EPT[G] Zerg Tears - Page 18
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Sylvr
United States524 Posts
| ||
|
nodestar
36 Posts
Follow the original guide and simply add in some Banelings and get lucky. | ||
|
kajeus
United States679 Posts
On August 07 2010 11:58 Jenslyn87 wrote: Idra has a storng tendency to go for the player and not the game. If I feel at a lose, like I've done a good number of times against T, I will usually just say gg. If I am a tad more frustrated, I will leave without gg. If I am really f'in frustrated and on a losing streak, I will leave with a "TvZ is such a joke" or whatever. And it may not always be warranted, but you know... sometimes you can get too passionate about a game like this  BUT! Even if Idra didn't tackle it as well as he could've, I strongly agree with him in the sense that he played that match very well, and a lot better than his opponent imo. His macro was close to perfect (yes fanboy) I really think it showcases some of the problems - just not really how f'in obnoxious it is to deal with the Terran harrass possibilities at the start of the game. Z always feels like you're forced into all sorts of weird shit When I play toss, I will be able to take control over the match in another way which is pretty awesome. I must admit I consider switching even if Z is my favorite race and I've played Z all through BW too Does anyone else think IdrA played that game rather oddly? His macro is fine, sure -- it's fantastic. But his entire gameplan seems to be: "Once I get ultras, I'll keep making ultras until I win." In making such a hard transition, he sacrificed a lot of mobility and even defensive power (i.e., it became hard to defend his expos from drops). He kept going massss ultra even after drewbie had transitioned to all marauder-thor, and he just moved around in a giant slow ball. He routinely smashed his army into drewbie with his 10 ultras mucking each other up in chokes and giving drewbie tons of free hits without doing much himself. IdrA seems to have a gameplan, and it seems to be: "Get to ultras." But then he just stays on ultras for 40 minutes. No matter how clear it is that a quick switch to a hydra-ultra army would completely destroy drewbie's standing force. I prefer Check any day of the week. Look at Check's mass muta against terran -- it's pretty cool. Granted, all of his games feel very aggressive and all-in (not long, safe macro games like IdrA's), but he wins every single time TvZ. | ||
|
SmoKim
Denmark10299 Posts
ps: Terran is so ez to beat ^^ | ||
|
nodestar
36 Posts
His macro is fine, sure -- it's fantastic. But his entire gameplan seems to be: "Once I get ultras, I'll keep making ultras until I win." In making such a hard transition, he sacrificed a lot of mobility and even defensive power (i.e., it became hard to defend his expos from drops). He kept going massss ultra even after drewbie had transitioned to all marauder-thor, and he just moved around in a giant slow ball. He routinely smashed his army into drewbie with his 10 ultras mucking each other up in chokes and giving drewbie tons of free hits without doing much himself. IdrA seems to have a gameplan, and it seems to be: "Get to ultras." But then he just stays on ultras for 40 minutes. No matter how clear it is that a quick switch to a hydra-ultra army would completely destroy drewbie's standing force. I was thinking something similar when I was watching the replay. But after thinking about it Ultras made the most sense for allot of reasons. He had invested allot in their upgrades. And they are the intuitive choice to counter an armored Heavy Thor/Marauder army. They are suppose to counter Armored units. And they are a T3.5 Counter to Armored units so you gota think thats your best option. I was thinking, "When is he going to get broodlords?" But in the mid game, or middle of that game(It was a long game.) making a big tech switch would of been risky. Since Broodlords are so slow he would of been in a tough spot if he got attacked at any of his expansions and been somewhere else. He would of had to hope he could engage the Main Terran army is a straight up fight. And the Terran army was split up. The main army on the right side of the map and a smaller forced on the left. If he got unlucky he would put himself in a bad spot to lose all his expos and get starved out. Including a smaller number of Broodlords(which he did eventually do) is a much safer choice. But a small amount of Broodlords don't do anything sense 2-3 vikings will own them. So then you have to invest in Corrupters. But not so many that your ground army is to weak because if you lose that you lost the game. From watching some of his recent interviews I think that Idra believes that Ultra is the safest choice. And that Corrupters are a bad unit choice since once the air is dead they are useless. Although Broodlords are very strong and maybe the best choice against that army composition I think the map and the position of each players expos and army's made Broodlords a bad choice in this game. He was attacked at his main and expos with drops and straight hit and runs. If he had Broodlords there would of been no