EPTHere's why bio with ghost/lib doesn't work anymore:
4.11.3 Patch (Adept revert) + Community Update
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
sneakyfox
8218 Posts
Here's why bio with ghost/lib doesn't work anymore: | ||
|
Crozo64
64 Posts
On December 28 2019 04:58 sneakyfox wrote: HeRoMaRiNe talked a lot about the state of TvZ today. He says the mech is viable so the matchup is not necessarily imbalanced, but that style (BCs and mech) is just not very fun to watch all the time. It's very predictable. Here's why bio with ghost/lib doesn't work anymore: https://clips.twitch.tv/SaltyEagerRaccoonEagleEye It's simple, maps need to be more like King's Cove if u want very late game tvz bio ghost. the expands need to be safe and not too far otherwise the mobility of the zerg army just crush u if u are out of position which is really impossible to avoid if u play on the current maps ( and that's why we only see mech recently ). BTW i got downvoted in reddit for saying exactly what heromarine says here, funny how clueless the community can be. | ||
|
TelecoM
United States10847 Posts
On December 28 2019 06:32 Crozo64 wrote: It's simple, maps need to be more like King's Cove if u want very late game tvz bio ghost. the expands need to be safe and not too far otherwise the mobility of the zerg army just crush u if u are out of position which is really impossible to avoid if u play on the current maps ( and that's why we only see mech recently ). BTW i got downvoted in reddit for saying exactly what heromarine says here, funny how clueless the community can be. Maybe because you are not a professional like Heromarine, keep pushing :D | ||
|
Crozo64
64 Posts
On December 29 2019 05:11 GGzerG wrote: Maybe because you are not a professional like Heromarine, keep pushing :D Does it matter when what im saying is true ? | ||
|
WaesumNinja
210 Posts
| ||
|
waiting2Bbanned
United States154 Posts
On December 18 2019 20:08 Dedraterllaerau wrote: And there is a reason Zergs always end up with the bigger banks in a game it's because not only do they get to expand more but their armies are extremely cost efficient. LOL I'd say you should uninstall SC2 immediately, but it's pretty obvious you never installed or played it  User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
Of course it's only one data point in the offseason with no big tournaments going on and you can quibble about aligulac's methodology, but this is as far as I can tell the best two week period for terran in TvZ since Wings of Liberty. I guess we'll see in the coming weeks if this was just a huge outlier or if zerg starts figuring out the thor styles that are popular now. | ||
|
Athenau
589 Posts
Swings across periods aren't uncommon, I doubt this one is too significant, though the patch does seem to have had a positive effect overall. | ||
|
Drfilip
Sweden592 Posts
| ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
On January 01 2020 22:45 Athenau wrote: TvZ for December was 51.46% overall: http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/ Swings across periods aren't uncommon, I doubt this one is too significant, though the patch does seem to have had a positive effect overall. While swings across periods are quite common, a swing this big isn't at all. TvZ's been hovering at roughly 46-47% all year with maybe 4% variation between periods usually so 61% is at the very least a huge outlier if it doesn't indicate some change in balance. | ||
|
Athenau
589 Posts
On January 02 2020 02:06 ZigguratOfUr wrote: While swings across periods are quite common, a swing this big isn't at all. TvZ's been hovering at roughly 46-47% all year with maybe 4% variation between periods usually so 61% is at the very least a huge outlier if it doesn't indicate some change in balance. The previous period was 46.14% (http://aligulac.com/periods/256/?sort=&race=ptzrs&nats=all), so what changed between the first half of December and the second? I mean, it's clear that the patch did affect balance, as the December stats show, but I don't see this particular period as indicative of a larger trend indicating imbalance the other way. | ||
|
Pentarp
227 Posts
On January 02 2020 02:06 ZigguratOfUr wrote: While swings across periods are quite common, a swing this big isn't at all. TvZ's been hovering at roughly 46-47% all year with maybe 4% variation between periods usually so 61% is at the very least a huge outlier if it doesn't indicate some change in balance. When more Terrans start winning because of balance changes, winrates spike up until they even out again when those Terrans start losing more to better Zergs they meet higher up in the brackets. That's why TvZ has been close 50% all year because of the a handful A-tier Terrans smacking down a huge number of lower tier Zergs when they face them in the higher brackets. So yeah, winrates are high, but without factoring for the representation of the races, it's not a very high quality statistic. | ||
|
Vision_
877 Posts
