Changes for balance test map live - Page 49

On August 14 2013 04:32 FabledIntegral wrote:


It wasn't even as he described. Zerg rarely went up to three base quick, this was only vs Protoss. Typical vs Terran was either 2 hatch muta or 3 hatch muta, with the 3rd hatch if the Zerg chose to go so being in the main. Zerg would have exactly 8 lings with speed and two sunken colonies when the Terran pushed out if it was going standard. Terran would push out with exactly two medics. Terran pushed out for the sole purpose of establishing a small amount of map presence and forcing the Zerg to build two sunken colonies, spending extra minerals. Zerg would sometimes build extra speedlings and try to flank from both sides the Marine/Medic squad that came out. However, some Terrans would build firebats instead of only marines, which would make this speedling play incredibly risky and result in having to build sunkens regardless, meaning less drones. Assuming things went standard, Zerg would have exactly 35 supply in a 3hatch scenario when the spire popped, in which Zerg would also have just had the third larvae pop from all 3 hatches, allowing exactly 9 mutas to be built. They'd eventually go up to 11 and force the Terran back into his base.

Drops were not a constant threat like you mentioned at this point in the game. Terran would then build up a MM force and defend with turrets while Zerg was taking the third. Two hydras would be put on the ramp, morphed into lurkers of the third, with the eggs preventing the terran from moving up the ramp and bum rushing it. Then, the lurkers would finish and burrow at the top of the ramp, making it nigh impossible for Terran to push up. What made Flash so distinguished from other Terran players was that his control was impeccable, he would move out with only 2/3 of 3/4 of the standard bio force at the time, and rely purely on control/micro to not get picked off by the mutas. This allowed him to pressure the third sooner, making Zergs drone up less in response and have a worse off economy.

Zerg would then attempt to contain Terran with lurkers. Terran could not push Zerg without a science vessel, and there was micro engagements (term used was leapfrogging) of tanks pushing forward to shoot lurkers, with the lurkers unburrowing and reburrowing just out of range. Constant micro engagements. Zerg could either stay on lurker/ling for a long time and try to go for a flank if Terran moved out too soon, Terran needed to actively scout the hive timing. Typically if Zerg did not go excessive lurker/ling, Terran would move out wiht 3 tanks 1 science vessel and a ton of MM. Sniping the vessel was a huge deal if Zerg could pull it off. If Terran could move across the map directly to Zerg, he would get stomped, so Zerg simply leapfrogged lurkers delaying as long as possible. Then, as he retreated to his base, Zerg would typically have 5+ sunken colonies which Terran sieged up as Zerg bought time.

The timings were on such an insanely thin wire. Savior rose to prominence for being known at holding at THE LAST SECOND. As in, the approaching Terran army would kill all the sunkens, kill like 60% of the lurkers, and AS the Terran was stimming in for a killing blow, the defilers would pop with consume ready and get a Dark Swarm off. 10 seconds later and each time he would have been killed.

At this point, Terran is taking a third and Zerg a fourth, Terran is retreating vs Zerg Dark swarms and building up a double starport fleet of mass vessels. Terran's priority is to irridiate all defilers that are available and take the Zerg on in a headon engagement. Zerg's priority is to consistently delay pushes, counter attack, etc. Zerg would have to clone scourge to kill vessels, try to get plagues off on the vessels, and now start drop play as Mutas were no longer a threat (usually dead by now). Micro engagements go on all across the map, with vessels wandering out in dangerous territory (remember there's plague, no fungal) to irridiate defilers/ultras/lurkers, while scourge try to pick off said vessels, with marines protecting the vessels. It was insane to watch the control on both sides, there's nothing comparable in SC2. Zerg would often build 1-2 mutas when a Sci Vessel cloud got plagued and use the bounce to three shot science vessels with a single attack. Terran would try to tech to mass amounts of tanks, as the splash still dealt damage, and shoot for a split map scenario which Terran would win almost every single time (Flash became also notorious for doing this ridiculously well, creating unbreakable situations). Zerg would attempt to mass expand and mine out the map and simply deny terran expansions. Cracklings vs supply depots were INSANE at how fast they took down buildings. In fact, if you haven't seen the insane damage output Zerglings wtih Adrenal had in BW, it was RIDICULOUS.

There were so many other scenarios that could play out, but the thing was, each scenario was so perfected, so exact. SC2 is just so volatile and due to the macro mechanics will never be able to achieve the exactly level of precision BW had.

On August 14 2013 05:40 Jermstuddog wrote:


You're filling in a lot more of the details, I just tried to give a quick view into what it was like and how different the dynamics were. That's why I glazed past the early and late game portions. Other options included vulture runbys, fortifying a position and isolating the 3rd, and plenty of other different strategies depending on the map architecture (remember cloaked wraiths?), which had much more meaning in BW IMO, it seems the only differences in SC2 architecture are good map vs non-playable.

Still, your examples highlight even more how amazing it was to watch BW. The top tier pros were so good it was unreal. In SC2, I feel like I could clean up a little bit of control and play with the pros. In BW, I don't even understand how these guys managed playing with perfect control in 3 different battles, some of which spanned multiple screen lengths. They really were on a completely different level.

On August 14 2013 05:40 Jermstuddog wrote:


You're filling in a lot more of the details, I just tried to give a quick view into what it was like and how different the dynamics were. That's why I glazed past the early and late game portions. Other options included vulture runbys, fortifying a position and isolating the 3rd, and plenty of other different strategies depending on the map architecture (remember cloaked wraiths?), which had much more meaning in BW IMO, it seems the only differences in SC2 architecture are good map vs non-playable.

Still, your examples highlight even more how amazing it was to watch BW. The top tier pros were so good it was unreal. In SC2, I feel like I could clean up a little bit of control and play with the pros. In BW, I don't even understand how these guys managed playing with perfect control in 3 different battles, some of which spanned multiple screen lengths. They really were on a completely different level.

On August 14 2013 06:40 Entirety wrote:


SC2 is still quite young compared to Brood War... doesn't it make sense that not everything is refined perfectly? Especially since HotS just came out... then LotV will come out... then give it 10 years to reach that level of precision.

On August 14 2013 06:40 Entirety wrote:


SC2 is still quite young compared to Brood War... doesn't it make sense that not everything is refined perfectly? Especially since HotS just came out... then LotV will come out... then give it 10 years to reach that level of precision.