
[quote]
Erhm, no. Other than broodlords, what is cost efficient against mines for zerg? 1. Spore and Spine Crawlers for the early game ... (They are even good against Hellbat drops since neither of these dies easily to the "vs light" damage and the Medivac dies faster ... which prevents its reuse. Spore Crawlers are great against Phoenix and Oracle too ....) 2. Sending in Overlords to soak up the shots right before your charge ... Just watch a few TvZ games with early harrassment and IMO it is always the "diehard oldschoolers" who try to defend against Hellbat harrassment with Zerglings who are losing the match while the ones who build static defenses seem to be fine. That might be a misperception on my part, but I would suggest you check for yourself. The whole point of HotS seems to be "more harrassment" ... Hellbat, Oracle, Mutalisk regen, Medivac speed, Widow Mine, ... so preparing for that is a requirement and not optional now IMO. Also 2x +3 attack upgrade blings kill a mine(that is less than +3 armor upgrade) which I'd argue isn't that cost inefficient for a zerg(100/50 vs 75/25). It is really obnoxious when a zerg sends 2x blings ontop of a widow mine and blows it up, but terrans quite often in a hurry burry 2x next to each other, so atleast those times it is cost effective. I see it as a great way for a zerg to keep the amount of widow mines on the field in control, rather than letting it spiral. So, just to be clear: I don't think there is any imbalance in the matchup overall, but I do believe that ling/bling/muta (even if you manage to upgrade 3-3+cracklings, 3-0 AND even with small infestor support) can't fight against marine/medivac/mine (or hellbat/tank/marauder variations) and you have to go ultras/broodlords to win after the early 3base Terran phase. That being said, it's not good to trade banes vs mines like that. The equation goes basically like this: 1) marines > lings, mutas, roaches, hydras, queens, swarm hosts 2) marines < banelings, ultralisks, huge infestor count, huge broodlord count Basically, all you want to do as a Terran in those engagements is kill as many banelings efficiently or in equal trades as you can before they touch marines. The rest is just a mob up. On May 12 2013 04:51 plogamer wrote:On May 12 2013 04:48 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 12 2013 03:20 Whitewing wrote:
Be very careful about changing TvZ even if you conclude it is imbalanced. Right now at the highest level, it's the most engaging and exciting matchup to watch. The entire matchup frequently turns into a super long push from terran trying to break zerg while zerg tries to throw the push back one time, with both players micro'ing their faces off to try to be efficient. It's incredibly interesting to watch how they try to out control one another with constant battles and counter attacks. The wrong buff to zerg or nerf to terran could ruin that kind of push and send us back to both players maxxing out before doing anything.
TBH, I think the main problem is that zergs let terrans be too greedy and don't punish it. I kind of agree if they opened with Hellions/Reapers etc. however, you can't always punish it, and it is a lot harder if they opened with 1-2 Siege Tanks(which some of them are doing, mind you) or Mines. It also depends on the map a lot. Or Idra's super greedy opener versus Polt could also be the correct response when scouting 3 cc opener. /edit When it comes to greed, I don't think any race can top the Zerg race. I disagree. When zerg is greedy, zerg gets more mining earlier but no tech at all. When Terran is greedy, they still get their full tech tree much earlier and still have the same amount of CCs, but terran only needs to defend a single entrance (compared to two for outdoor basing zerg). Both races have their ups and downs when playing greedy. I agree with Whitewing on that matter. People should roach rush the fuck out of Terrans. Soulkey, Roro, Symbol and Kangho all have been roach rushing, baneling busting and nydusing their way into Ro8 against Terrans this GSL. Shine made it far similarily (those games against Fantasy...). Life, BBong, DRG, Hyun tried to play macrogames and got destroyed. The macro-metagame right now is very simple. Terrans build 3CCs, double ebays, a few hellions/reapers and go into mass reactored barracks+stim/shields and reactored widow mines/medivacs. Before 9-10mins, a Terran won't have any defences down apart from the hellions and a handful of widow mines/marines. On the flip side, a zerg invests into multiple queens, speed, speedlings, sometimes roaches/defenses relatively early without there even being any actual thread apart from those few hellions/reapers and just falls behind. But if you just blindly allin