|
On June 13 2016 02:31 Gwavajuice wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2016 00:00 Charoisaur wrote:
@gwajajuice
Transitioning to ghost liberator thor takes a lot of time and because those units are useless against a midgame army you only start transitioning to them once zerg has ultras.
And by the time you have transitioned the zerg has suCcesfully transitioned to BL infestor viper corruptor and has huge creep spread and could freely expand in the period the terran was transitioning.
And at that point you can't win anymore since this army of zerg is not beatable unless you somehow emp/snipe all the vipers before the engagement starts which only happens if the zerg screws up. I'm not convinved. Ghost aside, everything you need to counter the ultra corruptors is already there in mid game : you already have 3+ baracks with tech labs, you already have libs, you can have the thors fast enough : if he went roach ravager, you have 2 facto with tech labs, if he massed muta, you're already thinking about a counter for air, etc... between the time the zerg gets his infestation pit and the time ultra's armor is done, you really have time to adapt. Also, creep spread is not so big unless terran has been very passive (or dominated) in mid game, and switching from ultras to BL vipers costs an arm too... you surely have the time to build the 3 extra starport to totally shutdown this army. In short, when you say this, all I can see is the fate of Leenock vs Bravo.
So what you're saying is terran can go toe to toe with zerg in lategame and can also easily transition to their lategame army?
|
this is a really poor example if anything, because Leenock thought he was playing vs mech and then got sucker punched by the bio push
|
United Kingdom36161 Posts
well written article, well done
|
U totally ignore the main issue with nerfed larva which is economy and base saturation. Larvae are not only important in straight production of units. With 3 larvae we have here something called snowball effect. Less larva means slower saturation on your bases, and slows all your timings. In the same time, LOTV economy and mules are in perfect synergy especially that Terran needs mainly minerals to pump BIO. The effect is that when Terran BIO push comes, Zerg has no recources and production to compete with it. For example: LOTV economy is like- more workers, that means faster orbital and first mule. That means faster second orbital and second mules and even more minerals, which Terran can put into his production and pump BIO much earlier. In the same time Zerg has nerfed larva which means slower base saturation- less economy. And in the same time to stop bio Zerg needs gas- which mining didn't change in LOTV. That's why u cannot fight with Terran in midgame. He just comes too fast to stop it. Zerg hardly can ever take his 4th base, because in that time Terran is pushing on his 3 orbitals. Since the beginning of sc2 they said that Zerg must have one base more than T or P to be even. Now, Terran can take his third faster than Zerg.
The problem is that Zerg's whole macro was nerfed to the bone with 3 larva and in the same time Terran Harras was buffed as hell. Yeah u can whine about Zerg lategame, but surviving to that lategame vs good Terran is nearly impossible.
I watch a lot of ZvT's and it's almost always the same- Zerg has 3 bases and Terran too. I agree with KesPa that Zerg needs 4 larva back to be even with Terran. The only issue i can see with that change will be in PvZ, where it can be hard for Protoss to stop mass speedlings.
|
in other words the OP is more a terran than zerg fan and doesn't want tvz balance to be touched.
|
I feel like we need two words for balance.
There's winrate balance, where we only thing we look at is winrates If the winrates are 50 % then the game is balanced in that regard.
But the other important part of balance, which I think we need a new word for is balance of power.
TvZ is not balanced in that regard, as terran reks zerg midgame and zerg reks terran lategame.
I personally think the last part of balance is the most important. It doesn't matter if the game is winrate balanced to 50 % if the game doesn't feel like it's balanced to the people playing it. When a zerg player dies to a hellbat push for the fifth time in row, the game sure as hell doesn't FEEL balanced to him. When a terran player gets stomped by ultras for the fifth time in a row, it sure as hell doesn't FEEL balanced to him either.
I care much more about the latter, than the first kind of balance, as it is the balance that will matter to 99 % of the players actually playing the game.
|
On June 14 2016 15:32 MperorM1 wrote:
I feel like we need two words for balance.
There's winrate balance, where we only thing we look at is winrates If the winrates are 50 % then the game is balanced in that regard.
But the other important part of balance, which I think we need a new word for is balance of power.
TvZ is not balanced in that regard, as terran reks zerg midgame and zerg reks terran lategame.
I personally think the last part of balance is the most important. It doesn't matter if the game is winrate balanced to 50 % if the game doesn't feel like it's balanced to the people playing it. When a zerg player dies to a hellbat push for the fifth time in row, the game sure as hell doesn't FEEL balanced to him. When a terran player gets stomped by ultras for the fifth time in a row, it sure as hell doesn't FEEL balanced to him either.
