Test server is back up any changes not shown just yet...I'll update this post as soon as any changes can be figured out.
Live servers went down for patching today, no word yet on whether or not the map pool will change. More likely then not that won't be the case until next tuesday 7/26 when season 3 starts.
Currently (7/13/11) - Multiplayer Enabled
Known Changes (checked all unit cost/stats via test map on PTR) - Blue Flame Picture Icon Change to Have Blue Flames
No other noticeable changes to unit stats just yet, DK said they wanted to rotate around half the map pool (will know what maps soon). Likely the rumors that there would be the icon change and optimizations to the game, along with the map pool change are true.
A special sneak peek at new ladder maps is now available! Several performance and memory improvements have been made. "Player Left" messages will once again appear in replays. The Hellion's Infernal Pre-Igniter upgrade icon has been updated (now with more blue flames!). StarCraft II Editor Improvements
UI errors will now go into a newly-created Error Display Message window. Cooldowns shorter than 1/4 of a second no longer display on the command card.
As this is a test server, please anticipate uneven game performance, and note that restarts and downtime may occur without warning. We'll provide information regarding extended downtimes, should they occur, in the Public Test forum.
On July 12 2011 01:02 Nerski wrote: Test server is back up any changes not shown just yet...I'll update this post as soon as any changes can be figured out.
Currently (7/11/11) - Multiplayer Disabled on PTR
Known Changes - Blue Flame Picture Icon Change to Have Blue Flames
No other noticeable changes to unit stats just yet
Watch this end up being like the biggest patch they ever do, but they're only putting in that picture icon change. It's going to be like the SC1 patches. They're just being sneaky beavers about it.
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock. Look at Zenio vs Byun. GHOSTS. I hope they don't mess with too much, balance feels pretty good at the moment. I'm guessing itl just be some new maps + the linked regions & some minor changes like the the hellion icon.
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock. Look at Zenio vs Byun. GHOSTS. I hope they don't mess with too much, balance feels pretty good at the moment.
Finding new strategies is not as fun as just nerfing the things you struggle with.
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
I'm pretty sure, that the only 1.3.5 changes are the new S3 Maps, some bugfixes and maybe UI improvements (Blizzard wants to fix the "Input limit reached..." error). Balance changes are likely not going to happen before 1.4
OMG YES PTR finally up! (if it was going to be at all)
Also, I remember peopel joking about the blue flame thing, LOL They actuallyf ixed it! for them to pay attention to such a thing means that they probably feel the game is in a good enough position to focus on things like that xD
<3 blue flame even more, lol blue looks better than red on that icon
Bliz apparently doesn't have time to make "vanity" changes such as adding clan support of name changes at the beginning of a season. Clearly pro gamers have been complaining about the inaccuracy of the hellion portrait after you research blue flame though. How awful, glad they finally fixed that.
Just because terrans dont use ghosts doesent make BL infestor OP. EDIT: I can also say with 99.9999% confidence that once terrans utalize the ghost in tvz (to counter every worth while unit zerg has) than the matchup may actually require a balance change
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock. Look at Zenio vs Byun. GHOSTS. I hope they don't mess with too much, balance feels pretty good at the moment. I'm guessing itl just be some new maps + the linked regions & some minor changes like the the hellion icon.
If you don't play terran, don't suggest new strat. There are so much problem against that composition that adding a single unit isn't gonna make it better
Its no different from protoss players suggesting zergs to go mass corruptors against void colossus deathball when the real answer was more in line with baneling/infestor/roach.
On July 12 2011 01:42 Stropheum wrote: Bliz apparently doesn't have time to make "vanity" changes such as adding clan support of name changes at the beginning of a season. Clearly pro gamers have been complaining about the inaccuracy of the hellion portrait after you research blue flame though. How awful, glad they finally fixed that.
Yep they had to make a tough decision between correcting the Hellion upgrade or adding clan support.
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock. Look at Zenio vs Byun. GHOSTS. I hope they don't mess with too much, balance feels pretty good at the moment. I'm guessing itl just be some new maps + the linked regions & some minor changes like the the hellion icon.
If you don't play terran, don't suggest new strat. There are so much problem against that composition that adding a single unit isn't gonna make it better
How ignorant are you? a zerg tells you exactly what you need to do to kill his "ultimate" unit comp and you yell at him. Remember when idra asked incontrol what he hated the most in PvZ and incontrol said drops? guess what, it became a staple of ZvP. Now they tell you what the best thing for terran late game is, ghosts, and you push it off with some elitist BS. I can personally say from experiance that any time i have gotten the infestor broodlord combo out vs terran, any terran that had 5+ ghosts killed my entire army without issue and proceeded to roll my base. if you think spending 500 gas to hard counter my 2500+gas army is not worth it than there is something wrong with you
Oh I get it. All the zergs that where whining for a balance change got their infestor/brood lord combo, and now that people are saying it's op those same people are defending the crap out of it O_O
I sortof agree. Ghosts are rather underused, especially with personal cloaking.
I'm surprised this is all they've changed this patch. I was personally expecting a few balance changes which I won't mention because I don't want to start a balance debate!
Really curious about what the new 1v1 map pool is going to be, hopefully they'll remove at least Slag Pits and Delta Quadrant.
On July 12 2011 01:42 Stropheum wrote: Bliz apparently doesn't have time to make "vanity" changes such as adding clan support of name changes at the beginning of a season. Clearly pro gamers have been complaining about the inaccuracy of the hellion portrait after you research blue flame though. How awful, glad they finally fixed that.
Well it's quite clear that Blizzard is making more money due to people buying new accounts to change their names because of changing clan instead of losing customers for not having clan support, so it's not like they're going to "rush" it.
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock. Look at Zenio vs Byun. GHOSTS. I hope they don't mess with too much, balance feels pretty good at the moment.
Finding new strategies is not as fun as just nerfing the things you struggle with.
I hope that was sarcasim...
I think day9 did a page on TL about competetive gaming and how over patching can destroy a scene, and I agree... It seems when 1 build is strong, it gets nerf instead of players having to learn how to counter. Imagine in BW if they started nerfing terran before savior changed zerg so it could easy terran? then savior would have came along, innovattive, and they be like wow wow nerfsauce.
To much nerfing probably a bad thing, let the broodlord/infestor lategame stay for atleast a few more months, till terrans start going heavy ghosts.
