|
On August 08 2013 21:37 ImperialFist wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2013 08:56 GhostOwl wrote:On August 08 2013 05:57 ImperialFist wrote:
As a Terran I just want to apologize to every Zerg player out there. TvZ is Terran favored if it goes into a standard macro game.
I am aware, I have a conscience. I have no idea how Zerg will be good at this rate, Protoss is completely god-mode vs everything and bio-mine is a bit too strong in TvZ.
I am fucking sorry guys T_T
You are awesome dude. I didn't have time to read the other lengthy responses at the moment and I can't write a long paragraph but major props for admitting it unlike many other Terrans here. Yeah well, I whined like a bitch about Infestors for most part of WOL so I know how it feels. The community is progressing though I've even seen a bunch of Protoss admit how their race is easier to play and that PvT is P favored. Somewhere deep inside people must understand that one widow mine taking out 40 banelings is wrong. Was the same with the Infestor WOL, most Zergs did not admit, but they must have known. The mothersip-core and widow mines needs some kind of tweaking. And I still think that templars are completely ridiculous for their cost. It's essentially a free unit considering their incredible spells, it's extremely easy to control and very hard for your opponent to counter. I am very sure that I do not deserve my 70% win rate TvZ and I'm even more sure that my 30% TvP is equally stupid if not even more so.
I, as low master EU, have 60% TvP win rate and 40% TvZ. (Which is I don't understand how it is above 20%, even with the game I win due to zergs RQ'ing when I make a bunker besides their natural while not having any units to put in them). Nerf zerg, boost toss?
Funny part is that I play mech, so for me mech works better vs toss than vs zerg.
|
On August 08 2013 21:45 NarutO wrote:
You missed my point. If you win the engagement and can choose between destroying economy or camping the production, you camp the production. Terran has no way to use his income when his production is camped but he can use parts of the income if you ravage the economy.
Both things can put you ahead but the smarter move is get to the production if you can. So dont say 'dont start with this shit' if you
A) miss my point
B) seemingly not understood it
I am Terran and I can tell you I never came back from sufficient units in my production yet often times I did with low economy.
Edit. I also never said it should be your goal to play like that and especially I never mentioned roach ling drops. Wtf
I didn't miss your point. I actually repeated it, more or less.
if you kill the whole army first in a bust and have a good junk of units left over the killing move is to get them into the production
I didn't comment on the SK vs Innovation part of your comment, because I'd have to rewatch the game. But from what I remember both of them were very close in supply and worker numbers throughout all of SKs attacks (until the last part of banelings traded banelings for SCVs, which I agree was not a good move, or at least he didn't kill enough). So I don't think that there was a moment when SK could have gone to the main, even disregarding that he was only barely able to break into the natural from time to time. I simply believe that Innovation outplayed Soulkey's semiallinish build order, even though I don't believe SK made a major execution mistake. Innovation just played a better strategy.
The roach/ling drop comment (and the whole way I paraphrased my comment) was because your first lines, e.g.
I know another situation that lots of Zerg don't seem to understand. ,
sounded a lot like you'd agree with Rabiators ideas. Who said on more than one occasation that Zergs should adjust their gameplay towards attacking a Terrans production with roach and zergling drops.
|
I will just write a few things to your post LSN because every player following the scene knows its full of bullshit.
1) I didnt whine about Broodlord/Infestor. It was imbalanced and I worked on getting better and hitting timings. Furthermore I never mentioned it here to validate potential imbalances
2) 15000 posts full of rage? Perhaps you should take the time to read my posts instead of your accusations
3) I dont whine about TvP. I wrote down concerns of Terran in the match up. While people were saying Naniwa won over MMA because of imbalance, I explained it was poor play
You come up with statements that are far from the truth and discuss TvZ on multiple levels. If you could decide what level you want to talk about that would be great. I never said the match up is perfectly balanced but the topics you bring up are often times about design, not balance. You want nerfs to biomine, well better give Terran a viable option to play then. Just a very few points I pointed out but your post is so wrong I wouldnt even know where to start and as I am on the phone I will leave it with the above post.
|
On August 08 2013 22:09 Sissors wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2013 21:37 ImperialFist wrote:On August 08 2013 08:56 GhostOwl wrote:On August 08 2013 05:57 ImperialFist wrote:
As a Terran I just want to apologize to every Zerg player out there. TvZ is Terran favored if it goes into a standard macro game.