I care much more about the latter, than the first kind of balance, as it is the balance that will matter to 99 % of the players actually playing the game.
I understand where you are coming from but it is dealing with this kind of situations that actually gives the flavor to SC2. There is a need for strength and weaknesses, for dynamics, for different economical elements and so on because otherwise you would just basically play mirror matches all day long.
It works like a puzzle: At the start you basically have no clue which piece belongs were. You might know how the picture is supposed to look like and probably you have an idea how to start (e.g. start with the border pieces). Then you will focus on individual parts of the puzzle looking for pieces which might fit and try them out. Sometimes you just cannot find the right piece which fits at the place you are working on so you either pause or work at a different part.
StarCraft2, and any other complex activity, is no different here.
Now imagine that someone would have sorted the pieces of the puzzle into different parts so that it would be very easy to find the right pieces for a specific part of the puzzle. Would you have as much fun doing the puzzle?
Because this is what happens if you go down the way of "There should be no stomping by X" you'll arrive at "We have to make X and Y more equal" which leads to dull gameplay from my point of view.
In terms of video games this is what happened to World of WarCraft for example.
|
Great literature and reasoning only to support a bias. This is heavily Terran favored because it doesn't consider the issue of macro gaming, it only show how the encounter goes.
|
It was a very good read with lots of insight. I share your opinion that the game should not be balanced around the top 5 korean players. But at the moment you see mid-tier Korean terrans slaughter mid-tier Korean zergs. IMO a meta-shift won't happen because Terran can preasure so early and forces zerg to build lategame inefficient units like rouges. If you look at Europe Snute and Nerchio don't seem to have lots of problems with terran but I think it's because they are just better players than their competition.
BTW I play(ed) Terran and Protoss but at the moment I feel just sorry for all the Korean Zergs.
|
Dark barelywon vs Innovation, but man that was an uphill battle. Btw he went roach ling bane into fast hive all five games and I thing this guy is probably playing what should be the most optimal Zerg comp identified, so I'm pretty sure the OP must be updated about that (Korean preferring MLB hence suspecting this could be the best comp, which is probably not; at the end of the day, Snute might have been right from the start).
|
Not a single Zerg will be qualified for SSL out of the 4 challenge groups. That is saying a lot. Without Dark and Solar qualified through the previous season, there would be only Terrans and Protosses. The SSL challenge matches are giving quite a good overview about the current meta balance ...
|
On June 16 2016 16:40 DjayEl wrote:
Dark barelywon vs Innovation, but man that was an uphill battle. Btw he went roach ling bane into fast hive all five games and I thing this guy is probably playing what should be the most optimal Zerg comp identified, so I'm pretty sure the OP must be updated about that (Korean preferring MLB hence suspecting this could be the best comp, which is probably not; at the end of the day, Snute might have been right from the start).
Not all KR ZvT games featured ling/bane/muta(or corruptor) style. There are quite many games from SSL in which zerg players used roach/ravager/infestor into fast ultra but failed, because they couldn't keep up with the terran macro. I also don't think MLB is the best lotv style, but I also don't believe roach/ravager/infestor would magically balance it up in KR.
|
maps always favor protoss and terran mechanics "drops , warp ins", and the swarmhost gap was never fixed... ,
mothership core destroyed any posibility of doing damage to protoss , they are the best at defending and attacking , because the warpprism + coreship perfect synergy to win
maybe david kim can illuminate us how is zerg suppose to be played , it seems like they really want zerg to be the 1 timing all in race
|
SC2 cannot be fixed ever without identifying and fixing the root of the issues which is op units against op units of every race and matchup. Blizzards mindset of buffing the counterpart instead of nerfing what is or has become op was sharpening the problem over the years and the point of return was unfortunately trespassed long time ago and we are stuck on fragile balances and metagames that react with big leverage on every little change. Without going back the game wont be able to become satisfactory imo.
|
personally, i think the way zvt is balanced the zerg goes through times of turmoil. in zvt you constantly scout your opponents production and army size in order to get an accurate representation of what their army will be like/when the next push is coming. it seems to be a recurring trend for zerg players to have a very hard time for a while against terran, and then there is a large metagame shift as the players figure more of the game out and zergs are able to win again (and if the shift is strong enough they can start to seem OP).
either way i really hope the korean zergs can come up with something to deal with the incredibly powerful midgame terran aggression.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