I'm guessing the primary change of the patch is just the maps. It's weird that multiplayer is not enabled though. The brood lord infestor combo they were talking about that might seem op, probably will not get changed, as it can get stopped with ghosts quite well. EMP the infestors, and the zerg has very little Anti-air, then snipe away and use vikings on everything else.
On July 12 2011 02:06 aka_star wrote: Helions flame is blue?! mine always appear grey :-/ stupid color blindness >_<
hahahaha oh God
Thanks for posting this, I hope there is an update on the change notes soon!! Btw, can you check if roach pictures for the tunneling claws and the speed have been swapped? Someone had originally noticed that tunneling claws icon should be... erm.. the claws.lol
Infestor/BL thing DK mentioned was just an example of them looking into things the players claim to be OP...which does not mean they will actually change anything. As far as blizzard is concerned according to their latest stats based on their formulas...all match ups were near 50/50 win to loss ratios.
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock. Look at Zenio vs Byun. GHOSTS. I hope they don't mess with too much, balance feels pretty good at the moment. I'm guessing itl just be some new maps + the linked regions & some minor changes like the the hellion icon.
If you don't play terran, don't suggest new strat. There are so much problem against that composition that adding a single unit isn't gonna make it better
How ignorant are you? a zerg tells you exactly what you need to do to kill his "ultimate" unit comp and you yell at him. Remember when idra asked incontrol what he hated the most in PvZ and incontrol said drops? guess what, it became a staple of ZvP. Now they tell you what the best thing for terran late game is, ghosts, and you push it off with some elitist BS. I can personally say from experiance that any time i have gotten the infestor broodlord combo out vs terran, any terran that had 5+ ghosts killed my entire army without issue and proceeded to roll my base. if you think spending 500 gas to hard counter my 2500+gas army is not worth it than there is something wrong with you
5 ghosts hardcounter a 2500+ gas army? really?
learn to spread your infestors, then laugh at the terran as his army is destroyed by his own siege tanks and fungal growth.
it's not an unbeatable composition, but it's waaaay too hard to stop. it means that smart terrans will aim to end the game before the zerg can get hive tech. having fun in all of those two rax losses? no? well it's the smart thing for terran to do unfortunately.
personally i feel that ghosts need to have their full energy drain back again... having to double emp enemy casters when they have them spread = a joke.
in late game if the economies are even, HT and infestor lol all over terran late game. your army dies in seconds unless you get perfect emps, and they can still reinforce faster than you.
On July 12 2011 02:06 aka_star wrote: Helions flame is blue?! mine always appear grey :-/ stupid color blindness >_<
hahahaha oh God
Thanks for posting this, I hope there is an update on the change notes soon!! Btw, can you check if roach pictures for the tunneling claws and the speed have been swapped? Someone had originally noticed that tunneling claws icon should be... erm.. the claws.lol
Wait a minute... this actually makes perfect sense.
Boycotting 1.3.5, no way I'm playing with new blue flame icon change. Will be working on my new emulated server to save the purity of the Starcraft 2 experience,
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock. Look at Zenio vs Byun. GHOSTS. I hope they don't mess with too much, balance feels pretty good at the moment. I'm guessing itl just be some new maps + the linked regions & some minor changes like the the hellion icon.
If you don't play terran, don't suggest new strat. There are so much problem against that composition that adding a single unit isn't gonna make it better
How ignorant are you? a zerg tells you exactly what you need to do to kill his "ultimate" unit comp and you yell at him. Remember when idra asked incontrol what he hated the most in PvZ and incontrol said drops? guess what, it became a staple of ZvP. Now they tell you what the best thing for terran late game is, ghosts, and you push it off with some elitist BS. I can personally say from experiance that any time i have gotten the infestor broodlord combo out vs terran, any terran that had 5+ ghosts killed my entire army without issue and proceeded to roll my base. if you think spending 500 gas to hard counter my 2500+gas army is not worth it than there is something wrong with you
Doesn't matter what a zerg player tells a terran do do...if they don't know what they are talking about then they shouldn't say anything.
And in response to the bolded...you can't be any more dense to think that gas, and not minerals, is what slows terran down in production. Even then, spending money on tanks, vikings, and ghosts isn't necessarily cheap on gas either.
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock. Look at Zenio vs Byun. GHOSTS. I hope they don't mess with too much, balance feels pretty good at the moment. I'm guessing itl just be some new maps + the linked regions & some minor changes like the the hellion icon.
If you don't play terran, don't suggest new strat. There are so much problem against that composition that adding a single unit isn't gonna make it better
How ignorant are you? a zerg tells you exactly what you need to do to kill his "ultimate" unit comp and you yell at him. Remember when idra asked incontrol what he hated the most in PvZ and incontrol said drops? guess what, it became a staple of ZvP. Now they tell you what the best thing for terran late game is, ghosts, and you push it off with some elitist BS. I can personally say from experiance that any time i have gotten the infestor broodlord combo out vs terran, any terran that had 5+ ghosts killed my entire army without issue and proceeded to roll my base. if you think spending 500 gas to hard counter my 2500+gas army is not worth it than there is something wrong with you
5 ghosts hardcounter a 2500+ gas army? really?
learn to spread your infestors, then laugh at the terran as his army is destroyed by his own siege tanks and fungal growth.
it's not an unbeatable composition, but it's waaaay too hard to stop. it means that smart terrans will aim to end the game before the zerg can get hive tech. having fun in all of those two rax losses? no? well it's the smart thing for terran to do unfortunately.
personally i feel that ghosts need to have their full energy drain back again... having to double emp enemy casters when they have them spread = a joke.
in late game if the economies are even, HT and infestor lol all over terran late game. your army dies in seconds unless you get perfect emps, and they can still reinforce faster than you.
If the ghosts have enough energy, sure.
I don't know about bio, but ghosts are perfect for mech. Tanks deal with the Infestors. Ghosts, hellions, and thors deal with the Broodlords. Then again, you can just get vikings but you'd have to sit them close to your tanks or else they might get fungal'd. You could do this with bio too ofc.
Also, when they spread the infestors, it's a lot harder to fungal. Unless they want to send them in a couple at a time, in which they can be sniped.
Either way, bio or mech, you can deal with infestor/broodlord with tank/viking or tank/ghost (along with the normal MMM or thor/hellion), you just can't move your vikings very far away from your tanks or else they'd get fungald. Same with ghosts, they can die when not careful.
