|
As some of you might know, I've created threads about how Terran is overpowered in the past. Well, I've taken time to research ZvT to its full potential and I'm going to give you some good thoughts on the entire concept of ZvT.
In the past, I blamed Terran was overpowered because m&m was too powerful and cost efficient. In the past, I felt like with micro, lings melt under m&m and they can move away from lurks easily. They can move away from dark swarm simply, and the only actual spell that hurts them is plague. In the past, I've also talked about how cost efficient T is with their vulture, turret (20 damage, fast fire, cheap cost, long range), goliaths (ultimate air attacker), valkirye (ultimate air to air). In the past, I've told that bunker is extremely cheap for the amount of protection and power it gives for contains and turtle, and how even fake bunker rush is advantageous to Terran. In the past, I've blamed how there are extremely few Zergs in the top of progaming because very few Zergs are capable of ZvT since T is overpowered to the max.
Well, I don't deny these accusations I've made, I still feel same about most of them, but I've realized the main issue why ZvT is so advantageous to T. The main reason, the simple reason, and the biggest reason....is not cost efficiency (but it is a huge factor) but Terran's ability to lift off command center.
Lets look at why this is so important. In higher level of starcraft, macro is extremely important. In order to have resources and macro and build units, you need to obtain enough bases to produce enough units. This is why fast expand and multiple bases are so common. But you all probably knew this already.
Now we look at the next step. We need to realize that destroying or delaying an expansion is much more economically damaging than losing the cost of minerals it took to make that base. For example, Protoss Nexus = 400 minerals. But a Zerg player would rather spend 500 minerals worth of lings to destroy that Nexus JUST to delay that expansion and losing all the lings, disregarding the actual mineral cost that each player lost. Because the longer it takes for that expansion to start running, the more likely that the Protoss will lose a lot more than 400 minerals because he lost all that mining time + gas'ing time.
Now lets look at modern ZvT. Terran usually uses marine&medics + science vessels + tanks to fight Zergs in normal ZvT. Zergs usually use zerglings and lurkers, scourges, ultras, defilers, etc. Notice how none of these units can attack air except scourges? Hydras are very weak in ZvT, and this is why its not used. Mutalisks are not always used, and even if they are, they die off throughout the game usually.
This is why lifting off CC is so critical to Zergs, because Zergs cannot destroy the Terran base because they cannot touch the command center. What makes it worse is that SCV have more life than drones, so the second Terran realizes that he cannot defend his expansion, he will simply lift CC and move all his SCV to main safely (lings are not ranged like marines so they cannot kill line-moving scvs easily, and SCV has more life than drones)
So in this scenario, after Zerg threat is out of the area, Terran can simply put CC back into the ground, and SCVs will start working again right away. It is definately not the same for Zergs. The moment even a small size group of m&m come, your drones pop VERY fast and your hatchery cannot simply be "lifted off"
Because Z has to wait for the hatchery to rebuild and THEN drones to rebuild, he loses quite a huge amount of mining and gas time. On the other hand, it takes T literally less than 5 seconds to get his expo running again.
What makes this even worse is that if the inflow of gas for Z stops, then he is in a lot of trouble because Z army consumes the most gas usually. T on the other hand doesn't need a lot of gas so making sure the expo's are up and running are not as important as it is to Zerg. Combine that with the inability to simply "lift" hatchery while Terran can simply lift "CC" and you get a not perfectly balanced ZvT.
And we know how important getting or losing an expansion can be to your game. Even though Terrans being able to lift off production buildings is also unfair, its not as important as being able to lift off CC. The most reasonable solution to this is let T lift off his usual buildings EXCEPT the command center. This simple concept totally upsets the balance of ZvT.
You can make a difference. We know the Blizzard still cares about SC:BW so lets give them mass e-mails trying to point this out in the slim hopes that they actually might change this.
In the meantime, if you're a frustrated Zerg player, I recommend using a queen or two during your game with ensnare. Ensnare makes a big difference, and queens will let you infest that lifted off CC if it is damaged enough. If the T has bad enough reflex to let you damage half the life of his CC, he deserves a nice infestation from the queen for playing a rigged matchup.