way to respond to any of those. In response to your Hydra/Ultra army. I don't know. Hydra against Terran is normally not a good idea. Terran had upgraded tanks. And could of added in more. Plus allot of the fighting was going on around the right side of the map. Where creep was sparse. He would of been put in allot of spots where his Hydra are out of position or just late to the battle. It might of worked but it would of been a risky move. Just like transitioning into heavy Broodlords. EDIT: One more thing  In making such a hard transition, he sacrificed a lot of mobility and even defensive power (i.e., it became hard to defend his expos from drops) He had lings in the mix. Which is Zergs fastest unit. I don't see any better way to defend against drops when your spread over half of a 4 player map. Probably even faster than muta in response time when on creep. Also it was a natural transition. It was his game plan the whole time. He was upgrading melee and armor in anticipation of his ultras. | ||
|
Khai
Australia551 Posts
| ||
|
st3roids
Greece538 Posts
Atm hes loosing money cause of blandant imbalances for the zerg race both vs terran and toss. blizzard openly admited that at 200/200 zerg looses both to terran and toss , i dont see though the advantages of zerg .. clearly in later game both terran and toss can have 10+ baracs or gateways to spam units almost as fast as zerg + also having way more powerfull units through robo or factory or spaceports. Terms of minerals both due to mules and chronoboost can have better economies at start - esp terrans not to mention the eazy wallins that zerg lacks and the lack of easy scouting in general fyi is so lame atm for zerg. Last why some race should not have their owns builds and rely to counter the other race , who thought of that , even if it was true ur always a move behind , always. | ||
|
Sixes
Canada1123 Posts
On August 08 2010 00:26 kajeus wrote: Does anyone else think IdrA played that game rather oddly? His macro is fine, sure -- it's fantastic. But his entire gameplan seems to be: "Once I get ultras, I'll keep making ultras until I win." In making such a hard transition, he sacrificed a lot of mobility and even defensive power (i.e., it became hard to defend his expos from drops). He kept going massss ultra even after drewbie had transitioned to all marauder-thor, and he just moved around in a giant slow ball. He routinely smashed his army into drewbie with his 10 ultras mucking each other up in chokes and giving drewbie tons of free hits without doing much himself. IdrA seems to have a gameplan, and it seems to be: "Get to ultras." But then he just stays on ultras for 40 minutes. No matter how clear it is that a quick switch to a hydra-ultra army would completely destroy drewbie's standing force. I prefer Check any day of the week. Look at Check's mass muta against terran -- it's pretty cool. Granted, all of his games feel very aggressive and all-in (not long, safe macro games like IdrA's), but he wins every single time TvZ. Well, let's look at his options: - Ling/Ultra/Infestor is what he had - Mutas he had and switched out of, if you want to know why, look what happened to the early ones. - Corruptors are a non issue. - Banelings he had in a good amount to handle the marines throughout the game, remember they die epically to any mech or marauder. - Hydras just die to mech - Roaches are a very inefficient 200/200, it means you get 60 roaches rather than 15 ultras and 60 lings. - Broodlords are maybe valid and he got a few at the end, but looking at what happened then, 4-5 vikings counter any number of broodlords aren't accessible as they can sit over marines/thors/tanks which take out any anti air zerg has. The fact that zerg 200/200 gets killed by protoss is less of a problem because the zerg can hit 200 well before the protoss and attack at that point. Against Terran though the 200/200 zerg will die to 150 food Terran in a defensive position without any chance. What composition would you suggest against all marauder/thor/tank ? Roaches? Hydras? Mutas? Ideally in fact it would be absolutely pure ling on an open plain, except for the fact that on current maps 250 lings are not an option. What shocked me the most in the game was a bunch of ultras getting an almost perfect surround on a marine marauder thor ball with a couple tanks. At the end of the battle the losses were still roughly equal. On the other hand if Zerg needs to pull out Terran gets 3-4 free ultras because of small chokes and the all ranged army. I think one fix, which would not break anything I can think of and would make the matchup more interesting would be to make Thors attack-able as air units like the colossus. This means corruptors would have a use (which they don't unless BCs show up) and Thors would have a proper counter. It wouldn't really affect TvP because phoenixes die to thors regardless and VRs can already attack them, TvT doesn't seem to use thors anyways so wouldn't matter. Corruptors able to attack thors would force some anti air. Corruptors can also be had at the same time (Z t2 versus T t3) which is nice unlike the super slow and expensive broodlords which are way way later. The more I think about that fix the better idea it seems. It means the all marauder/thor/tank build could be beaten by corruptors with some muta support (with good micro) forcing marines or vikings, which in turn limits availability of anti armor so roaches and ultras become good. If marines are chosen then banelings become an option whereas vikings could open up hydra play if the Terran is tank light. Seems like that would be a relatively nice matchup to play (and again, it changes very little so the side effects are practically non existent). | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