Damn, I can't play the PTR cause it says some bs about it not being installed and it cannot find where to put the files or something. I really cannot be bothered reinstalling. Oh well, I will just wait until the next season starts I suppose.
Known Changes (checked all unit cost/stats via test map on PTR) - Blue Flame Picture Icon Change to Have Blue Flames
Funny how most players never realised that the flame in the icon was red, while many Zerg players since beta have said that the roach upgrade icons are swapped (since those obviously create confusion as they are unintuitive right now).
On July 12 2011 02:16 shinyA wrote: I think Ghost's EMP should take away all the energy but not take away the shields of Protoss units at all.
Then what would be the point of getting ghosts if they have no casters?
Whats the point of feedback if your opponent has no casters?
Medivacs, Thors, Battle Cruisers, and Banshees all have energy to get feedbacked and die....Medivacs are VERY common in TvP.
Also, you oversimplified the situation. HTs are still useful because Psi Storm is so powerful. If the proposed nerf to EMP was to take place there would be no real reason to get ghosts because it would turn into a useless unit.
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock. Look at Zenio vs Byun. GHOSTS. I hope they don't mess with too much, balance feels pretty good at the moment. I'm guessing itl just be some new maps + the linked regions & some minor changes like the the hellion icon.
If you don't play terran, don't suggest new strat. There are so much problem against that composition that adding a single unit isn't gonna make it better
How ignorant are you? a zerg tells you exactly what you need to do to kill his "ultimate" unit comp and you yell at him. Remember when idra asked incontrol what he hated the most in PvZ and incontrol said drops? guess what, it became a staple of ZvP. Now they tell you what the best thing for terran late game is, ghosts, and you push it off with some elitist BS. I can personally say from experiance that any time i have gotten the infestor broodlord combo out vs terran, any terran that had 5+ ghosts killed my entire army without issue and proceeded to roll my base. if you think spending 500 gas to hard counter my 2500+gas army is not worth it than there is something wrong with you
5 ghosts hardcounter a 2500+ gas army? really?
learn to spread your infestors, then laugh at the terran as his army is destroyed by his own siege tanks and fungal growth.
it's not an unbeatable composition, but it's waaaay too hard to stop. it means that smart terrans will aim to end the game before the zerg can get hive tech. having fun in all of those two rax losses? no? well it's the smart thing for terran to do unfortunately.
personally i feel that ghosts need to have their full energy drain back again... having to double emp enemy casters when they have them spread = a joke.
in late game if the economies are even, HT and infestor lol all over terran late game. your army dies in seconds unless you get perfect emps, and they can still reinforce faster than you.
If the ghosts have enough energy, sure.
I don't know about bio, but ghosts are perfect for mech. Tanks deal with the Infestors. Ghosts, hellions, and thors deal with the Broodlords. Then again, you can just get vikings but you'd have to sit them close to your tanks or else they might get fungal'd. You could do this with bio too ofc.
Also, when they spread the infestors, it's a lot harder to fungal. Unless they want to send them in a couple at a time, in which they can be sniped.
Either way, bio or mech, you can deal with infestor/broodlord with tank/viking or tank/ghost (along with the normal MMM or thor/hellion), you just can't move your vikings very far away from your tanks or else they'd get fungald. Same with ghosts, they can die when not careful.
Easier said then done. There is a good reason why blizzard plans to rework the synergy of broods+infestors in the future.
Interesting~~~~~~ Their answer regarding latency is interesting, are they saying KR and Taiwan were running through the same servers already so we should have really good latency already?
Like, I think the KR servers are located in Seoul, so were the Taiwanese connecting via Seoul already?
Was really happy for a split second when I saw infernal preigniter, but they just change the icon -_-
Iny my opinion blue flame hellions are one of the last broken things that are left in the game. Even terrans say that they are plain stupid. They don't fit in most terran builds and getting them ruins most timings that the race relies on so heavily, but if terran has infernal preigniter the risk/reward of hellion harass goes through the roof. It feels like it's more difficult to use them NOT cost-efficient then it is to make them cost-efficient and this is just not right.
On July 12 2011 02:04 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: thanks for the pic, the new icon is awesome :D
also, how come I can't log in ?
Once I try to press connect, it has the connection error or server down error message, with options of "play offline" and "cancel"
you can connect and use existing maps you've previously DL'd by playing offline otherwise that's it until multiplayer gets enabled.
Ohh ok thanks. When the OP said multi was disabled, I thought he meant you could go online, but just had to play against AI or such.
On July 12 2011 02:10 shizna wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:51 Silent331 wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:46 xbankx wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:28 Wr3k wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock. Look at Zenio vs Byun. GHOSTS. I hope they don't mess with too much, balance feels pretty good at the moment. I'm guessing itl just be some new maps + the linked regions & some minor changes like the the hellion icon.
If you don't play terran, don't suggest new strat. There are so much problem against that composition that adding a single unit isn't gonna make it better
How ignorant are you? a zerg tells you exactly what you need to do to kill his "ultimate" unit comp and you yell at him. Remember when idra asked incontrol what he hated the most in PvZ and incontrol said drops? guess what, it became a staple of ZvP. Now they tell you what the best thing for terran late game is, ghosts, and you push it off with some elitist BS. I can personally say from experiance that any time i have gotten the infestor broodlord combo out vs terran, any terran that had 5+ ghosts killed my entire army without issue and proceeded to roll my base. if you think spending 500 gas to hard counter my 2500+gas army is not worth it than there is something wrong with you
5 ghosts hardcounter a 2500+ gas army? really?
learn to spread your infestors, then laugh at the terran as his army is destroyed by his own siege tanks and fungal growth.
it's not an unbeatable composition, but it's waaaay too hard to stop. it means that smart terrans will aim to end the game before the zerg can get hive tech. having fun in all of those two rax losses? no? well it's the smart thing for terran to do unfortunately.
personally i feel that ghosts need to have their full energy drain back again... having to double emp enemy casters when they have them spread = a joke.
in late game if the economies are even, HT and infestor lol all over terran late game. your army dies in seconds unless you get perfect emps, and they can still reinforce faster than you.
If the ghosts have enough energy, sure.
I don't know about bio, but ghosts are perfect for mech. Tanks deal with the Infestors. Ghosts, hellions, and thors deal with the Broodlords. Then again, you can just get vikings but you'd have to sit them close to your tanks or else they might get fungal'd. You could do this with bio too ofc.