- You can fix / hold on easily more positions on maps, - Protect tanks behind the bunker, - It have a synergy with mines, - Sligthly force ennemies to get around your defences, - Add micro management units inside and outside bunkers (Hype feature !!! ).. How such a building, so representative of Terran race, can be forgotten / gived up ??? I can add if stimpack is counter balanced by centrifugal hooks (and inversement), the bunker efficiency is really impaced by centrifugal hooks and no upgrade has been made to avoid this imbalanced interaction; in fact more you re waiting Zerg attack far from your base, more he can crush you, that s why i think it s necessary to settle faster. This idea is really basic and intuitive, furthermore adding vcs in the terran army is already in meta (missile turrets / repair). I m trying to implement this change in galaxy editor but it s more complicated than expected (if someone know ?!). Keep in mind Terrans have played their best game on this kind of maps... <3 Ohana <3 <3 <3 Catalyst | ||
|
Pentarp
227 Posts
On January 05 2020 02:52 Vision_ wrote: I propose 50% reduction on bunkers build time (automatically enable when enginerring bay is done) .. (and combined to a small creep size reduction) - You can fix / hold on easily more positions on maps, - Protect tanks behind the bunker, - It have a synergy with mines, - Sligthly force ennemies to get around your defences, - Add micro management units inside and outside bunkers (Hype feature !!! ).. How such a building, so representative of Terran race, can be forgotten / gived up ??? I can add if stimpack is counter balanced by centrifugal hooks (and inversement), the bunker efficiency is really impaced by centrifugal hooks and no upgrade has been made to avoid this imbalanced interaction; in fact more you re waiting Zerg attack far from your base, more he can crush you, that s why i think it s necessary to settle faster. This idea is really basic and intuitive, furthermore adding vcs in the terran army is already in meta (missile turrets / repair). I m trying to implement this change in galaxy editor but it s more complicated than expected (if someone know ?!). Keep in mind Terrans have played their best game on this kind of maps... <3 Ohana <3 <3 <3 Catalyst Given how much map control is possible for other races with creep (vision and speed) and warp-tech (near-instant reinforcements), Terrans really need something that helps them hold the center of the map. The threat of drops did that in early iterations of the game. But now that other races can also threaten similar tactics (warp prism, nydus), Terrans really haven't kept up in map control. A change to the mechanics here, as you suggested, would also help distinguish the good from the great Terrans. Given equal raw mechanics, a more strategic Terran will benefit more from map-control over a "max to 200 supply and a-move" Terran. SC2 sorely needs more strategy, not in unit comps or build openers, but in map-control, army-movement and positioning. | ||
|
BerserkSword
United States2123 Posts
On January 05 2020 08:44 Pentarp wrote: Given how much map control is possible for other races with creep (vision and speed) and warp-tech (near-instant reinforcements), Terrans really need something that helps them hold the center of the map. The threat of drops did that in early iterations of the game. But now that other races can also threaten similar tactics (warp prism, nydus), Terrans really haven't kept up in map control. A change to the mechanics here, as you suggested, would also help distinguish the good from the great Terrans. Given equal raw mechanics, a more strategic Terran will benefit more from map-control over a "max to 200 supply and a-move" Terran. SC2 sorely needs more strategy, not in unit comps or build openers, but in map-control, army-movement and positioning. Terran has unmatched ability to old a position. The best "set and forget" units in liberators, widow mines, and tanks, which are so potent that they usually pay for themselves in spades. Planetary fortresses which literally turn the tide of a game if a Protoss or Zerg player takes a single bad engagement attacking into one. Mass orbital commands which means terran has the easier time taking and exploiting far off bases than protoss does, as well as mining without workers which can thrwo a wrench in zerg economy in lategame split match scenarios. MMM that can move around the map at mach speed while being so efficient that they can trade well if not better than most protoss and zerg compositions that are used for pinch defenses. Battlecruisers, the most powerful unit in the game bar none, that is more powerful than literally anything pound for pound, can delete its counters, insane burst damage, teleport anywhere in the map, force ridiculous base trades, and can be fully repaired. The Ghost which has the same dps as a stalker, comes out on top vs all other casters, can cloak and be used to nuke spam a map. And you want to give Terran more map control abilities? | ||
|
Crozo64
64 Posts
On January 05 2020 09:35 BerserkSword wrote: Terran has unmatched ability to old a position. The best "set and forget" units in liberators, widow mines, and tanks, which are so potent that they usually pay for themselves in spades. Planetary fortresses which literally turn the tide of a game if a Protoss or Zerg player takes a single bad engagement attacking into one. Mass orbital commands which means terran has the easier time taking and exploiting far off bases than protoss does, as well as mining without workers which can thrwo a wrench in zerg economy in lategame split match scenarios. MMM that can move around the map at mach speed while being so efficient that they can trade well if not better than most protoss and zerg compositions that are used for pinch defenses. Battlecruisers, the most powerful unit in the game bar none, that is more powerful than literally anything pound for pound, can delete its counters, insane burst damage, teleport anywhere in the map, force ridiculous base trades, and can be fully repaired. The Ghost which has the same dps as a stalker, comes out on top vs all other casters, can cloak and be used to nuke spam a map. And you want to give Terran more map control abilities? Seriously tho there are so much things wrong in this post but it's too long and a waste of time to discuss with someone like this, sorry just wanted to say this. | ||