The problem is that Zerg has to play the matchup reactionary. Ok, that's part of the flavor of the race so lets go with that. By definition this means Terran gets to be aggressive. We all know Terrans get to be aggressive, they can hellion harass, bio push, mech push, medivac drop, thor drop, air harass, etc. Obviously not all at once or anything, but they have their options. So it'd stand to reason that since Terrans get to be aggressive and Zerg has to play reactionary the Zerg are the better race at being reactionary? Well no, that's actually not the case and the more I play the more I realize this is the imbalance (well this and cliff issues) or at least where the perception comes from. Lets look at some examples of not all-in strategies that the Terran can react to very late and still be safe vs. First we can briefly mention baneling busts, as people know Terrans can stop this quite easily and it's clear they do so on reaction or with cost-free pre-planning (basically just how they lay their buildings out will solve this form of pressure) Tier 1- Roach pressure. Roaches seem like a great way to keep a terran from teching. They can actually damage a wall, they don't melt to hellions, and they're tier 1. But lets look at the timings. 55s for roach warren + 27s to make roaches + ~50s to travel rush distances (this is a low estimate and I based it off near kulas ravine distances which are some of the shortest rush distances in the game, I use a low number because it best favors the zerg side of things). So that's 132s from when you start the roach warren to win your at the Terran's door with roaches. As a 1-base, or in general early roach opening this is going to come out fairly early on in the game so you can expect 4-6 roaches in your first push. Meanwhile lets look at how long it takes the Terran to prepare a defense for this. Tech lab - 25s Marauder - 30s (bunker can be built simultaneously and bunker + marauder + possible some repair action will hold the wall vs roaches) That's right 55s to have an adequate defense vs 4-6 roaches. That means as long the Terran scouts the roaches by the time they're DONE building he'll have adequate defense up in time to hold that pressure. Lets compare that to something like defending Hellion Harass, even if you scout the hellions as they leave your base the only defense that may be able to get up in time is blocking your ramp with your queen or roaches. Possibly, depending on map distance you may be able to have a batch of roaches or lings spawn the moment the hellions get there if you queue them the moment the hellions leave base (hellions are 2x as fast as roaches, if it takes roaches 50s to travel to the enemy ramp it takes hellions 25s). Spine crawlers take 50s so they're too slow to make on reaction. Also note that defending with zerglings on reaction would require you to have the larvae available (need at least 2 per hellion) and hellions can micro around roaches. So pretty much you either need the ramp blocked, spine crawlers, or both (if on 2 bases). Next take a look at mutalisks. To make mutalisks requires 133s for the first batch from the moment you place the spire + travel time (dunno a good number to use for air distance to estimate with). Now lets look at the possible Terran responses... Engineering bay + missle turret(s) = 85s Armory + Thor = 125s 133s = 5 marines Also note these sets of responses are not mutually exclusive and can all be done in parallel (resources permitting). This means the Terran has 48s + Air distance to start the engineering bay or 8 seconds + air distance to start the armory (provided they don't already have the buildings for upgrades). That's a significant amount of game time to have to prepare a defense on reaction. While you can't take stuff like this out of context, I think it's a big part of the perceived imbalanced (regardless of if it exists or not). What makes this even worse is how vague Terrans can be. Take for example some situations I've seen by Terran players... 1. Barracks -> reactor + factory. You scout that, so what is the enemy going? Most likely hellions. 