with roaches, a Terran often won't even have the production to react to anything you do because that build can't really produce anything that does not come from a reactored factory, before 9-10mins. And if a Terran even goes more greedy (like instead of defensive mines, even drops mines/hellbats early with this or gets his upgrades even faster or even more barracks early on, or just 4hellions), it's just a freewin, even if you just put on some semiallinish roach aggression with a third behind it, or a really late roach allin that hits at 10+mins. The only thing I want to add to this is the fact that, while having access to the tech, Terran can't utilize it in quite the explosive nature that Zerg (and even Protoss) can, nor is it as central of a role in winning. The only upgrade/tech that plays a huge, instant role is stim, and maybe combat shields and a tank. Having a starport or being able to produce hellbats isn't going to change the game when the first unit rolls out, unlike finishing a spire or making that first colossus (with range). I agree with pretty much everything Big J said except I do feel that TvZ is just slightly in favor of Terran (as most stats show) and just needs a tiny, tiny adjustment. Most stats don't show that. Only one sets of stats shown that, which was proven again and again to lack statistical significance (when you removed WCS qualifiers it was pretty much 50/50). And at what level do you think TvZ favors Terran? Since even the most hardcore zerg supporters here have a very hard time defending that at pro level terran would be stronger, with half the Code S RO8 for example being zerg. And at every level above silver it is kinda weird that way more people play zerg than terran if zerg would be so much weaker. But what kind of tiny ajustments do you want to boost zerg without allowing them to dominate pro levels and become even more popular on 'normal' levels? And not to nerf terran against toss would also be nice. Oh and take into account due to their production nature zerg always needs longer to adapt to new metagames so I would also consider it a pré if zerg don't dominate the next 6 months yet again. @Decendos, terran has never been able to go for a pure macro game against any of the other races. So why should zerg be allowed to do it? I've seen many different statistics posted on this site and very few of them don't show Terran being favored over Zerg. Most seem to be ~54-56% which is extremely close of course. I think Terran is probably slightly favored at all levels but it's harder to see in lower level stats because the lower leagues are so volatile. At the pro level Life and many other pro players (including many Terrans) claim and Zerg is slightly underpowered. As for "half of Code S being Zerg" let's face it, Terran has a smaller player pool than the other races for whatever reason so there were bound to be more Zergs in the GSL. Lets face it, you just made it up. Zerg has smallest player base especially in Korea
I believe he did as well. You're arguing with someone who publicly supported the queen patch.
|
On May 13 2013 01:03 vRadiatioNv wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2013 17:03 Sissors wrote:On May 12 2013 12:50 vRadiatioNv wrote:On May 12 2013 08:50 aksfjh wrote:On May 12 2013 08:11 Big J wrote:On May 12 2013 03:41 Zarahtra wrote:On May 12 2013 03:21 Rabiator wrote:On May 12 2013 03:16 Chocobo wrote:On May 11 2013 19:49 Godwrath wrote:On May 11 2013 18:06 Chocobo wrote:
Yep. Kinda like how mines are cost efficient vs everything zerg has in the first 15-20 minutes of the game. Erhm, no. Other than broodlords, what is cost efficient against mines for zerg? 1. Spore and Spine Crawlers for the early game ... (They are even good against Hellbat drops since neither of these dies easily to the "vs light" damage and the Medivac dies faster ... which prevents its reuse. Spore Crawlers are great against Phoenix and Oracle too ....) 2. Sending in Overlords to soak up the shots right before your charge ... Just watch a few TvZ games with early harrassment and IMO it is always the "diehard oldschoolers" who try to defend against Hellbat harrassment with Zerglings who are losing the match while the ones who build static defenses seem to be fine. That might be a misperception on my part, but I would suggest you check for yourself. The whole point of HotS seems to be "more harrassment" ... Hellbat, Oracle, Mutalisk regen, Medivac speed, Widow Mine, ... so preparing for that is a requirement and not optional now IMO. Also 2x +3 attack upgrade blings kill a mine(that is less than +3 armor upgrade) which I'd argue isn't that cost inefficient for a zerg(100/50 vs 75/25). It is really obnoxious when a zerg sends 2x blings ontop of a widow