I am aware, I have a conscience. I have no idea how Zerg will be good at this rate, Protoss is completely god-mode vs everything and bio-mine is a bit too strong in TvZ.
I am fucking sorry guys T_T
You are awesome dude. I didn't have time to read the other lengthy responses at the moment and I can't write a long paragraph but major props for admitting it unlike many other Terrans here. Yeah well, I whined like a bitch about Infestors for most part of WOL so I know how it feels. The community is progressing though I've even seen a bunch of Protoss admit how their race is easier to play and that PvT is P favored. Somewhere deep inside people must understand that one widow mine taking out 40 banelings is wrong. Was the same with the Infestor WOL, most Zergs did not admit, but they must have known. The mothersip-core and widow mines needs some kind of tweaking. And I still think that templars are completely ridiculous for their cost. It's essentially a free unit considering their incredible spells, it's extremely easy to control and very hard for your opponent to counter. I am very sure that I do not deserve my 70% win rate TvZ and I'm even more sure that my 30% TvP is equally stupid if not even more so. I, as low master EU, have 60% TvP win rate and 40% TvZ. (Which is I don't understand how it is above 20%, even with the game I win due to zergs RQ'ing when I make a bunker besides their natural while not having any units to put in them). Nerf zerg, boost toss? Funny part is that I play mech, so for me mech works better vs toss than vs zerg.
well that makes sense since mech is bad vs Zerg, and TvP mech works in mastersno doubt, I too do better with mech TvP than bio especially since many Protoss don't know how to respond.
|
On August 08 2013 21:45 NarutO wrote:
You missed my point. If you win the engagement and can choose between destroying economy or camping the production, you camp the production. Terran has no way to use his income when his production is camped but he can use parts of the income if you ravage the economy.
Both things can put you ahead but the smarter move is get to the production if you can. So dont say 'dont start with this shit' if you
A) miss my point
B) seemingly not understood it
I am Terran and I can tell you I never came back from sufficient units in my production yet often times I did with low economy.
Edit. I also never said it should be your goal to play like that and especially I never mentioned roach ling drops. Wtf
Generally speaking, if you win the engagement and have enough to camp production you have won or should be so far ahead that that they shouldn't win. Just like when a terran wins an engagement and has army left over to kill a whole base (or two) for zergs. Also, ideally you would split off a small chunk of your army to kill the mineral line too. If you can't spare 6 lings to kill a ton of SCV's then you don't have enough to camp the production either really.
Is 1 reactor worth ~8-9 SCV's? Or in the case of banelings possibly 20 SCV's?
PS: Soulkey lost because as Naruto said, he kept using banelings to kill the mineral lines/depots. 2 banelings are not a good trade to kill 4 SCV's like he was doing. Or 20 banelings to kill 3 depot's and 5 SCV's. Banelings should be used to let lings in to deal damage. I have no clue what soulkey was thinking
|
Well you always mention WOL infestor when talking about an imbalanced state of a game example but forget that the most of the time in WOL terran was ahead (in the beginning).
Anyway I think you are not in the position to decide about which opinions are valid and which are not. There are so many flaws in the ZvT matchup when looking into it deeply and comparing it with earlier balance levels as well as broodwar metagame so that it is worth to bring it up again more oftenly.
Your analysis about the game soulkey vs innovations I consider wrong at the point where you say soulkey was ahead and then wasted units and let the terran come back. This is in fact a pure terran biased view of the happenenings. Because as I remember the game, Soulkey used alot of his banelings to kill terran natural scv count 100%. After this he was of course very vulnerable to attacks as he had basically nothing left to stop the terran army if it attacks. For this reason he _had_ to go on with the harrassment on the terran to a) keep him in base defending as long as possible and get more time to rebuild an army that can face the bio/mine before it pushes out (which it eventually did not) and b) get some potential more hits on SCV's because he was no way ahead in this position (after killing 30 scvs).