2. Then they add a Star port and tech lab to the barracks. What is the Terran going now? You'd probably guess medivacs and a bio push if you don't get a good scout of their base, if you see there's only one 1 barracks it becomes a little easier but there is still a lot of options. Are they going to put the factory on the tech lab and make tanks? Are they going to make vikings from the star port? Are they going to make banshees from the starport by putting it on the tech lab? Are they going to build up a marauder hellion push with a viking in there for harass? Are they going for a hellion medivac drop? Are they going for a Thor medivac drop? Until you can actually see the buildings in a settled position training units you don't know what's coming. Even worse is you don't know what's coming after the first wave. A great example of this is banshees where a single banshee means you only want to defend with queens or your're putting yourself behind. Even 2 banshees warrants only a queen defense (maybe some infestors as well). However if the person decides to pump 5 banshees before taking the starport off the tech lab then you need a dedicated system of air defense and a completely different response that CANNOT be done on reaction. The last part of this triforce of Zerg woe is overdefense. On the Terran side a Terran player might build 2-3 thors and 3-4 missile turrets to what ends up only being 4-5 mutas. Well the terran has wasted the money on turrets, and has Thors which are great units regardless of what they face (excluding broodlords). Meanwhile they can use their wall and siege tanks to wait until that lapse in investment becomes less significant. As players mine and spend more and more spending several hundred resources on turrets becomes less of an issue. On the zerg side this doesn't happen though. The defenses they need to prepare for something like vikings or banshees (hydras, extra queens, and/or spore crawlers) don't necessarily carry the same utility. Hydras are poor in ZvT because they melt to hellions and tanks for example. The 2nd part of the problem is Zerg can't be defensive until the resources don't matter as much. Without a defensive gameplan the Zerg is relying on all of the resources they can scrap together to make sure they don't die. While in some situations the game will progress on to when the resources don't matter it's never the less always a tough choice for zerg. If they over commit in the wrong type of defense they run a much higher risk of dieing than the Terran does and can't hope that their defensive setup (of which they have none because it's zerg) will hold out. So put together the above situation and consider the needs of scouting and everything else. You have to scout the factory+reactor going down, the switch of the factory to the reactor, the tech lab going down, the starport going down, the starport moving to the tech lab/reactor or staying put, the first wave of units to come out of the reactor or base starport (vikings or medivac), whether or not the starport switches at that point, whether or not the factory is staying on the tech lab, reactor, or nothing. All that just to determine what general unit composition the Terran is going + you still need to know things like expansions and any other buildings in his base you might not see yet. That's an insane amount of branching points for the Terran and we're only talking about 1 build/situation and one 2 minute span of the game. Now I'm not posting this as proof of an imbalance, other parts of the matchup may make the win %s stay even, but I feel like so many Zerg and other players misunderstand why and how the matchup is imbalanced. As far as I can tell this is what really makes the situation tough and feel wrong to so many zerg players. So hopefully it at least gets the point across of how overwhelming and futile a lot of Zerg play feels when pitted up against Terran. Not only do the Terrans get to react incredibly well to the Zerg, but they get this great aggressive game because they can hide their intentioned form of aggression or harassment for so very long, even if the zerg is scouting an incredible amount. | ||
|
Grond
599 Posts
On August 07 2010 04:49 kajeus wrote: My response is way late, but I guess that's what I get for having other stuff to do.  http://sc2ranks.com/stats Of all players on Korean servers: 8.56% Random, 39.21% Protoss, 34.51% Terran, 17.73% Zerg Diamond league as a whole: 9.74% Random, 36.11% Protoss, 29.87% Terran, 24.28% Zerg. LOOK at that gigantic gap. Now, % for each race of only Korean diamond players would be ideal, but oh well. Look at the percentage that plays zerg in each region: 20.35% NA, 21.13% Europe, 17.73% Korea, 24.20% Taiwan, 20.46% SE Asia, 21.71% Russia, 17.53% Latin America. Now imagine any reasonable weighted average of those numbers. Around 21% maybe? Less? HOWEVER, what percentage of all diamond players are zerg? 24.28%!! That is not only CLOSE to what would be expected, but ABOVE what would be expected. ((Terrans are 36% of the top 50 in Korea, btw... Zergs are 24% -- way MORE than the percentage who play the race in all of Korea)) I've seen this argument many times before. If somebody hasn't already pointed out you are making a very poor assumption that skill level is evenly distributed. | ||
|
Half
United States2554 Posts
On August 07 2010 10:42 Entropic wrote: I remember when Terran was thought to be "weak" before Boxer. This kind of evolving metagame won't ever happen in SC2 to this kind of degree <3. If it does it will be because of a different tourny mappool or blizzard balance. | ||