mine and blows it up, but terrans quite often in a hurry burry 2x next to each other, so atleast those times it is cost effective. I see it as a great way for a zerg to keep the amount of widow mines on the field in control, rather than letting it spiral. So, just to be clear: I don't think there is any imbalance in the matchup overall, but I do believe that ling/bling/muta (even if you manage to upgrade 3-3+cracklings, 3-0 AND even with small infestor support) can't fight against marine/medivac/mine (or hellbat/tank/marauder variations) and you have to go ultras/broodlords to win after the early 3base Terran phase. That being said, it's not good to trade banes vs mines like that. The equation goes basically like this: 1) marines > lings, mutas, roaches, hydras, queens, swarm hosts 2) marines < banelings, ultralisks, huge infestor count, huge broodlord count Basically, all you want to do as a Terran in those engagements is kill as many banelings efficiently or in equal trades as you can before they touch marines. The rest is just a mob up. On May 12 2013 04:51 plogamer wrote:On May 12 2013 04:48 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 12 2013 03:20 Whitewing wrote:
Be very careful about changing TvZ even if you conclude it is imbalanced. Right now at the highest level, it's the most engaging and exciting matchup to watch. The entire matchup frequently turns into a super long push from terran trying to break zerg while zerg tries to throw the push back one time, with both players micro'ing their faces off to try to be efficient. It's incredibly interesting to watch how they try to out control one another with constant battles and counter attacks. The wrong buff to zerg or nerf to terran could ruin that kind of push and send us back to both players maxxing out before doing anything.
TBH, I think the main problem is that zergs let terrans be too greedy and don't punish it. I kind of agree if they opened with Hellions/Reapers etc. however, you can't always punish it, and it is a lot harder if they opened with 1-2 Siege Tanks(which some of them are doing, mind you) or Mines. It also depends on the map a lot. Or Idra's super greedy opener versus Polt could also be the correct response when scouting 3 cc opener. /edit When it comes to greed, I don't think any race can top the Zerg race. I disagree. When zerg is greedy, zerg gets more mining earlier but no tech at all. When Terran is greedy, they still get their full tech tree much earlier and still have the same amount of CCs, but terran only needs to defend a single entrance (compared to two for outdoor basing zerg). Both races have their ups and downs when playing greedy. I agree with Whitewing on that matter. People should roach rush the fuck out of Terrans. Soulkey, Roro, Symbol and Kangho all have been roach rushing, baneling busting and nydusing their way into Ro8 against Terrans this GSL. Shine made it far similarily (those games against Fantasy...). Life, BBong, DRG, Hyun tried to play macrogames and got destroyed. The macro-metagame right now is very simple. Terrans build 3CCs, double ebays, a few hellions/reapers and go into mass reactored barracks+stim/shields and reactored widow mines/medivacs. Before 9-10mins, a Terran won't have any defences down apart from the hellions and a handful of widow mines/marines. On the flip side, a zerg invests into multiple queens, speed, speedlings, sometimes roaches/defenses relatively early without there even being any actual thread apart from those few hellions/reapers and just falls behind. But if you just blindly allin with roaches, a Terran often won't even have the production to react to anything you do because that build can't really produce anything that does not come from a reactored factory, before 9-10mins. And if a Terran even goes more greedy (like instead of defensive mines, even drops mines/hellbats early with this or gets his upgrades even faster or even more barracks early on, or just 4hellions), it's just a freewin, even if you just put on some semiallinish roach aggression with a third behind it, or a really late roach allin that hits at 10+mins. The only thing I want to add to this is the fact that, while having access to the tech, Terran can't utilize it in quite the explosive nature that Zerg (and even Protoss) can, nor is it as central of a role in winning. The only upgrade/tech that plays a huge, instant role is stim, and maybe combat shields and a tank. Having a starport or being able to produce hellbats isn't going to change the game when the first unit rolls out, unlike finishing a spire or making that first colossus (with range). I agree with pretty much everything Big J said except I do feel that TvZ is just slightly in favor of Terran (as most