The problem that I see in this very game is that terran is too forigiving when it comes to losing SCV's in ZvT. And this is only one example. If zerg does a 2 base 20 drones all-in vs terran and succeeds to kill 100% of terrans scvs, the terran is still ahead with having tripple mules+tech if he survives. This is basically the same thing that happened at the last soulkey vs innovation match just not in the scenario of a 2 base all-in. And this is the reason for people saying it is senseless to harrass terran and get an advantage out of it and its the reason why I say it is cost inefficient to attack the terran at all at any stage of the game before endgame which is also not desireable from both the design and balance point of view.
|
LSN, soulkey was behind that whole game. Yes, he kept killing SCV's, but I dont think at any time Innovation was below 50 SCV's. His economy was always on par or better than soulkeys. Meanwhile, soulkey was losing important banelings to kill depots
|
On August 08 2013 22:50 LSN wrote:
Well you always mention WOL infestor when talking about an imbalanced state of a game example but forget that the most of the time in WOL terran was ahead (in the beginning).
Anyway I think you are not in the position to decide about which opinions are valid and which are not. There are so many flaws in the ZvT matchup when looking into it deeply and comparing it with earlier balance levels as well as broodwar metagame so that it is worth to bring it up again more oftenly.
Your analysis about the game soulkey vs innovations I consider wrong at the point where you say soulkey was ahead and then wasted units and let the terran come back. This is in fact a pure terran biased view of the happenenings. Because as I remember the game, Soulkey used alot of his banelings to kill terran natural scv count 100%. After this he was of course very vulnerable to attacks as he had basically nothing left to stop the terran army if it attacks. For this reason he _had_ to go on with the harrassment on the terran to a) keep him in base defending as long as possible and get more time to rebuild an army that can face the bio/mine before it pushes out (which it eventually did not) and b) get some potential more hits on SCV's because he was no way ahead in this position (after killing 30 scvs).
The problem that I see in this very game is that terran is too forigiving when it comes to losing SCV's in ZvT. And this is only one example. If zerg does a 2 base 20 drones all-in vs terran and succeeds to kill 100% of terrans scvs, the terran is still ahead with having tripple mules+tech if he survives. This is basically the same thing that happened at the last soulkey vs innovation match just not in the scenario of a 2 base all-in. And this is the reason for people saying it is senseless to harrass terran and get an advantage out of it and its the reason why I say it is cost inefficient to attack the terran at all at any stage of the game before endgame which is also not desireable from both the design and balance point of view.
I'm really curious LSN, on any given week, how much do you actually play zvt? You don't need to to into rank or anything, I'd just really like to know.
|
On August 08 2013 22:55 TheRabidDeer wrote:
LSN, soulkey was behind that whole game. Yes, he kept killing SCV's, but I dont think at any time Innovation was below 50 SCV's. His economy was always on par or better than soulkeys. Meanwhile, soulkey was losing important banelings to kill depots
this is exactly what I think. Just need to add that he did go on harrassing with baneling to keep the terran in base as long as possible, what you forgot to mention besides killing the depots. Arguing that Soulkey wasted more banelings just out of stupidity is probably just stupid by itself.
What you say basically supports what I say. I say killing 30 SCV in this game didnt do anything and obviously innovation didnt even care about it at all. Therefore what else should the Z do to come back if not killing SCVs?
We both together figured just out one of the major issues of complaint my friend ;-)
edit: poster above, feel free to write me a PM with private questions, this is not matter of this topic. But I am sure you will learn it some day when mods are going to teach you. Meanwhiles feel free to write how many games of each matchup you play yourself per week if you feel is of any interest in this matter.