I will only respond to people who give a decent analysis on this thread so flame me all you want, I do not care. This has to be changed, look at how Top Zergs in progaming scene are dying out
|
Terran has much less mobility than Zerg, and you fail to address the numerous advantageous Zerg has in the same sphere (defending and keeping expansions). Zerg commits a lot less to taking out a Terran expansion. This is usually due to the fact that most Terrans won't waste a group of marines to defend every expansion. At most, there will be a bunker and that's it. This allows for a lot of opportunities for Zerg to just overwhelm the expansion with as little as a group of lings and maybe a few lurkers. On the other hand, Zerg probably is the best in terms of expansion defense, with a dark swarm, which can be the equivalent or the greater than lift off, that often stalls long enough for the Zerg army to return to defend. All it requires is a defiler and a couple of lurkers (or a nydus). This would be enough to stop the entire Terran ball if needed, while Terran needs to commit a significant portion of his army to defend his expansions against a force much smaller. Arguing for a small thing like lifting off is like me arguing that Zergs should not be allowed to use their Nydus Canal any longer because it allows for too fast of a defense.
|
On November 24 2008 16:23 nevake wrote:
Terran has much less mobility than Zerg, and you fail to address the numerous advantageous Zerg has in the same sphere (defending and keeping expansions). Zerg commits a lot less to taking out a Terran expansion. This is usually due to the fact that most Terrans won't waste a group of marines to defend every expansion. At most, there will be a bunker and that's it. This allows for a lot of opportunities for Zerg to just overwhelm the expansion with as little as a group of lings and maybe a few lurkers. On the other hand, Zerg probably is the best in terms of expansion defense, with a dark swarm, which can be the equivalent or the greater than lift off, that often stalls long enough for the Zerg army to return to defend. All it requires is a defiler and a couple of lurkers (or a nydus). This would be enough to stop the entire Terran ball if needed, while Terran needs to commit a significant portion of his army to defend his expansions against a force much smaller. Arguing for a small thing like lifting off is like me arguing that Zergs should not be allowed to use their Nydus Canal any longer because it allows for too fast of a defense.
Great feedback, (I also appreciate your youtube account uploading videos!)
There are some things I have to argue about: I think Terrans commit alot less to defend than Zergs will. Each sunken = 175 minerals. 1 bunker = 100 minerals. A few sunkens will not stop a decent sized m&m army while 2 bunkers + a tank WILL stop a decent sized lurker/ling army. To further talk about this issue, because Zergs need to have more expansions than Terrans do, its only natural that Terrans have fewer expansions, which equals less units spent to defend because there are less expansions.
Dark swarm can hold off a m&m army IF Zerg has enough ground support units, and Vessel will simply irradiate the defiler anyway so the length of the dark swarm = how safe Zerg base will be. Furthermore, Dark swarm+ defiler is a not viable until hive, and we know how much more damaging losing a base is in early/mid game than compared to late game. Swarm definately is not greater than lift off.
I have already explained that lifting off IS a small thing but it is the root of how the expansions are destroyed/saved. That analogy definately doesnt work. How about you telling me losing expansions and keeping expansions are a small thing in Starcraft?
But I appreciate you pointing out possibility I missed. Yes Zerg is more mobile BUT what good is mobility if you can't touch their base/expansion and they can touch your base/expansion?
|
I have two things to say. First, I this thread doesn't belong in the strategy forum. Second, your premise that T>>Z is inaccurate. According to the TLPD, out of all TvZ's played, Terran wins 53.85% of the time (with 2800+ games played). That doesn't strike me as quite the unfair matchup that you portray.
edit: By not belonging in the strategy forum, I mean in the broodwar forum. Or the closed thread 'forum'. I also think your title is wildly inaccurate. Judging by the title, one would expect something insightful, which we have not received. I find your 'analysis' highly suspect.
|
where do you get those matchup percentages? i can only get them by maps only.
|
Great analysis, I agree with most of the issues you put up there. Expansions ARE a huge deal , especially in modern day SC and lifting off CC is the root of saving expansions in ZvT.