Also, when they spread the infestors, it's a lot harder to fungal. Unless they want to send them in a couple at a time, in which they can be sniped.
Either way, bio or mech, you can deal with infestor/broodlord with tank/viking or tank/ghost (along with the normal MMM or thor/hellion), you just can't move your vikings very far away from your tanks or else they'd get fungald. Same with ghosts, they can die when not careful.
Easier said then done. There is a good reason why blizzard plans to rework the synergy of broods+infestors in the future.
The way i see it, tanks make it so that infestors can't get in range to fungal, but broodlords make it so that tanks have to retreat, and now ghosts cant get in range to snipe/emp. Then, vikings make it so that broodlords have to retreat, and now ghosts can get in and cast. Not sure what zerg does after that, maybe corrupter or ultra. Seems fair to me.
On July 12 2011 02:04 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: thanks for the pic, the new icon is awesome :D
also, how come I can't log in ?
Once I try to press connect, it has the connection error or server down error message, with options of "play offline" and "cancel"
you can connect and use existing maps you've previously DL'd by playing offline otherwise that's it until multiplayer gets enabled.
Ohh ok thanks. When the OP said multi was disabled, I thought he meant you could go online, but just had to play against AI or such.
On July 12 2011 02:10 shizna wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:51 Silent331 wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:46 xbankx wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:28 Wr3k wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock. Look at Zenio vs Byun. GHOSTS. I hope they don't mess with too much, balance feels pretty good at the moment. I'm guessing itl just be some new maps + the linked regions & some minor changes like the the hellion icon.
If you don't play terran, don't suggest new strat. There are so much problem against that composition that adding a single unit isn't gonna make it better
How ignorant are you? a zerg tells you exactly what you need to do to kill his "ultimate" unit comp and you yell at him. Remember when idra asked incontrol what he hated the most in PvZ and incontrol said drops? guess what, it became a staple of ZvP. Now they tell you what the best thing for terran late game is, ghosts, and you push it off with some elitist BS. I can personally say from experiance that any time i have gotten the infestor broodlord combo out vs terran, any terran that had 5+ ghosts killed my entire army without issue and proceeded to roll my base. if you think spending 500 gas to hard counter my 2500+gas army is not worth it than there is something wrong with you
5 ghosts hardcounter a 2500+ gas army? really?
learn to spread your infestors, then laugh at the terran as his army is destroyed by his own siege tanks and fungal growth.
it's not an unbeatable composition, but it's waaaay too hard to stop. it means that smart terrans will aim to end the game before the zerg can get hive tech. having fun in all of those two rax losses? no? well it's the smart thing for terran to do unfortunately.
personally i feel that ghosts need to have their full energy drain back again... having to double emp enemy casters when they have them spread = a joke.
in late game if the economies are even, HT and infestor lol all over terran late game. your army dies in seconds unless you get perfect emps, and they can still reinforce faster than you.
If the ghosts have enough energy, sure.
I don't know about bio, but ghosts are perfect for mech. Tanks deal with the Infestors. Ghosts, hellions, and thors deal with the Broodlords. Then again, you can just get vikings but you'd have to sit them close to your tanks or else they might get fungal'd. You could do this with bio too ofc.
Also, when they spread the infestors, it's a lot harder to fungal. Unless they want to send them in a couple at a time, in which they can be sniped.
Either way, bio or mech, you can deal with infestor/broodlord with tank/viking or tank/ghost (along with the normal MMM or thor/hellion), you just can't move your vikings very far away from your tanks or else they'd get fungald. Same with ghosts, they can die when not careful.
Easier said then done. There is a good reason why blizzard plans to rework the synergy of broods+infestors in the future.
The way i see it, tanks make it so that infestors can't get in range to fungal, but broodlords make it so that tanks have to retreat, and now ghosts cant get in range to snipe/emp. Then, vikings make it so that broodlords have to retreat, and now ghosts can get in and cast. Not sure what zerg does after that, maybe corrupter or ultra. Seems fair to me.
oh and than viking get fungaled ... shot by corruptor ... the end
On July 12 2011 02:04 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: thanks for the pic, the new icon is awesome :D
also, how come I can't log in ?
Once I try to press connect, it has the connection error or server down error message, with options of "play offline" and "cancel"
you can connect and use existing maps you've previously DL'd by playing offline otherwise that's it until multiplayer gets enabled.
Ohh ok thanks. When the OP said multi was disabled, I thought he meant you could go online, but just had to play against AI or such.
On July 12 2011 02:10 shizna wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:51 Silent331 wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:46 xbankx wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:28 Wr3k wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock. Look at Zenio vs Byun. GHOSTS. I hope they don't mess with too much, balance feels pretty good at the moment. I'm guessing itl just be some new maps + the linked regions & some minor changes like the the hellion icon.
If you don't play terran, don't suggest new strat. There are so much problem against that composition that adding a single unit isn't gonna make it better
How ignorant are you? a zerg tells you exactly what you need to do to kill his "ultimate" unit comp and you yell at him. Remember when idra asked incontrol what he hated the most in PvZ and incontrol said drops? guess what, it became a staple of ZvP. Now they tell you what the best thing for terran late game is, ghosts, and you push it off with some elitist BS. I can personally say from experiance that any time i have gotten the infestor broodlord combo out vs terran, any terran that had 5+ ghosts killed my entire army without issue and proceeded to roll my base. if you think spending 500 gas to hard counter my 2500+gas army is not worth it than there is something wrong with you
5 ghosts hardcounter a 2500+ gas army? really?
learn to spread your infestors, then laugh at the terran as his army is destroyed by his own siege tanks and fungal growth.
it's not an unbeatable composition, but it's waaaay too hard to stop. it means that smart terrans will aim to end the game before the zerg can get hive tech. having fun in all of those two rax losses? no? well it's the smart thing for terran to do unfortunately.
personally i feel that ghosts need to have their full energy drain back again... having to double emp enemy casters when they have them spread = a joke.
in late game if the economies are even, HT and infestor lol all over terran late game. your army dies in seconds unless you get perfect emps, and they can still reinforce faster than you.
If the ghosts have enough energy, sure.
I don't know about bio, but ghosts are perfect for mech. Tanks deal with the Infestors. Ghosts, hellions, and thors deal with the Broodlords. Then again, you can just get vikings but you'd have to sit them close to your tanks or else they might get fungal'd. You could do this with bio too ofc.