|
On August 08 2013 23:02 LSN wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2013 22:55 TheRabidDeer wrote:
LSN, soulkey was behind that whole game. Yes, he kept killing SCV's, but I dont think at any time Innovation was below 50 SCV's. His economy was always on par or better than soulkeys. Meanwhile, soulkey was losing important banelings to kill depots this is exactly what I think. Just need to add that he did go on harrassing with baneling to keep the terran in base as long as possible, what you forgot to mention besides killing the depots. Arguing that Soulkey wasted more banelings just out of stupidity is probably just stupid by itself. What you say basically supports what I say. I say killing 30 SCV in this game didnt do anything and obviously innovation didnt even care about it at all. Therefore what else should the Z do to come back if not killing SCVs? We both together figured just out one of the major issues of complaint my friend ;-)
Killing SCV's is impactful, but trading 20 banelings for 10-15 SCV's repeatedly is not. 1 baneling costs more than 1 SCV, and he loses none of his army. Had he used regular zerglings instead, he wouldve killed as many or more SCV's and lost significantly less of his army.
EDIT: I do agree that lategame when terran has like 4+ OC's that the value of the SCV is possibly too severely diminished though.
|
mate it were more like 45+ banelings for 3-4 scvs repeatedly, but aside from this zerglings dont kill scvs fast enaugh to do efficient damage. ~10 zerglings kill maybe 2-3 scv before they get pulled away and few marines come to clear it up. 20-30 zerglings is equal as big investment as the banes (mins only, no gas, same or more larva) and kills less scv. 10 ling and 4-5 banes would probably be best but there are mines that can instantly take out such a few amount of banelings so soulkey obviously thought that he has to go with more banelings.
Anyway its good to see a terran admitting that the SCV issues is something to look at instead of telling me its all fine as it is and works like intended.
|
|
|
From how you word yourself I cannot believe you actually touched the game ever. Go host a game and send 12 zerglings into an economy line. I guarantee you more than 3 die before you pull (given innovations reaction against the banelings possibly 10). In addition you can retreat with zerglings and its less of a commitment.
If you mention its not worth trading banes vs economy especially considering he needed any part of his army due to lack of upgrades then first of all soulkey made several mistakes doing it over and over and it got punished. That is no balance but a design issue.
I will give you an analogy in TvP. Killing 2 nexus isnt worth anything if you sacrifice half your army for it. He will counter and you will die if you didnt have a huge lead to begin with. Go rewatch the game and tell me how many banelings he send into supplies at the 3rd without any return. Tell me his engagements or movement at the 4th were as good as it gets . I will give you the benefif of the match up being hard as fuck but that goes for Terran as well as for Zerg. You continuously blame Terran for biomine when the truth is that there is no other viable option. For what exactly are we supposed to get spellcasters? Why do you call us out on it. We play what was given to us and god beware any Terran in the world that is not top notch doesnt look like Innovation with his mines. So dont you agree that potentially the possibility is that innovation simply is better?
While Terrans do win, they dont completly demolish Zergs . So what you should ask for ar tweaks but you make it sound like terran needs to get a new Design because it requires no skill whatsoever
|
Not a defined proof, but Major just said in the last meta that he thinks tvz is terran favoured. Again doesn´t proof anything but an opinion from a pro player counts more than my opinion.
|
Let's take a look at the top 10 zergs on the korean ladder:
[IM]Byul:
vs P 55%
vs T 57%
vs Z 51%
||||||| (2339 points)
vs P 52%
vs T 60%
vs Z 61%
||||||| (2329 points)
vs P 64%
vs T 60%
vs Z 56%
[IM]KANGHO
vs P 47%
vs T 56%
vs Z 56%
|||||||| (2327 points)
vs P 54%
vs T 57%
vs Z 53%
Soo
vs P 63%
vs T 62%
vs Z 65%
||||||| (2275 points)
vs P 51%
vs T 59%
vs Z 53%
[SWGS]|||||| (2273 points)
vs P 64%
vs T 48%
vs Z 64%
|||||| (2265 points)
vs P 49%
vs T 52%
vs Z 56%
Lilith (2263 points)
vs P 55%
vs T 65%
vs Z 67%
TOTAL: 57,6
Let's take a look at the top 10 terrans on the korean ladder:
|||||| (2281 points)
vs P 56%
vs T 62%
vs Z 57%
|||||| (2265 points)
vs P 48%
vs T 58%
vs Z 57%
|||||| (2230 points)
vs P 45%
vs T 50%
vs Z 57%
oGsForGG
vs P 52%
vs T 65%
vs Z 46%
|||||| (2207 points)
vs P 42%
vs T 61%
vs Z 44%
|||||| (2207 points)
vs P 50%
vs T 57%
vs Z 53%
[u]|||||| (2205 points)
vs P 56%
vs T 46%
vs Z 56%
Innovation
vs P 48%
vs T 67%
vs Z 67%
|||||| (2149 points)
vs P 51%
vs T 46%
vs Z 55%
|||||| (2147 points)
vs P 47%
vs T 51%
vs Z 57%
Journey (2140 points)
vs P 63%
vs T 69%
vs Z 48%
TOTAL: 53,9
If we have to believe all these whinezergs then:
1) The zergs are doing really bad vs terran
2) The terrans are having a fun time vs zerg
When I look at these winrates, I don't see that. I see an even matchup (and actually I see better winrates for the zergs: 57,6 vs 53,9, but let's be kind and let's not use that).