stats show) and just needs a tiny, tiny adjustment. Most stats don't show that. Only one sets of stats shown that, which was proven again and again to lack statistical significance (when you removed WCS qualifiers it was pretty much 50/50). And at what level do you think TvZ favors Terran? Since even the most hardcore zerg supporters here have a very hard time defending that at pro level terran would be stronger, with half the Code S RO8 for example being zerg. And at every level above silver it is kinda weird that way more people play zerg than terran if zerg would be so much weaker. But what kind of tiny ajustments do you want to boost zerg without allowing them to dominate pro levels and become even more popular on 'normal' levels? And not to nerf terran against toss would also be nice. Oh and take into account due to their production nature zerg always needs longer to adapt to new metagames so I would also consider it a pré if zerg don't dominate the next 6 months yet again. @Decendos, terran has never been able to go for a pure macro game against any of the other races. So why should zerg be allowed to do it? I've seen many different statistics posted on this site and very few of them don't show Terran being favored over Zerg. Most seem to be ~54-56% which is extremely close of course. I think Terran is probably slightly favored at all levels but it's harder to see in lower level stats because the lower leagues are so volatile. At the pro level Life and many other pro players (including many Terrans) claim and Zerg is slightly underpowered. As for "half of Code S being Zerg" let's face it, Terran has a smaller player pool than the other races for whatever reason so there were bound to be more Zergs in the GSL. I disagree with people saying it takes Zerg so much longer to adapt especially in the case of HoTS where Zerg didn't receive many new units or adjustments. It is much easier for Zerg to use Ling/Muta since they have been since WoL whereas Terran received huge changes. It's going to take Terran longer to figure out how best to utilize Medivacs, Hellbats, Mines, and Ravens and also how many of each of these units they should have in their compositions. For example, I've seen Bio + Mine and Bio + Hellbats but very rarely do I see Bio + Mines + Hellbats. Terrans are still figuring out what works best. It's much easier for Zerg to learn what works vs Hellbats or what works vs Mines than it is for Terran to learn exactly how many of each they should have for the perfect composition. I feel Terrans will only get better whereas Zergs may not since they don't have as much to learn. As for small changes, I think a good start would be to make Mines visible on the minimap before they go off. Multipronged aggression is nearly impossible right now with mines on the map because you must have your screen on your units to avoid them (Overseers aren't the answer either since they are slower than lings and mutas). At least if they appeared on the minimap you would have a chance of reacting and pulling your units back. Correct me if I'm wrong but Spider Mines in BW would unburrow before they attacked so not only can you see them on the minimap before they go off but you can actually attack them as well. You should at least be able to see Widow Mines on the minimap before they go off imo. I don't think this would be a huge nerf or anything since it would take absurd reflexes to notice and pull units back fast enough to avoid mines.
Actually Terran is pretty well represented, they are plentiful in bronze/silver which makes up about half the player base -- proof http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all If you take into account how many there are in bronze/silver and how there are fewer higher up, it ends up about even.
I believe the reason people think it will take zerg longer to adapt is because they have less early game unit changes. Firstly you have to see a cheese/build, then you have to learn how to defend it. Terran got changes that come earlier in the game, ie reapers, mines, hellbats, faster siege, where as zergs changes generally come later, ultra buff, swarm hosts, vipers, muta buff. Early game units are likely to get figured out before later game units, since all games go through the early game, but not all make the late game. Ravens are the exception here.
|
All the progamers I've heard, said that Hellbats are bad.
|
As a TvZ "spectator" (i play P), I wouldn't mind if blizzard adjusted things around creep/positioning.
For example, if mines happen to be too strong (so far I really can't tell), a change like : "burrow time doubled on creep" would make things quite interesting regarding positioning, creep spread, decision making on when to engage or not, etc.