@CDRdude Does 53.85% sound perfectly balanced to you or does it sound slightly in favor of Terran? Because "perfectly balanced" should be 50.00%
|
dude if you think thats imba... just think about SaviOr style, just read carefully and look into it deep ok?
1) Nydus Canal
2) Plague/Swarm
3) Crack lings/Ultras
|
On November 24 2008 16:10 F13 wrote:
As some of you might know, I've created threads about how Terran is overpowered in the past. Well, I've taken time to research ZvT to its full potential and I'm going to give you some good thoughts on the entire concept of ZvT.
In the past, I blamed Terran was overpowered because m&m was too powerful and cost efficient. In the past, I felt like with micro, lings melt under m&m and they can move away from lurks easily. They can move away from dark swarm simply, and the only actual spell that hurts them is plague. In the past, I've also talked about how cost efficient T is with their vulture, turret (20 damage, fast fire, cheap cost, long range), goliaths (ultimate air attacker), valkirye (ultimate air to air). In the past, I've told that bunker is extremely cheap for the amount of protection and power it gives for contains and turtle, and how even fake bunker rush is advantageous to Terran. In the past, I've blamed how there are extremely few Zergs in the top of progaming because very few Zergs are capable of ZvT since T is overpowered to the max.
Well, I don't deny these accusations I've made, I still feel same about most of them, but I've realized the main issue why ZvT is so advantageous to T. The main reason, the simple reason, and the biggest reason....is not cost efficiency (but it is a huge factor) but Terran's ability to lift off command center.
Lets look at why this is so important. In higher level of starcraft, macro is extremely important. In order to have resources and macro and build units, you need to obtain enough bases to produce enough units. This is why fast expand and multiple bases are so common. But you all probably knew this already.
Now we look at the next step. We need to realize that destroying or delaying an expansion is much more economically damaging than losing the cost of minerals it took to make that base. For example, Protoss Nexus = 400 minerals. But a Zerg player would rather spend 500 minerals worth of lings to destroy that Nexus JUST to delay that expansion and losing all the lings, disregarding the actual mineral cost that each player lost. Because the longer it takes for that expansion to start running, the more likely that the Protoss will lose a lot more than 400 minerals because he lost all that mining time + gas'ing time.
Now lets look at modern ZvT. Terran usually uses marine&medics + science vessels + tanks to fight Zergs in normal ZvT. Zergs usually use zerglings and lurkers, scourges, ultras, defilers, etc. Notice how none of these units can attack air except scourges? Hydras are very weak in ZvT, and this is why its not used. Mutalisks are not always used, and even if they are, they die off throughout the game usually.
This is why lifting off CC is so critical to Zergs, because Zergs cannot destroy the Terran base because they cannot touch the command center. What makes it worse is that SCV have more life than drones, so the second Terran realizes that he cannot defend his expansion, he will simply lift CC and move all his SCV to main safely (lings are not ranged like marines so they cannot kill line-moving scvs easily, and SCV has more life than drones)
So in this scenario, after Zerg threat is out of the area, Terran can simply put CC back into the ground, and SCVs will start working again right away. It is definately not the same for Zergs. The moment even a small size group of m&m come, your drones pop VERY fast and your hatchery cannot simply be "lifted off"
Because Z has to wait for the hatchery to rebuild and THEN drones to rebuild, he loses quite a huge amount of mining and gas time. On the other hand, it takes T literally less than 5 seconds to get his expo running again.
What makes this even worse is that if the inflow of gas for Z stops, then he is in a lot of trouble because Z army consumes the most gas usually. T on the other hand doesn't need a lot of gas so making sure the expo's are up and running are not as important as it is to Zerg. Combine that with the inability to simply "lift" hatchery while Terran can simply lift "CC" and you get a not perfectly balanced ZvT.
And we know how important getting or losing an expansion can be to your game. Even though Terrans being able to lift off production buildings is also unfair, its not as important as being able to lift off CC. The most reasonable solution to this is let T lift off his usual buildings EXCEPT the command center. This simple concept totally upsets the balance of ZvT.