Now some smart zerg will tell me "don't use ladder in balance discussions"!!!
Then I give the guy this:
http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/hots/individual-leagues
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Premier_Tournaments
Then he responds with: nono, let's only take a look at these 3 tournaments where zergs are doing bad! Cherrypicking FTW!
I don't have a problem with people complaining about their race when it's indeed a problem. What I HATE is that zergs whine while zvt is actually fine.
|
On August 08 2013 23:47 Snowbear wrote:Let's take a look at the top 10 zergs on the korean ladder:[IM]Byul: vs P 55% vs T 57%vs Z 51% ||||||| (2339 points)vs P 52% vs T 60%vs Z 61% ||||||| (2329 points)vs P 64% vs T 60%vs Z 56% [IM]KANGHOvs P 47% vs T 56%vs Z 56% |||||||| (2327 points)vs P 54% vs T 57%vs Z 53% Soovs P 63% vs T 62%vs Z 65% ||||||| (2275 points)vs P 51% vs T 59%vs Z 53% [SWGS]|||||| (2273 points)vs P 64% vs T 48%vs Z 64% |||||| (2265 points)vs P 49% vs T 52%vs Z 56% Lilith (2263 points)vs P 55% vs T 65%vs Z 67% TOTAL: 57,6Let's take a look at the top 10 terrans on the korean ladder:|||||| (2281 points)vs P 56% vs T 62% vs Z 57%|||||| (2265 points)vs P 48% vs T 58% vs Z 57%|||||| (2230 points)vs P 45% vs T 50% vs Z 57%oGsForGGvs P 52% vs T 65% vs Z 46%|||||| (2207 points)vs P 42% vs T 61% vs Z 44%|||||| (2207 points)vs P 50% vs T 57% vs Z 53%[u] |||||| (2205 points)vs P 56% vs T 46% vs Z 56%Innovation vs P 48% vs T 67% vs Z 67%|||||| (2149 points)vs P 51% vs T 46% vs Z 55%|||||| (2147 points)vs P 47% vs T 51% vs Z 57%Journey (2140 points)vs P 63% vs T 69% vs Z 48%TOTAL: 53,9If we have to believe all these whinezergs then: 1) The zergs are doing really bad vs terran 2) The terrans are having a fun time vs zerg When I look at these winrates, I don't see that. I see an even matchup (and actually I see better winrates for the zergs: 57,6 vs 53,9, but let's be kind and let's not use that). Now some smart zerg will tell me "don't use ladder in balance discussions"!!! Then I give the guy this: http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/hots/individual-leagueshttp://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Premier_TournamentsThen he responds with: nono, let's only take a look at these 3 tournaments where zergs are doing bad! Cherrypicking FTW! I don't have a problem with people complaining about their race when it's indeed a problem. What I HATE is that zergs whine while zvt is actually fine.
No!
you are doing it wrong, coming here and whine again
Its HOW you win the games
I repeat
HOW you as a player playing starcraft WINS the GAME
one more time
HOW you as a starcraft 2 player with blood in your body wins a GAME!!!