Also, when they spread the infestors, it's a lot harder to fungal. Unless they want to send them in a couple at a time, in which they can be sniped.
Either way, bio or mech, you can deal with infestor/broodlord with tank/viking or tank/ghost (along with the normal MMM or thor/hellion), you just can't move your vikings very far away from your tanks or else they'd get fungald. Same with ghosts, they can die when not careful.
Easier said then done. There is a good reason why blizzard plans to rework the synergy of broods+infestors in the future.
The way i see it, tanks make it so that infestors can't get in range to fungal, but broodlords make it so that tanks have to retreat, and now ghosts cant get in range to snipe/emp. Then, vikings make it so that broodlords have to retreat, and now ghosts can get in and cast. Not sure what zerg does after that, maybe corrupter or ultra. Seems fair to me.
oh and than viking get fungaled ... shot by corruptor ... the end
maybe, but it is frustrating when the terran splits vikings into several small groups and sends them in waves, instead of balling them up.
On July 12 2011 02:53 Influ wrote: Was really happy for a split second when I saw infernal preigniter, but they just change the icon -_-
Iny my opinion blue flame hellions are one of the last broken things that are left in the game. Even terrans say that they are plain stupid. They don't fit in most terran builds and getting them ruins most timings that the race relies on so heavily, but if terran has infernal preigniter the risk/reward of hellion harass goes through the roof. It feels like it's more difficult to use them NOT cost-efficient then it is to make them cost-efficient and this is just not right.
Huh? They are the only reason terran can play mech, hellions without blueflame are COMPLETELY USELESS vs speedlings/marines, might as well try to fight them with SCVs.
I dont think there is a realistic fix for 'make them unable to get lucky mineral line all-kills'.
On July 12 2011 02:04 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: thanks for the pic, the new icon is awesome :D
also, how come I can't log in ?
Once I try to press connect, it has the connection error or server down error message, with options of "play offline" and "cancel"
you can connect and use existing maps you've previously DL'd by playing offline otherwise that's it until multiplayer gets enabled.
Ohh ok thanks. When the OP said multi was disabled, I thought he meant you could go online, but just had to play against AI or such.
On July 12 2011 02:10 shizna wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:51 Silent331 wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:46 xbankx wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:28 Wr3k wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock. Look at Zenio vs Byun. GHOSTS. I hope they don't mess with too much, balance feels pretty good at the moment. I'm guessing itl just be some new maps + the linked regions & some minor changes like the the hellion icon.
If you don't play terran, don't suggest new strat. There are so much problem against that composition that adding a single unit isn't gonna make it better
How ignorant are you? a zerg tells you exactly what you need to do to kill his "ultimate" unit comp and you yell at him. Remember when idra asked incontrol what he hated the most in PvZ and incontrol said drops? guess what, it became a staple of ZvP. Now they tell you what the best thing for terran late game is, ghosts, and you push it off with some elitist BS. I can personally say from experiance that any time i have gotten the infestor broodlord combo out vs terran, any terran that had 5+ ghosts killed my entire army without issue and proceeded to roll my base. if you think spending 500 gas to hard counter my 2500+gas army is not worth it than there is something wrong with you
5 ghosts hardcounter a 2500+ gas army? really?
learn to spread your infestors, then laugh at the terran as his army is destroyed by his own siege tanks and fungal growth.
it's not an unbeatable composition, but it's waaaay too hard to stop. it means that smart terrans will aim to end the game before the zerg can get hive tech. having fun in all of those two rax losses? no? well it's the smart thing for terran to do unfortunately.
personally i feel that ghosts need to have their full energy drain back again... having to double emp enemy casters when they have them spread = a joke.
in late game if the economies are even, HT and infestor lol all over terran late game. your army dies in seconds unless you get perfect emps, and they can still reinforce faster than you.
If the ghosts have enough energy, sure.
I don't know about bio, but ghosts are perfect for mech. Tanks deal with the Infestors. Ghosts, hellions, and thors deal with the Broodlords. Then again, you can just get vikings but you'd have to sit them close to your tanks or else they might get fungal'd. You could do this with bio too ofc.
Also, when they spread the infestors, it's a lot harder to fungal. Unless they want to send them in a couple at a time, in which they can be sniped.
Either way, bio or mech, you can deal with infestor/broodlord with tank/viking or tank/ghost (along with the normal MMM or thor/hellion), you just can't move your vikings very far away from your tanks or else they'd get fungald. Same with ghosts, they can die when not careful.
Easier said then done. There is a good reason why blizzard plans to rework the synergy of broods+infestors in the future.
The way i see it, tanks make it so that infestors can't get in range to fungal, but broodlords make it so that tanks have to retreat, and now ghosts cant get in range to snipe/emp. Then, vikings make it so that broodlords have to retreat, and now ghosts can get in and cast. Not sure what zerg does after that, maybe corrupter or ultra. Seems fair to me.
oh and than viking get fungaled ... shot by corruptor ... the end
yeah, because the game is as easy as that...but if you want, we can continue: meanwhile the corruptors get sniped by ghosts and shot by sucidal marines and 8range thors.
Interesting~~~~~~ Their answer regarding latency is interesting, are they saying KR and Taiwan were running through the same servers already so we should have really good latency already?
Like, I think the KR servers are located in Seoul, so were the Taiwanese connecting via Seoul already?
I assume they have data centers more centrally located than that - otherwise I can't imagine why they'd launch with multiple regions, since the only effect would be to limit the player base in all the regions connecting to the same data center. I think what they mean is that LA players will continue to connect to a server in South America, and NA players will continue to play on a server in North America, but the two servers will be connected (with ultra high tech secret "LAN Latency Technology") to allow the players to play against each other.
It's fair to assume that Blizzard's servers are directly attached to a backbone and will have pretty insane transfer rates between them. I note that all of the servers being linked up like this are on the same continent (ie, won't require a connection via trans-oceanic cable) - it wouldn't surprise me if that was a factor in linking them.