|
Grond
599 Posts
On August 08 2010 05:28 Logo wrote: People talk about Terran like 200/200 is the problem, when really it's not. The problem is that Zerg has to play the matchup reactionary. Ok, that's part of the flavor of the race so lets go with that. By definition this means Terran gets to be aggressive. We all know Terrans get to be aggressive, they can hellion harass, bio push, mech push, medivac drop, thor drop, air harass, etc. Obviously not all at once or anything, but they have their options. So it'd stand to reason that since Terrans get to be aggressive and Zerg has to play reactionary the Zerg are the better race at being reactionary? Well no, that's actually not the case and the more I play the more I realize this is the imbalance (well this and cliff issues) or at least where the perception comes from. Lets look at some examples of not all-in strategies that the Terran can react to very late and still be safe vs. First we can briefly mention baneling busts, as people know Terrans can stop this quite easily and it's clear they do so on reaction or with cost-free pre-planning (basically just how they lay their buildings out will solve this form of pressure) Tier 1- Roach pressure. Roaches seem like a great way to keep a terran from teching. They can actually damage a wall, they don't melt to hellions, and they're tier 1. But lets look at the timings. 55s for roach warren + 27s to make roaches + ~50s to travel rush distances (this is a low estimate and I based it off near kulas ravine distances which are some of the shortest rush distances in the game, I use a low number because it best favors the zerg side of things). So that's 132s from when you start the roach warren to win your at the Terran's door with roaches. As a 1-base, or in general early roach opening this is going to come out fairly early on in the game so you can expect 4-6 roaches in your first push. Meanwhile lets look at how long it takes the Terran to prepare a defense for this. Tech lab - 25s Marauder - 30s (bunker can be built simultaneously and bunker + marauder + possible some repair action will hold the wall vs roaches) That's right 55s to have an adequate defense vs 4-6 roaches. That means as long the Terran scouts the roaches by the time they're DONE building he'll have adequate defense up in time to hold that pressure. Lets compare that to something like defending Hellion Harass, even if you scout the hellions as they leave your base the only defense that may be able to get up in time is blocking your ramp with your queen or roaches. Possibly, depending on map distance you may be able to have a batch of roaches or lings spawn the moment the hellions get there if you queue them the moment the hellions leave base (hellions are 2x as fast as roaches, if it takes roaches 50s to travel to the enemy ramp it takes hellions 25s). Spine crawlers take 50s so they're too slow to make on reaction. Also note that defending with zerglings on reaction would require you to have the larvae available (need at least 2 per hellion) and hellions can micro around roaches. So pretty much you either need the ramp blocked, spine crawlers, or both (if on 2 bases). Next take a look at mutalisks. To make mutalisks requires 133s for the first batch from the moment you place the spire + travel time (dunno a good number to use for air distance to estimate with). Now lets look at the possible Terran responses... Engineering bay + missle turret(s) = 85s Armory + Thor = 125s 133s = 5 marines Also note these sets of responses are not mutually exclusive and can all be done in parallel (resources permitting). This means the Terran has 48s + Air distance to start the engineering bay or 8 seconds + air distance to start the armory (provided they don't already have the buildings for upgrades). That's a significant amount of game time to have to prepare a defense on reaction. While you can't take stuff like this out of context, I think it's a big part of the perceived imbalanced (regardless of if it exists or not). What makes this even worse is how vague Terrans can be. Take for example some situations I've seen by Terran players... 1. Barracks -> reactor + factory. You scout that, so what is the enemy going? Most likely hellions. 2. Then they add a Star port and tech lab to the barracks. What is the Terran going now? You'd probably guess medivacs and a bio push if you don't get a good scout of their base, if you see there's only one 1 barracks it becomes a little easier but there is still a lot of options. Are they going to put the factory on the tech lab and make tanks? Are they going to make vikings from the star port? Are they going to make banshees from the starport by putting it on the tech lab? Are they going to build up a marauder hellion push with a viking in there for harass? Are they going for a hellion medivac drop? Are they going for a Thor medivac drop? Until you can actually see the buildings in a settled position training units you don't know what's coming. Even worse is you don't know what's coming after the first wave. A great example of this is banshees where a single banshee means you only want to defend with queens