|
Parcelleus
Australia1662 Posts
On January 05 2020 12:43 Crozo64 wrote: And the gold league post of the month goes to ... Seriously tho there are so much things wrong in this post but it's too long and a waste of time to discuss with someone like this, sorry just wanted to say this. Considering you have not been able to provide a compelling response to the CONTENT of BerserkSword's post and focus on insulting the poster, I think this makes it very clear what is going on here. | ||
|
WaesumNinja
210 Posts
On December 18 2019 20:08 Dedraterllaerau wrote: That's what most Zergs think, that you don't have any options if your casters get nerfed. Problem with Zerg is you have so many options which are why they are so strong. Viper Blinding Cloud and Abduct on a single caster is OUTRAGEOUS and on top of that it can fly. Infestor a 2 supply unit that can MOVE IN STEALTH and instantly steal 6 supply units that cost tons of minerals and gas FROM RANGE. Zerg casters should be nerfed hard and be forced to have to make specific army comps to counter Terran and Protoss, right now you can combine almost anything with these casters and you have a working counter that can respond to any enemy composition. Zerg casters are way too versatile. And there is a reason Zergs always end up with the bigger banks in a game it's because not only do they get to expand more but their armies are extremely cost efficient. Zergs power lies in fast remax,quick tech switches, cheap and many fast units. Zerg in SC was built and balanced around what I mentioned above but at the moment Zerg does not need to use those strengths because Blizzard gave them armies so strong they outrade armies that can cost waaaay more then the Zerg army. Zerg is ment to use its advantages aggressively but now all they do is eat up the map with bases and creep and have armies that are extremely hard to engage. That is another reason why Banelings are so strong now because we are supposed to accept Zerg can generate these insane banks so they can afford to make 100 friggin banelings that cost only 50 supply. It's madness and I seriously don't understand why there is not more outrage against this. | ||
|
Vision_
877 Posts
On January 05 2020 16:16 Parcelleus wrote: Considering you have not been able to provide a compelling response to the CONTENT of BerserkSword's post and focus on insulting the poster, I think this makes it very clear what is going on here. Well it s true, There s no need to much thought to understand how wrong are these arguments, either taken separetly.. I can easily bring to light what races specificities have or not.. This is already the subject, 'changes in the core of a race' which means there are probably (in the case of creep) multiple reasons in each races that make creep too powerfull (can t be resolved by a single change). It seems you recite all the caracteristics of Terran race with forgetting the most important one.... Terran units are way way weaker when they attack in isolated manner.. That s why Pentarp's post is good (he s saying how important Terran has to hold on middle map, how the control of Terran is powerfull but not so big) , how a terran could defend a whole border line of creep without somes cost efficient units ? Mines only ? (which are only cost efficient in the main army group of Terran, even at PRO level) So Berserksword forgot : 1) Terran mobility need significant micro management / siege mode / burrow mines 2) unit groups can t trade enought (Not so good separetly) in multiple defensive positions 3) 'The most incredible' : Supply cost for mines : 2 - while Supply cost for banelings : 0.5 (more expansive than an ultralisk) 4) +30% speed on creep... (not an argument but a specificity of Zerg) 5) Mines versatility etc... If you don t read only few posts above argumentation of Berserksword, his post mostly play to our advantages | ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany16088 Posts
They have the strongest deathball in the game with devastating Aoe damage which the opponent needs 3 hands to negate meanwhile toss a-moves. The ability to see the entire map with invisible Observers and free hallucination scouts + maphack revelations. Protoss can't be surprised because they know what the opponent does all the time. The ability to instantly create an army ANYWHERE ON THE MAP for just 200 minerals. Oh wait it got nerfed now it's 250 minerals such a huge nerf. Furthermore Probes can just warpin buildings and INSTANTLY return to mining while Terran Scvs are occupied during the whole building process and drones get DESTROYED in the process. This leads to Protoss always having a superior economy. On top of that they have the biggest balls in the game with disruptors. With such huge balls they are able to do riskier attacks than Zerg or Terran. | ||
| ||