Edit: Enough people discussing this issue have stated that they really were hosting multiple regions on the same physical servers that I've come to the conclusion that I'm probably wrong in this post. It makes no sense to me that they'd do this, but I also can't find anywhere to confirm how the servers are set up in meatspace.
infestors are just tooo good. don't get me wrong, heaving strong spell caster is something good. but the infestor right now counters everything. fungal growth with 9 range and huge area counters light units with its ridiculous dps, armored with its even higher dps, also it snairs and detects invisible units. they can take over units, burrow move and energy dump infested terrans to trigger siege tank shots or harass minreal lines. and on top of that they still got the amulet.
they are all around good against everything. i can't see any drawbacks, on creep they even have huge mobility. if you watch dimaga zvt for instance, he has ultras by the 13 minute mark, while infestors grant him safety against everything if he didn't mess up the early game.
I highly doubt Blizzard will work towards allowing matchups between different regions to please the users. There would be too much potentially lost money from users NOT having to buy new copies of SC2. Just bad business for them to do so.
On July 12 2011 02:04 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: thanks for the pic, the new icon is awesome :D
also, how come I can't log in ?
Once I try to press connect, it has the connection error or server down error message, with options of "play offline" and "cancel"
you can connect and use existing maps you've previously DL'd by playing offline otherwise that's it until multiplayer gets enabled.
Ohh ok thanks. When the OP said multi was disabled, I thought he meant you could go online, but just had to play against AI or such.
On July 12 2011 02:10 shizna wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:51 Silent331 wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:46 xbankx wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:28 Wr3k wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock. Look at Zenio vs Byun. GHOSTS. I hope they don't mess with too much, balance feels pretty good at the moment. I'm guessing itl just be some new maps + the linked regions & some minor changes like the the hellion icon.
If you don't play terran, don't suggest new strat. There are so much problem against that composition that adding a single unit isn't gonna make it better
How ignorant are you? a zerg tells you exactly what you need to do to kill his "ultimate" unit comp and you yell at him. Remember when idra asked incontrol what he hated the most in PvZ and incontrol said drops? guess what, it became a staple of ZvP. Now they tell you what the best thing for terran late game is, ghosts, and you push it off with some elitist BS. I can personally say from experiance that any time i have gotten the infestor broodlord combo out vs terran, any terran that had 5+ ghosts killed my entire army without issue and proceeded to roll my base. if you think spending 500 gas to hard counter my 2500+gas army is not worth it than there is something wrong with you
5 ghosts hardcounter a 2500+ gas army? really?
learn to spread your infestors, then laugh at the terran as his army is destroyed by his own siege tanks and fungal growth.
it's not an unbeatable composition, but it's waaaay too hard to stop. it means that smart terrans will aim to end the game before the zerg can get hive tech. having fun in all of those two rax losses? no? well it's the smart thing for terran to do unfortunately.
personally i feel that ghosts need to have their full energy drain back again... having to double emp enemy casters when they have them spread = a joke.
in late game if the economies are even, HT and infestor lol all over terran late game. your army dies in seconds unless you get perfect emps, and they can still reinforce faster than you.
If the ghosts have enough energy, sure.
I don't know about bio, but ghosts are perfect for mech. Tanks deal with the Infestors. Ghosts, hellions, and thors deal with the Broodlords. Then again, you can just get vikings but you'd have to sit them close to your tanks or else they might get fungal'd. You could do this with bio too ofc.
Also, when they spread the infestors, it's a lot harder to fungal. Unless they want to send them in a couple at a time, in which they can be sniped.
Either way, bio or mech, you can deal with infestor/broodlord with tank/viking or tank/ghost (along with the normal MMM or thor/hellion), you just can't move your vikings very far away from your tanks or else they'd get fungald. Same with ghosts, they can die when not careful.
Easier said then done. There is a good reason why blizzard plans to rework the synergy of broods+infestors in the future.
The way i see it, tanks make it so that infestors can't get in range to fungal, but broodlords make it so that tanks have to retreat, and now ghosts cant get in range to snipe/emp. Then, vikings make it so that broodlords have to retreat, and now ghosts can get in and cast. Not sure what zerg does after that, maybe corrupter or ultra. Seems fair to me.
oh and than viking get fungaled ... shot by corruptor ... the end
yeah, because the game is as easy as that...but if you want, we can continue: meanwhile the corruptors get sniped by ghosts and shot by sucidal marines and 8range thors.
Thors have 10 range, and if you are still making Thors after you saw Brood Lords.....then I don't know what to say.
Going further, since you are supposed to EMP the Infestors (which are so big and fat that you never get a bunch at the same time, just one...maybe two) ALL of your ghost energy was used on EMPs, so their is no possible way for you to Snipe any Corrupters.
On July 12 2011 02:04 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: thanks for the pic, the new icon is awesome :D
also, how come I can't log in ?
Once I try to press connect, it has the connection error or server down error message, with options of "play offline" and "cancel"
you can connect and use existing maps you've previously DL'd by playing offline otherwise that's it until multiplayer gets enabled.
Ohh ok thanks. When the OP said multi was disabled, I thought he meant you could go online, but just had to play against AI or such.
On July 12 2011 02:10 shizna wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:51 Silent331 wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:46 xbankx wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:28 Wr3k wrote: [quote]
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock. Look at Zenio vs Byun. GHOSTS. I hope they don't mess with too much, balance feels pretty good at the moment. I'm guessing itl just be some new maps + the linked regions & some minor changes like the the hellion icon.
If you don't play terran, don't suggest new strat. There are so much problem against that composition that adding a single unit isn't gonna make it better
How ignorant are you? a zerg tells you exactly what you need to do to kill his "ultimate" unit comp and you yell at him. Remember when idra asked incontrol what he hated the most in PvZ and incontrol said drops? guess what, it became a staple of ZvP. Now they tell you what the best thing for terran late game is, ghosts, and you push it off with some elitist BS. I can personally say from experiance that any time i have gotten the infestor broodlord combo out vs terran, any terran that had 5+ ghosts killed my entire army without issue and proceeded to roll my base. if you think spending 500 gas to hard counter my 2500+gas army is not worth it than there is something wrong with you
5 ghosts hardcounter a 2500+ gas army? really?
learn to spread your infestors, then laugh at the terran as his army is destroyed by his own siege tanks and fungal growth.
it's not an unbeatable composition, but it's waaaay too hard to stop. it means that smart terrans will aim to end the game before the zerg can get hive tech. having fun in all of those two rax losses? no? well it's the smart thing for terran to do unfortunately.
personally i feel that ghosts need to have their full energy drain back again... having to double emp enemy casters when they have them spread = a joke.
in late game if the economies are even, HT and infestor lol all over terran late game. your army dies in seconds unless you get perfect emps, and they can still reinforce faster than you.