or your're putting yourself behind. Even 2 banshees warrants only a queen defense (maybe some infestors as well). However if the person decides to pump 5 banshees before taking the starport off the tech lab then you need a dedicated system of air defense and a completely different response that CANNOT be done on reaction. The last part of this triforce of Zerg woe is overdefense. On the Terran side a Terran player might build 2-3 thors and 3-4 missile turrets to what ends up only being 4-5 mutas. Well the terran has wasted the money on turrets, and has Thors which are great units regardless of what they face (excluding broodlords). Meanwhile they can use their wall and siege tanks to wait until that lapse in investment becomes less significant. As players mine and spend more and more spending several hundred resources on turrets becomes less of an issue. On the zerg side this doesn't happen though. The defenses they need to prepare for something like vikings or banshees (hydras, extra queens, and/or spore crawlers) don't necessarily carry the same utility. Hydras are poor in ZvT because they melt to hellions and tanks for example. The 2nd part of the problem is Zerg can't be defensive until the resources don't matter as much. Without a defensive gameplan the Zerg is relying on all of the resources they can scrap together to make sure they don't die. While in some situations the game will progress on to when the resources don't matter it's never the less always a tough choice for zerg. If they over commit in the wrong type of defense they run a much higher risk of dieing than the Terran does and can't hope that their defensive setup (of which they have none because it's zerg) will hold out. So put together the above situation and consider the needs of scouting and everything else. You have to scout the factory+reactor going down, the switch of the factory to the reactor, the tech lab going down, the starport going down, the starport moving to the tech lab/reactor or staying put, the first wave of units to come out of the reactor or base starport (vikings or medivac), whether or not the starport switches at that point, whether or not the factory is staying on the tech lab, reactor, or nothing. All that just to determine what general unit composition the Terran is going + you still need to know things like expansions and any other buildings in his base you might not see yet. That's an insane amount of branching points for the Terran and we're only talking about 1 build/situation and one 2 minute span of the game. Now I'm not posting this as proof of an imbalance, other parts of the matchup may make the win %s stay even, but I feel like so many Zerg and other players misunderstand why and how the matchup is imbalanced. As far as I can tell this is what really makes the situation tough and feel wrong to so many zerg players. So hopefully it at least gets the point across of how overwhelming and futile a lot of Zerg play feels when pitted up against Terran. Not only do the Terrans get to react incredibly well to the Zerg, but they get this great aggressive game because they can hide their intentioned form of aggression or harassment for so very long, even if the zerg is scouting an incredible amount. Very nice analysis. The build times and the branching are certainly a core part of the problem. Do you feel this is the only issue are are there any Terran units that are just outright OP. | ||
|
Pking
Sweden142 Posts
On August 08 2010 06:15 Grond wrote: I've seen this argument many times before. If somebody hasn't already pointed out you are making a very poor assumption that skill level is evenly distributed. How is that a poor assumption? | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
On August 08 2010 06:38 Grond wrote: Very nice analysis. The build times and the branching are certainly a core part of the problem. Do you feel this is the only issue are are there any Terran units that are just outright OP. The only Terran unit I have a problem with is the Thor, and only then because of the reasons I stated before. At 60s the Thor is extremely fast to come out for a 6 pop unit and it's incredibly versatile and effective vs ground units. Forcing your Terran opponent to make Thors by making mutalisks really doesn't get you anywhere. It's not like when you force a bio-Terran to make marines by making Mutalisks then crush the marines with banelings. With Thors the only unit that 'crushes' them are ultralisks and infestors with NP, two very gas heavy options to transition to from mutalisks. I don't think I'd mind the versatility if they were a little more difficult to mass and had a training time of 65 or 70 seconds (colossi and ultralisk training time respectively). Thor is also a nice unit to adjust because it doesn't have much bearing on TvT or TvP from my understanding. Still I'd say the majority of the issue is on the Zerg side. Terran are really fun and interesting right now, I'd hate to have that taken away from them. | ||
|
Sixes
Canada1123 Posts