I'd like them to approach balance this way, using the races differences, rather than just buffing/nerfing damage/speed/cost of units.
|
On May 13 2013 02:32 eXdeath wrote:
As a TvZ "spectator" (i play P), I wouldn't mind if blizzard adjusted things around creep/positioning.
For example, if mines happen to be too strong (so far I really can't tell), a change like : "burrow time doubled on creep" would make things quite interesting regarding positioning, creep spread, decision making on when to engage or not, etc.
I'd like them to approach balance this way, using the races differences, rather than just buffing/nerfing damage/speed/cost of units.
I don't like it because it makes the ruleset of the game very complex.
|
On May 12 2013 23:16 Chocobo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2013 22:59 Hryul wrote:On May 12 2013 22:43 Chocobo wrote:On May 12 2013 09:39 AxionSteel wrote:After ages of frustration against zerg in LingsofLiberty, it certainly gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling to see all this QQ in here. Doesn't stop zerg from mopping up the tournaments and doing extremely well in Code S though I don't know any zergs who are complaining about balance at the pro level. The problem is that the skill required to play effectively in ZvT is too high for the vast majority of active players. This wouldn't be a problem if it affected both races equally, but it only affects zerg. It's nothing like other situations where it's like "yes, banelings are strong, you have to split your army up when you see them coming, or you have to protect yourself with tanks". Those are reasonable challenges that most players can learn to pull off. The skill and precision requires to deal with mines effectively is not. It requires so much effort, and is very punishing for any mistakes. Few diamond and masters players have the skill to ever be able to pull it off. So even though it's completely fair at the pro level, there's a problem for much of the ladder. This post highlights a unreasonable fatalistic stance: It is hard. I can't do it right now therefore only a few people can do it and all the others (including me) can't ever learn it. Zerg bias at its finest. The deliberate ignorance of facts in here is starting to rival Fox News. It is simply a fact that it is significantly more difficult to engage a bio mine army in a cost efficient way than it is to split your marines when banelings come rolling in, or cast feedback on medivacs, or whatever.
Completely missing the point. You just claim that it is an unreasonable effort to learn how to engage mines and then base your whole arguments on this assumption. It doesn't strengthen your argument by drawing wild comparisons to Fox News.
And instead of taking the challenge you fight a war on the tl forums for a nerf of mines. This is a slippery slope especially since it's unclear if there really is a problem with mines. (Opposed to bl/inf into ultra switches)
At the moment you are arguing that Blizzard should balance the game not only for the pros (where TvZ might be slightly T favored) but also to your personal gaming experience.
E:On May 13 2013 03:07 [F_]aths wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2013 02:32 eXdeath wrote:
As a TvZ "spectator" (i play P), I wouldn't mind if blizzard adjusted things around creep/positioning.
For example, if mines happen to be too strong (so far I really can't tell), a change like : "burrow time doubled on creep" would make things quite interesting regarding positioning, creep spread, decision making on when to engage or not, etc.
I'd like them to approach balance this way, using the races differences, rather than just buffing/nerfing damage/speed/cost of units. I don't like it because it makes the ruleset of the game very complex.
It's also a bit of a doubleedged sword. One of the great advantages of mines over tanks is that T actually can move on creep w/o the need to wait until the creep recedes. Otherwise we might turn back to WoL TvZ. And I'm sure not only Scarlett would be able to pull off some crazy creepspreads if it would give the Z such an advantage.
|
While we are discussing the ideas behind current state of TvZ the toss soul train just rolled through the WCS EU Challanger qualifiers:   
Sneaky bastards! 
|
On May 13 2013 02:32 eXdeath wrote:
As a TvZ "spectator" (i play P), I wouldn't mind if blizzard adjusted things around creep/positioning.
For example, if mines happen to be too strong (so far I really can't tell), a change like : "burrow time doubled on creep" would make things quite interesting regarding positioning, creep spread, decision making on when to engage or not, etc.
I'd like them to approach balance this way, using the races differences, rather than just buffing/nerfing damage/speed/cost of units.