You can make a difference. We know the Blizzard still cares about SC:BW so lets give them mass e-mails trying to point this out in the slim hopes that they actually might change this.
In the meantime, if you're a frustrated Zerg player, I recommend using a queen or two during your game with ensnare. Ensnare makes a big difference, and queens will let you infest that lifted off CC if it is damaged enough. If the T has bad enough reflex to let you damage half the life of his CC, he deserves a nice infestation from the queen for playing a rigged matchup.
I will only respond to people who give a decent analysis on this thread so flame me all you want, I do not care. This has to be changed, look at how Top Zergs in progaming scene are dying out
If you having that much of a problem, build one queen. 100/100 and infest a lifted cc. That simple.
Or just have 5-6 muta hanging around, and if the terran lifts an injured CC have those muta come in quickly and snipe it down to infested health.
I just don't get how this is such a big deal?
|
On November 24 2008 16:45 InfeSteD wrote:
dude if you think thats imba... just think about SaviOr style, just read carefully and look into it deep ok?
1) Nydus Canal
2) Plague/Swarm
3) Crack lings/Ultras
Ok all these things you pointed out are only viable in late game where hive tech kicks in. From what i've noticed, Terrans usually finish off the Zerg in mid game recent zvt games and last time I checked, you always had early/mid games but sometimes you could play a game where you didnt have to play late game. And what about them? go more in depth about them please
I'm also saying that CC lift is not THE reason why T>Z in TvZ but a major contributing factor. Combine that with Terran cost effectiveness and you will see how it can be rather not perfectly balanced
|
On November 24 2008 16:43 TheFlashyOne wrote:
where do you get those matchup percentages? i can only get them by maps only.
I got them from this thread.
On November 24 2008 16:44 Februarys wrote:
@CDRdude Does 53.85% sound perfectly balanced to you or does it sound slightly in favor of Terran? Because "perfectly balanced" should be 50.00%
I never claimed it was perfect. But it's a lot better than what the OP is saying, that the big scary terrans are being mean to us.
edit: To the guy two posts above me, with the huge quote and like 2 lines of text: Read his post next time, thanks.
|
On November 24 2008 16:44 Februarys wrote:
Great analysis, I agree with most of the issues you put up there. Expansions ARE a huge deal , especially in modern day SC and lifting off CC is the root of saving expansions in ZvT.
@CDRdude Does 53.85% sound perfectly balanced to you or does it sound slightly in favor of Terran? Because "perfectly balanced" should be 50.00%
Ohh noes! a 3.85% deviation over 2800+ games. Not imba.
Is chess a balanced game?
-Yes
Does white win more (statistically) than black?
-Yes
What is the percentage of win ratio? (53-56%)
In all actuality draws are the most common form of a chess game completion.
SO about that 3.85%, if its good enough for chess, it's good enough for SC
|
On November 24 2008 16:48 Misrah wrote:
If you having that much of a problem, build one queen. 100/100 and infest a lifted cc. That simple.
Or just have 5-6 muta hanging around, and if the terran lifts an injured CC have those muta come in quickly and snipe it down to infested health.
I just don't get how this is such a big deal?
Queens cannot infest a CC without it becoming halfway damaged. A T with good reflex will never let CC get that much damaged to infest it in the 1st place unless he makes a mistake and forgets about it.
I assure you, 5-6 mutas cannot damage it fast enough until turrets or marines kill them, and theoretically T player will not let CC get injured because they can simply react fast and lift off so your theory goes out the window
|
On November 24 2008 16:52 Misrah wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2008 16:44 Februarys wrote:
Great analysis, I agree with most of the issues you put up there. Expansions ARE a huge deal , especially in modern day SC and lifting off CC is the root of saving expansions in ZvT.