On August 08 2010 06:45 Logo wrote: Thor is also a nice unit to adjust because it doesn't have much bearing on TvT or TvP from my understanding. Still I'd say the majority of the issue is on the Zerg side. Terran are really fun and interesting right now, I'd hate to have that taken away from them. What I said above: I think one fix, which would not break anything I can think of and would make the matchup more interesting would be to make Thors attack-able as air units like the colossus. This means corruptors would have a use (which they don't unless BCs show up) and Thors would have a proper counter. It wouldn't really affect TvP because phoenixes die to thors regardless and VRs can already attack them, TvT doesn't seem to use thors anyways so wouldn't matter. Corruptors able to attack thors would force some anti air. Corruptors can also be had at the same time (Z t2 versus T t3) which is nice unlike the super slow and expensive broodlords which are way way later. The more I think about that fix the better idea it seems. It means the all marauder/thor/tank build could be beaten by corruptors with some muta support (with good micro) forcing marines or vikings, which in turn limits availability of anti armor so roaches and ultras become good. If marines are chosen then banelings become an option whereas vikings could open up hydra play if the Terran is tank light. Seems like that would be a relatively nice matchup to play (and again, it changes very little so the side effects are practically non existent). Thoughts? | ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On August 08 2010 07:02 Sixes wrote: What I said above: I think one fix, which would not break anything I can think of and would make the matchup more interesting would be to make Thors attack-able as air units like the colossus. This means corruptors would have a use (which they don't unless BCs show up) and Thors would have a proper counter. It wouldn't really affect TvP because phoenixes die to thors regardless and VRs can already attack them, TvT doesn't seem to use thors anyways so wouldn't matter. Corruptors able to attack thors would force some anti air. Corruptors can also be had at the same time (Z t2 versus T t3) which is nice unlike the super slow and expensive broodlords which are way way later. The more I think about that fix the better idea it seems. It means the all marauder/thor/tank build could be beaten by corruptors with some muta support (with good micro) forcing marines or vikings, which in turn limits availability of anti armor so roaches and ultras become good. If marines are chosen then banelings become an option whereas vikings could open up hydra play if the Terran is tank light. Seems like that would be a relatively nice matchup to play (and again, it changes very little so the side effects are practically non existent). Thoughts? The biggest problem is that it would have drastic effects on TvT--specifically, it would pretty much kill Marauder/Thor based builds because Vikings would be able to destroy Thors well before they could threaten Tanks in a normal Tank/Viking composition, especially given the relatively poor anti-armor damage that Thors have vs. air. | ||
|
pieisamazing
United States1234 Posts
On August 08 2010 05:28 Logo wrote: This is a good post. I don't think it addresses everything I would put in such an essay (were I enlightened enough to make one), but there are some very good points in here. One of the few posts about this problem that I actually enjoyed reading and felt I learned something from. edit: format | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
On August 08 2010 07:18 pieisamazing wrote: This is a good post. I don't think it addresses everything I would put in such an essay (were I enlightened enough to make one), but there are some very good points in here. One of the few posts about this problem that I actually enjoyed reading and felt I learned something from. edit: format Yeah, it's by no means comprehensive. As a lengthy post I didn't really want to add too much more to it because then you risk TLDR or someone cherry picking 1 thing that's wrong and ignoring the rest of it. Thanks for the positive words though, I hope it at least shows some Terrans why this matchup is really frustrating to Zerg players. | ||
|
Sixes
Canada1123 Posts
On August 08 2010 07:13 TheYango wrote: The biggest problem is that it would have drastic effects on TvT--specifically, it would pretty much kill Marauder/Thor based builds because Vikings would be able to destroy Thors well before they could threaten Tanks in a normal Tank/Viking composition, especially given the relatively poor anti-armor damage that Thors have vs. air. I was not aware of thors used in TvT (thought that was just boring tank viking ... with occasionally a marauder rush). What are the thors actually used for that marauders can't do better in TvT? | ||
|
Half
United States2554 Posts
On August 08 2010 07:33 Sixes wrote: I was not aware of thors used in TvT (thought that was just boring tank viking ... with occasionally a marauder rush). What are the thors actually used for that marauders can't do better in TvT? Their really big. ... I'm not kidding, it means they soak tank fire better. And they kill clumped vikings decently without having to go air. | ||
| ||