I don't think zerg needs even more advantage on creep than it already has. Speed plus the vision already are really, really good.
|
On May 13 2013 02:05 Nirel wrote:
All the progamers I've heard, said that Hellbats are bad.
They are a unit with obvious flaws design. The thing is it is not overpowered, just a boring unit, pretty much like colossi.
|
On May 13 2013 01:03 vRadiatioNv wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2013 17:03 Sissors wrote:On May 12 2013 12:50 vRadiatioNv wrote:On May 12 2013 08:50 aksfjh wrote:On May 12 2013 08:11 Big J wrote:On May 12 2013 03:41 Zarahtra wrote:On May 12 2013 03:21 Rabiator wrote:On May 12 2013 03:16 Chocobo wrote:On May 11 2013 19:49 Godwrath wrote:On May 11 2013 18:06 Chocobo wrote:
Yep. Kinda like how mines are cost efficient vs everything zerg has in the first 15-20 minutes of the game. Erhm, no. Other than broodlords, what is cost efficient against mines for zerg? 1. Spore and Spine Crawlers for the early game ... (They are even good against Hellbat drops since neither of these dies easily to the "vs light" damage and the Medivac dies faster ... which prevents its reuse. Spore Crawlers are great against Phoenix and Oracle too ....) 2. Sending in Overlords to soak up the shots right before your charge ... Just watch a few TvZ games with early harrassment and IMO it is always the "diehard oldschoolers" who try to defend against Hellbat harrassment with Zerglings who are losing the match while the ones who build static defenses seem to be fine. That might be a misperception on my part, but I would suggest you check for yourself. The whole point of HotS seems to be "more harrassment" ... Hellbat, Oracle, Mutalisk regen, Medivac speed, Widow Mine, ... so preparing for that is a requirement and not optional now IMO. Also 2x +3 attack upgrade blings kill a mine(that is less than +3 armor upgrade) which I'd argue isn't that cost inefficient for a zerg(100/50 vs 75/25). It is really obnoxious when a zerg sends 2x blings ontop of a widow mine and blows it up, but terrans quite often in a hurry burry 2x next to each other, so atleast those times it is cost effective. I see it as a great way for a zerg to keep the amount of widow mines on the field in control, rather than letting it spiral. So, just to be clear: I don't think there is any imbalance in the matchup overall, but I do believe that ling/bling/muta (even if you manage to upgrade 3-3+cracklings, 3-0 AND even with small infestor support) can't fight against marine/medivac/mine (or hellbat/tank/marauder variations) and you have to go ultras/broodlords to win after the early 3base Terran phase. That being said, it's not good to trade banes vs mines like that. The equation goes basically like this: 1) marines > lings, mutas, roaches, hydras, queens, swarm hosts 2) marines < banelings, ultralisks, huge infestor count, huge broodlord count Basically, all you want to do as a Terran in those engagements is kill as many banelings efficiently or in equal trades as you can before they touch marines. The rest is just a mob up. On May 12 2013 04:51 plogamer wrote:On May 12 2013 04:48 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 12 2013 03:20 Whitewing wrote:
Be very careful about changing TvZ even if you conclude it is imbalanced. Right now at the highest level, it's the most engaging and exciting matchup to watch. The entire matchup frequently turns into a super long push from terran trying to break zerg while zerg tries to throw the push back one time, with both players micro'ing their faces off to try to be efficient. It's incredibly interesting to watch how they try to out control one another with constant battles and counter attacks. The wrong buff to zerg or nerf to terran could ruin that kind of push and send us back to both players maxxing out before doing anything.