You get it? Stop your nonsence, you ARE THE WHINER
|
On August 08 2013 23:44 RaFox17 wrote:
Not a defined proof, but Major just said in the last meta that he thinks tvz is terran favoured. Again doesn´t proof anything but an opinion from a pro player counts more than my opinion.
well, and as far as I remember CatZ did not think there was a problem. If there is any imbalance, it is probably tiny or even metagame dependend and could get figured out.
|
Do you know how those wins are gained for Z? All-ins can make matchup look ok while being totally shitty.(ZvP in WOL)
|
On August 09 2013 00:01 RaFox17 wrote:
Do you know how those wins are gained for Z? All-ins can make matchup look ok while being totally shitty.(ZvP in WOL)
even if zerg was only able to win through allins, as long as they can do it consistently there is nothing wrong with it balancewise.
|
On August 09 2013 00:00 Foxxan wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2013 23:47 Snowbear wrote:Let's take a look at the top 10 zergs on the korean ladder:[IM]Byul: vs P 55% vs T 57%vs Z 51% ||||||| (2339 points)vs P 52% vs T 60%vs Z 61% ||||||| (2329 points)vs P 64% vs T 60%vs Z 56% [IM]KANGHOvs P 47% vs T 56%vs Z 56% |||||||| (2327 points)vs P 54% vs T 57%vs Z 53% Soovs P 63% vs T 62%vs Z 65% ||||||| (2275 points)vs P 51% vs T 59%vs Z 53% [SWGS]|||||| (2273 points)vs P 64% vs T 48%vs Z 64% |||||| (2265 points)vs P 49% vs T 52%vs Z 56% Lilith (2263 points)vs P 55% vs T 65%vs Z 67% TOTAL: 57,6Let's take a look at the top 10 terrans on the korean ladder:|||||| (2281 points)vs P 56% vs T 62% vs Z 57%|||||| (2265 points)vs P 48% vs T 58% vs Z 57%|||||| (2230 points)vs P 45% vs T 50% vs Z 57%oGsForGGvs P 52% vs T 65% vs Z 46%|||||| (2207 points)vs P 42% vs T 61% vs Z 44%|||||| (2207 points)vs P 50% vs T 57% vs Z 53%[u] |||||| (2205 points)vs P 56% vs T 46% vs Z 56%Innovation vs P 48% vs T 67% vs Z 67%|||||| (2149 points)vs P 51% vs T 46% vs Z 55%|||||| (2147 points)vs P 47% vs T 51% vs Z 57%Journey (2140 points)vs P 63% vs T 69% vs Z 48%TOTAL: 53,9If we have to believe all these whinezergs then: 1) The zergs are doing really bad vs terran 2) The terrans are having a fun time vs zerg When I look at these winrates, I don't see that. I see an even matchup (and actually I see better winrates for the zergs: 57,6 vs 53,9, but let's be kind and let's not use that). Now some smart zerg will tell me "don't use ladder in balance discussions"!!! Then I give the guy this: http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/hots/individual-leagueshttp://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Premier_TournamentsThen he responds with: nono, let's only take a look at these 3 tournaments where zergs are doing bad! Cherrypicking FTW! I don't have a problem with people complaining about their race when it's indeed a problem. What I HATE is that zergs whine while zvt is actually fine. No! you are doing it wrong, coming here and whine again Its HOW you win the games I repeat HOW you as a player playing starcraft WINS the GAME one more time HOW you as a starcraft 2 player with blood in your body wins a GAME!!! You get it? Stop your nonsence, you ARE THE WHINER
On August 09 2013 00:01 RaFox17 wrote:
Do you know how those wins are gained for Z? All-ins can make matchup look ok while being totally shitty.(ZvP in WOL)
Yes! I show you a perfect proof that these zergs are whining without a reason. And then you come with "it's how you win the games"? Seriously??? What if those terran wins are because of allins? Your argument works in both ways mate  .
You want your WOL zerg domination back and NO, you are NOT going to get it. Get over it ASAP because Blizzard will NEVER ever make the same mistake.
This is HOTS now. You need to micro now. Those easy no micro infestor times are gone and will never come back. You are required to put the same effort into the game as the terran.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