@CDRdude Does 53.85% sound perfectly balanced to you or does it sound slightly in favor of Terran? Because "perfectly balanced" should be 50.00% Ohh noes! a 3.85% deviation over 2800+ games. Not imba. Is chess a balanced game? -Yes Does white win more (statistically) than black? -Yes What is the percentage of win ratio? (53-56%) In all actuality draws are the most common form of a chess game completion. SO about that 3.85%, if its good enough for chess, it's good enough for SC
You need to factor in how modern ZvT has changed throughout the many years.
You cannot compare chess to SC, period
|
On November 24 2008 16:53 F13 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2008 16:48 Misrah wrote:
If you having that much of a problem, build one queen. 100/100 and infest a lifted cc. That simple.
Or just have 5-6 muta hanging around, and if the terran lifts an injured CC have those muta come in quickly and snipe it down to infested health.
I just don't get how this is such a big deal?
Queens cannot infest a CC without it becoming halfway damaged. A T with good reflex will never let CC get that much damaged to infest it in the 1st place unless he makes a mistake and forgets about it. I assure you, 5-6 mutas cannot damage it fast enough until turrets or marines kill them, and theoretically T player will not let CC get injured because they can simply react fast and lift off so your theory goes out the window
I have one question:
On November 24 2008 16:10 F13 wrote:
In the meantime, if you're a frustrated Zerg player, I recommend using a queen or two during your game with ensnare. Ensnare makes a big difference, and queens will let you infest that lifted off CC if it is damaged enough. If the T has bad enough reflex to let you damage half the life of his CC, he deserves a nice infestation from the queen for playing a rigged matchup.
Why are you disagreeing with yourself?
|
On November 24 2008 16:53 F13 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2008 16:48 Misrah wrote:
If you having that much of a problem, build one queen. 100/100 and infest a lifted cc. That simple.
Or just have 5-6 muta hanging around, and if the terran lifts an injured CC have those muta come in quickly and snipe it down to infested health.
I just don't get how this is such a big deal?
Queens cannot infest a CC without it becoming halfway damaged. A T with good reflex will never let CC get that much damaged to infest it in the 1st place unless he makes a mistake and forgets about it. I assure you, 5-6 mutas cannot damage it fast enough until turrets or marines kill them, and theoretically T player will not let CC get injured because they can simply react fast and lift off so your theory goes out the window
Ahh ok, in that case, if people are going to have insane and unlimited apm- then sure.
I have been in many games where the T does one of the following
1. Not Lift
2. Lift to late
3. Lift, brings in his army and then "secures" the expo.
If T does 1.
I win
If T does 2.
I win
If T does 3.
I win. Because if he is going to park is slow and immobile army over his expo, to finish my muta or what not, he just allows me to expand, or take the map. So woo hoo.
Either way, if T is lifting and running his SCV, he is losing mining time, gas time, and (from what you say) will run his army over there and kill my 12-24 cracklings- i come out on top. Economicaly, and map control wise.
|
On November 24 2008 16:56 CDRdude wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2008 16:53 F13 wrote:On November 24 2008 16:48 Misrah wrote:
If you having that much of a problem, build one queen. 100/100 and infest a lifted cc. That simple.
Or just have 5-6 muta hanging around, and if the terran lifts an injured CC have those muta come in quickly and snipe it down to infested health.
I just don't get how this is such a big deal?
Queens cannot infest a CC without it becoming halfway damaged. A T with good reflex will never let CC get that much damaged to infest it in the 1st place unless he makes a mistake and forgets about it. I assure you, 5-6 mutas cannot damage it fast enough until turrets or marines kill them, and theoretically T player will not let CC get injured because they can simply react fast and lift off so your theory goes out the window I have one question: Show nested quote +On November 24 2008 16:10 F13 wrote:
In the meantime, if you're a frustrated Zerg player, I recommend using a queen or two during your game with ensnare. Ensnare makes a big difference, and queens will let you infest that lifted off CC if it is damaged enough. If the T has bad enough reflex to let you damage half the life of his CC, he deserves a nice infestation from the queen for playing a rigged matchup. Why are you disagreeing with yourself?