TBH, I think the main problem is that zergs let terrans be too greedy and don't punish it. I kind of agree if they opened with Hellions/Reapers etc. however, you can't always punish it, and it is a lot harder if they opened with 1-2 Siege Tanks(which some of them are doing, mind you) or Mines. It also depends on the map a lot. Or Idra's super greedy opener versus Polt could also be the correct response when scouting 3 cc opener. /edit When it comes to greed, I don't think any race can top the Zerg race. I disagree. When zerg is greedy, zerg gets more mining earlier but no tech at all. When Terran is greedy, they still get their full tech tree much earlier and still have the same amount of CCs, but terran only needs to defend a single entrance (compared to two for outdoor basing zerg). Both races have their ups and downs when playing greedy. I agree with Whitewing on that matter. People should roach rush the fuck out of Terrans. Soulkey, Roro, Symbol and Kangho all have been roach rushing, baneling busting and nydusing their way into Ro8 against Terrans this GSL. Shine made it far similarily (those games against Fantasy...). Life, BBong, DRG, Hyun tried to play macrogames and got destroyed. The macro-metagame right now is very simple. Terrans build 3CCs, double ebays, a few hellions/reapers and go into mass reactored barracks+stim/shields and reactored widow mines/medivacs. Before 9-10mins, a Terran won't have any defences down apart from the hellions and a handful of widow mines/marines. On the flip side, a zerg invests into multiple queens, speed, speedlings, sometimes roaches/defenses relatively early without there even being any actual thread apart from those few hellions/reapers and just falls behind. But if you just blindly allin with roaches, a Terran often won't even have the production to react to anything you do because that build can't really produce anything that does not come from a reactored factory, before 9-10mins. And if a Terran even goes more greedy (like instead of defensive mines, even drops mines/hellbats early with this or gets his upgrades even faster or even more barracks early on, or just 4hellions), it's just a freewin, even if you just put on some semiallinish roach aggression with a third behind it, or a really late roach allin that hits at 10+mins. The only thing I want to add to this is the fact that, while having access to the tech, Terran can't utilize it in quite the explosive nature that Zerg (and even Protoss) can, nor is it as central of a role in winning. The only upgrade/tech that plays a huge, instant role is stim, and maybe combat shields and a tank. Having a starport or being able to produce hellbats isn't going to change the game when the first unit rolls out, unlike finishing a spire or making that first colossus (with range). I agree with pretty much everything Big J said except I do feel that TvZ is just slightly in favor of Terran (as most stats show) and just needs a tiny, tiny adjustment. Most stats don't show that. Only one sets of stats shown that, which was proven again and again to lack statistical significance (when you removed WCS qualifiers it was pretty much 50/50). And at what level do you think TvZ favors Terran? Since even the most hardcore zerg supporters here have a very hard time defending that at pro level terran would be stronger, with half the Code S RO8 for example being zerg. And at every level above silver it is kinda weird that way more people play zerg than terran if zerg would be so much weaker. But what kind of tiny ajustments do you want to boost zerg without allowing them to dominate pro levels and become even more popular on 'normal' levels? And not to nerf terran against toss would also be nice. Oh and take into account due to their production nature zerg always needs longer to adapt to new metagames so I would also consider it a pré if zerg don't dominate the next 6 months yet again. @Decendos, terran has never been able to go for a pure macro game against any of the other races. So why should zerg be allowed to do it? I've seen many different statistics posted on this site and very few of them don't show Terran being favored over Zerg. Most seem to be ~54-56% which is extremely close of course.
Most seem to be 54-56% because they are all based on the exactly the same spreadsheet only they made different graphs with it. And that again is the spreadsheet where deleting the WCS qualifiers puts it back to pretty much 50/50 (actually 51/49 in favor of terran), which proofs that it lacked statistical significance.
I think Terran is probably slightly favored at all levels but it's harder to see in lower level stats because the lower leagues are so volatile. At the pro level Life and many other pro players (including many Terrans) claim and Zerg is slightly underpowered. As for "half of Code S being Zerg" let's face it, Terran has a smaller player pool than the other races for whatever reason so there were bound to be more Zergs in the GSL.
Come on even many of those who want terran nerfed here don't try to claim that terran is favored at pro level. There is literally nothing indicating that would be the case.
I disagree with people saying it takes Zerg so much longer to adapt especially in the case of HoTS where Zerg didn't receive many new units or adjustments. It is much easier for Zerg to use Ling/Muta since they have been since WoL whereas Terran received huge changes.