If the ghosts have enough energy, sure.
I don't know about bio, but ghosts are perfect for mech. Tanks deal with the Infestors. Ghosts, hellions, and thors deal with the Broodlords. Then again, you can just get vikings but you'd have to sit them close to your tanks or else they might get fungal'd. You could do this with bio too ofc.
Also, when they spread the infestors, it's a lot harder to fungal. Unless they want to send them in a couple at a time, in which they can be sniped.
Either way, bio or mech, you can deal with infestor/broodlord with tank/viking or tank/ghost (along with the normal MMM or thor/hellion), you just can't move your vikings very far away from your tanks or else they'd get fungald. Same with ghosts, they can die when not careful.
Easier said then done. There is a good reason why blizzard plans to rework the synergy of broods+infestors in the future.
The way i see it, tanks make it so that infestors can't get in range to fungal, but broodlords make it so that tanks have to retreat, and now ghosts cant get in range to snipe/emp. Then, vikings make it so that broodlords have to retreat, and now ghosts can get in and cast. Not sure what zerg does after that, maybe corrupter or ultra. Seems fair to me.
oh and than viking get fungaled ... shot by corruptor ... the end
yeah, because the game is as easy as that...but if you want, we can continue: meanwhile the corruptors get sniped by ghosts and shot by sucidal marines and 8range thors.
Thors have 10 range, and if you are still making Thors after you saw Brood Lords.....then I don't know what to say.
Going further, since you are supposed to EMP the Infestors (which are so big and fat that you never get a bunch at the same time, just one...maybe two) ALL of your ghost energy was used on EMPs, so their is no possible way for you to Snipe any Corrupters.
Well, thors can still hit broodlords fairly easy, and I don't know whether this will work, but can't blue flame hellions following behind the thors nullify all broodlings?
Hahaha oh man. I can picture the scenario in my head that led to this icon change.
Blizzard headquarters. Game design team meeting. Everyone sits at a round table getting ready to discuss new ideas and the implementation,while waiting for Dustin Browder. All of a sudden a cold breeze of air fills the room,the conference room door slams open and a blood crazed Browder enters the room looking like he is going to murder someone any second. Browder:"WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS?!?!?I WANT ANSWERS." A dev guy stands up,shrugs his shoulders:" W..we...we were about to discuss some options to change the infestor......we had no idea zergs would start massing them so much...... Browder:"WHAT,Infestors?No,what are you talking about?I just played the damn multiplayer to see what all this AI fuss is about.AND WHAT DO I SEE?!? Dev guy:"W..Wha...What sir?" Browder:"A BLUE FLAME HELLION UPGRADE,BLUE,NOT GREEN,NOT RED,BLUE-FLAME. AND SOME SMART ASS MADE THE UPGRADE RED.ANYONE CARE TO EXPLAIN? Dev guy:We..were sorry sir,we just thought it would be a silly little inside joke um..... Browder:"I DONT CARE.Change the god damn thing ASAP.Oh and someone better tell the people on the forums that the guy who made the icon was colorblind,I'm not standing up for this shit.I'm getting enough crap for those goddamn rocks as it is.Got it?Ok,next topic. David,whats the graph on bunker rushes these days,did we get it right this time or should we tweak that baby some more?
As mentioned on the Blizzard forums, this reminds me of the WoW 1.5.0 patch where the only changes for the mage class was:
"Mage Armor - Now has a new, unique icon."
The difference being that patch had a ton of balance changes for other classes, which made it all the more hilarious at the time (probably only if you were a mage, I guess).
On July 12 2011 03:15 Elefanto wrote: infestors are just tooo good. don't get me wrong, heaving strong spell caster is something good. but the infestor right now counters everything. fungal growth with 9 range and huge area counters light units with its ridiculous dps, armored with its even higher dps, also it snairs and detects invisible units. they can take over units, burrow move and energy dump infested terrans to trigger siege tank shots or harass minreal lines. and on top of that they still got the amulet.
they are all around good against everything. i can't see any drawbacks, on creep they even have huge mobility. if you watch dimaga zvt for instance, he has ultras by the 13 minute mark, while infestors grant him safety against everything if he didn't mess up the early game.
Out of curiousity, what league do you play in?
I think the infestor is good but you need ghosts. People dont use enough ghosts in TvZ and it will be needed if you want a real way to deal with infestors in ZvP then they can be a bit pesky for the protoss but ppl dont use High templars enough, just feedback the shit out of the infestors and you're good to go.
On July 12 2011 03:24 TheKefka wrote: Hahaha oh man. I can picture the scenario in my head that led to this icon change.
Blizzard headquarters. Game design team meeting. Everyone sits at a round table getting ready to discuss new ideas and the implementation,while waiting for Dustin Browder. All of a sudden a cold breeze of air fills the room,the conference room door slams open and a blood crazed Browder enters the room looking like he is going to murder someone any second. Browder:"WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS?!?!?I WANT ANSWERS." A dev guy stands up,shrugs his shoulders:" W..we...we were about to discuss some options to change the infestor......we had no idea zergs would start massing them so much...... Browder:"WHAT,Infestors?No,what are you talking about?I just played the damn multiplayer to see what all this AI fuss is about.AND WHAT DO I SEE?!? Dev guy:"W..Wha...What sir?" Browder:"A BLUE FLAME HELLION UPGRADE,BLUE,NOT GREEN,NOT RED,BLUE-FLAME. AND SOME SMART ASS MADE THE UPGRADE RED.ANYONE CARE TO EXPLAIN? Dev guy:We..were sorry sir,we just thought it would be a silly little inside joke um..... Browder:"I DONT CARE.Change the god damn thing ASAP.Oh and someone better tell the people on the forums that the guy who made the icon was colorblind,I'm not standing up for this shit.I'm getting enough crap for those goddamn rocks as it is.Got it?Ok,next topic. Steve,whats the graph on bunker rushes these days,did we get it right this time or should we tweak that baby some more?
I don't think Browder is THAT much of a srs bizness type... :/
IMO, they could've just ninja patched it and no one would've noticed or cared.
On July 12 2011 03:24 TheKefka wrote: Hahaha oh man. I can picture the scenario in my head that led to this icon change.