L O L insert facepalm
|
on the 53.85% point...it can be a bigger deal when you're talking about a series. if matches are independent, in a BO3, T>Z by p^2+2*p^2*(1-p) = 55.8%, in a BO5, T>Z by 57.2%.
in chess you get to switch sides in a series, right? then it doesn't matter, as much.
on the OP, nevake says it right, there are numerous advantages/disadv on both sides that you don't talk about here.
|
Hong Kong20321 Posts
On November 24 2008 16:55 F13 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2008 16:52 Misrah wrote:On November 24 2008 16:44 Februarys wrote:
Great analysis, I agree with most of the issues you put up there. Expansions ARE a huge deal , especially in modern day SC and lifting off CC is the root of saving expansions in ZvT.
@CDRdude Does 53.85% sound perfectly balanced to you or does it sound slightly in favor of Terran? Because "perfectly balanced" should be 50.00% Ohh noes! a 3.85% deviation over 2800+ games. Not imba. Is chess a balanced game? -Yes Does white win more (statistically) than black? -Yes What is the percentage of win ratio? (53-56%) In all actuality draws are the most common form of a chess game completion. SO about that 3.85%, if its good enough for chess, it's good enough for SC You need to factor in how modern ZvT has changed throughout the many years. You cannot compare chess to SC, I'm comparing the balance issues between the game of SC itself, you're comparing the type of race of players that play chess.
LOL TYPE OF RACE OF PLAYERS THAT PLAY CHESS
I ROFLED HAAHAHAH
sorry
|
On November 24 2008 16:56 Misrah wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2008 16:53 F13 wrote:On November 24 2008 16:48 Misrah wrote:
If you having that much of a problem, build one queen. 100/100 and infest a lifted cc. That simple.
Or just have 5-6 muta hanging around, and if the terran lifts an injured CC have those muta come in quickly and snipe it down to infested health.
I just don't get how this is such a big deal?
Queens cannot infest a CC without it becoming halfway damaged. A T with good reflex will never let CC get that much damaged to infest it in the 1st place unless he makes a mistake and forgets about it. I assure you, 5-6 mutas cannot damage it fast enough until turrets or marines kill them, and theoretically T player will not let CC get injured because they can simply react fast and lift off so your theory goes out the window Ahh ok, in that case, if people are going to have insane and unlimited apm- then sure. I have been in many games where the T does one of the following 1. Not Lift 2. Lift to late 3. Lift, brings in his army and then "secures" the expo. If T does 1. I win If T does 2. I win If T does 3. I win. Because if he is going to park is slow and immobile army over his expo, to finish my muta or what not, he just allows me to expand, or take the map. So woo hoo. Either way, if T is lifting and running his SCV, he is losing mining time, gas time, and (from what you say) will run his army over there and kill my 12-24 cracklings- i come out on top. Economicaly, and map control wise.
Of course you've been in many games where T forgets to lift, you're a freaking D player with lower apm than me, what do you expect? Yes, I saw your replays on your 'zerg on coke' thread. I'm talking about the Progaming scene, please read my post ENTIRELY before you quote my long post and throw in two stupid lines which I've already explained in the post. And even in pro scenes, there are times when Terran forgets to lift.
But that is Terran's own fault for doing so, its his negligance. He is given the full possibility to let his CC stay unharmed through his actions. However, the Zerg does not have a choice whether he is reactive or not. I'm saying that Terran HAS the power to let his cc not become damaged enough for queen to kick in, I'm not arguing whether he will or not.
Thanks.
|
On November 24 2008 17:01 mjh wrote:
on the 53.85% point...it can be a bigger deal when you're talking about a series. if matches are independent, in a BO3, T>Z by p^2+2*p^2*(1-p) = 55.8%, in a BO5, T>Z by 57.2%.
in chess you get to switch sides in a series, right? then it doesn't matter, as much.
on the OP, nevake says it right, there are numerous advantages/disadv on both sides that you don't talk about here.
True in chess you switch sides, in starcraft you switch maps. So depending on the map pool, the 3.85/7.2% err in statistical balance can be countered.
Really I think that we are splitting hairs here, just me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