Well zerg also has to adapt how to use ling/muta against mines, that is pretty much what this entire topic is about. Just a-moving isn't the best idea anymore. And the basic idea of terran isn't really anything shocking, bio play was also around in WoL, now only mines were added. If it was just TvZ I would agree that terran got quite a bit of adjustment to do, but since bio was the standard in TvP most players are pretty used to it.
The difference is that zerg is inherently a reactive race, unless they go all-in, where even the most hardcore zerg supporter here doesn't claim they are struggling. As example, lets say TvP. With changes in the metagame I need to know roughly when Oracles can come so I am prepared for it, and when I need to start worrying about DTs. Then also a bit when to roughly start making vikings, but thats it, as non-pro I really don't need to know that very accurate.
Meanwhile zerg playstyle is pretty much pure droning as long as possible, and then switching to pure making army. In an all-in (although imo generally it isn't an all-in, just an early game push, but thats another discussion) thats fairly easy: mass drones till X-supply, then mass roaches for example. But if you want to go for a longer game you really need to know based on what you scout when to exactly switch from droning to army production. This means zerg take longer to adjust to new metagames, and why zerg more than other races can highly optimize their builds, but it also takes longer before they are optimized.
|
United Kingdom14103 Posts
On May 13 2013 04:46 Godwrath wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2013 02:05 Nirel wrote:
All the progamers I've heard, said that Hellbats are bad. They are a unit with obvious flaws design. The thing is it is not overpowered, just a boring unit, pretty much like colossi.
I prefer hellbats to colossi :/ Colossi are more boring than corruptors ...
|
I've seen quite a few examples where a terran flat out lost the game after walking over a pair of burrowed banelings with his entire army. It has happened on pro levels and I've done it several times myself, its pretty frustrating.
Widow mines are fairly similar, although a bit worse still. One can compare it to when a zerg tries to lure you into his burrowed banelings with his muta harass, but instead of just harassing, its his main army trying to kill you. And instead of shooting at him from a distance as he moves back, he's shooting on you while you try to get into range.
So you make a mistake and you're dead. Frustrating, but next game you'll remember to scan ahead, its pretty obvious he's trying to trick you into attacking anyway. Sadly you dont have a scan. How about a raven? Very useful, until it dies that is.
But dont worry, I got this, MORE RAVENS! Sweet, but eventually they died as well. For some reason that also supply capped you. Sorry about that .
Now it is extremely annoying to lose game after game from nothing else than a small mistake. While one can argue that its obviously a huge mistake as you otherwise wouldnt lose the game from that alone, when it comes to actual mechanics, its a pretty small mistake to make.
Its like this: even the pros dont always only stim a small part of their marines ahead to chase away those pesky mutalisks. The harass never stops and that one time you stim your entire army instead there's ALWAYS banelings burrowed blowing up all of your marines. That, on top of an already frustrating situation, takes away so much enjoyment from the game.
Balance may ofc permit this, especially on the highest levels where mistakes are already minimal. For the rest of us however, its really not fun. I want to lose to people with better mechanics than me. I dont want to lose because my opponent moves back and forth with his army until I make a mistake which is then automatically punished.
That being said I have lost against people with better mechanics than me as well as against people with worse. Against skilled people I just die "harder" after accidentally exploding my army on his mines. In many cases I would have died anyway, but really, it rarely goes that far.
If things are balanced or not can be discussed endlessly. The way widow mines are designed is however pretty stupid, regardless of balance.
|
On May 10 2013 04:56 DoNuTs84 wrote:
Gratz Terrans. You won. Hope you continue to be happy with your dropplay freewins
User was warned for this post
There is something called static defense, build spines and spores. quit complaining and learn how to play.
|
This is a great change to be honest. the game is still by far in its infancy and large changes shouldn't be made this early on.
Also what happened to the philosophy of balancing races via new maps? Not complaining, just seems like it could be a easier way to make very subtle changes (though admittedly it would take more work to make things small)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