Blizzard headquarters. Game design team meeting. Everyone sits at a round table getting ready to discuss new ideas and the implementation,while waiting for Dustin Browder. All of a sudden a cold breeze of air fills the room,the conference room door slams open and a blood crazed Browder enters the room looking like he is going to murder someone any second. Browder:"WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS?!?!?I WANT ANSWERS." A dev guy stands up,shrugs his shoulders:" W..we...we were about to discuss some options to change the infestor......we had no idea zergs would start massing them so much...... Browder:"WHAT,Infestors?No,what are you talking about?I just played the damn multiplayer to see what all this AI fuss is about.AND WHAT DO I SEE?!? Dev guy:"W..Wha...What sir?" Browder:"A BLUE FLAME HELLION UPGRADE,BLUE,NOT GREEN,NOT RED,BLUE-FLAME. AND SOME SMART ASS MADE THE UPGRADE RED.ANYONE CARE TO EXPLAIN? Dev guy:We..were sorry sir,we just thought it would be a silly little inside joke um..... Browder:"I DONT CARE.Change the god damn thing ASAP.Oh and someone better tell the people on the forums that the guy who made the icon was colorblind,I'm not standing up for this shit.I'm getting enough crap for those goddamn rocks as it is.Got it?Ok,next topic. Steve,whats the graph on bunker rushes these days,did we get it right this time or should we tweak that baby some more?
I don't think Browder is THAT much of a srs bizness type... :/
IMO, they could've just ninja patched it and no one would've noticed or cared.
On July 12 2011 03:15 Elefanto wrote: infestors are just tooo good. don't get me wrong, heaving strong spell caster is something good. but the infestor right now counters everything. fungal growth with 9 range and huge area counters light units with its ridiculous dps, armored with its even higher dps, also it snairs and detects invisible units. they can take over units, burrow move and energy dump infested terrans to trigger siege tank shots or harass minreal lines. and on top of that they still got the amulet.
they are all around good against everything. i can't see any drawbacks, on creep they even have huge mobility. if you watch dimaga zvt for instance, he has ultras by the 13 minute mark, while infestors grant him safety against everything if he didn't mess up the early game.
Out of curiousity, what league do you play in?
I think the infestor is good but you need ghosts. People dont use enough ghosts in TvZ and it will be needed if you want a real way to deal with infestors in ZvP then they can be a bit pesky for the protoss but ppl dont use High templars enough, just feedback the shit out of the infestors and you're good to go.
On July 12 2011 03:24 TheKefka wrote: Hahaha oh man. I can picture the scenario in my head that led to this icon change.
Blizzard headquarters. Game design team meeting. Everyone sits at a round table getting ready to discuss new ideas and the implementation,while waiting for Dustin Browder. All of a sudden a cold breeze of air fills the room,the conference room door slams open and a blood crazed Browder enters the room looking like he is going to murder someone any second. Browder:"WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS?!?!?I WANT ANSWERS." A dev guy stands up,shrugs his shoulders:" W..we...we were about to discuss some options to change the infestor......we had no idea zergs would start massing them so much...... Browder:"WHAT,Infestors?No,what are you talking about?I just played the damn multiplayer to see what all this AI fuss is about.AND WHAT DO I SEE?!? Dev guy:"W..Wha...What sir?" Browder:"A BLUE FLAME HELLION UPGRADE,BLUE,NOT GREEN,NOT RED,BLUE-FLAME. AND SOME SMART ASS MADE THE UPGRADE RED.ANYONE CARE TO EXPLAIN? Dev guy:We..were sorry sir,we just thought it would be a silly little inside joke um..... Browder:"I DONT CARE.Change the god damn thing ASAP.Oh and someone better tell the people on the forums that the guy who made the icon was colorblind,I'm not standing up for this shit.I'm getting enough crap for those goddamn rocks as it is.Got it?Ok,next topic. Steve,whats the graph on bunker rushes these days,did we get it right this time or should we tweak that baby some more?
I don't think Browder is THAT much of a srs bizness type... :/
IMO, they could've just ninja patched it and no one would've noticed or cared.
You sir,have no sense of humor.
We just have different taste of humor, that's all. :/
I don't see how that is worthy of finger-pointing... <.<
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock. Look at Zenio vs Byun. GHOSTS. I hope they don't mess with too much, balance feels pretty good at the moment. I'm guessing itl just be some new maps + the linked regions & some minor changes like the the hellion icon.
If you don't play terran, don't suggest new strat. There are so much problem against that composition that adding a single unit isn't gonna make it better
Its no different from protoss players suggesting zergs to go mass corruptors against void colossus deathball when the real answer was more in line with baneling/infestor/roach.
note that the infestor got changed to create that scenario
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock. Look at Zenio vs Byun. GHOSTS. I hope they don't mess with too much, balance feels pretty good at the moment. I'm guessing itl just be some new maps + the linked regions & some minor changes like the the hellion icon.
If you don't play terran, don't suggest new strat. There are so much problem against that composition that adding a single unit isn't gonna make it better
Its no different from protoss players suggesting zergs to go mass corruptors against void colossus deathball when the real answer was more in line with baneling/infestor/roach.
How many units are in most compositions? Adding a unit is a huge deal
i think they should change two things: broodloard, infestor is to strong especially with banelingdrops on top. and the other thing is that terra can snipe observer with viking+scan pretty easy and kill everything with mass cloakbanshee. they could give observers a bigger detection range.
Interesting~~~~~~ Their answer regarding latency is interesting, are they saying KR and Taiwan were running through the same servers already so we should have really good latency already?
Like, I think the KR servers are located in Seoul, so were the Taiwanese connecting via Seoul already?
Yeah, I think that's right. We already knew that they shared a chat server. NA and LA, for example, could chat in the same channels and even be RealID friends across those servers (SDream and I did this). It's realistic to believe they're using the same game servers too and just segregate based on region during game searches, which will obviously no longer happen after this merge.
On July 12 2011 03:24 TheKefka wrote: Hahaha oh man. I can picture the scenario in my head that led to this icon change.
Blizzard headquarters. Game design team meeting. Everyone sits at a round table getting ready to discuss new ideas and the implementation,while waiting for Dustin Browder. All of a sudden a cold breeze of air fills the room,the conference room door slams open and a blood crazed Browder enters the room looking like he is going to murder someone any second. Browder:"WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS?!?!?I WANT ANSWERS." A dev guy stands up,shrugs his shoulders:" W..we...we were about to discuss some options to change the infestor......we had no idea zergs would start massing them so much...... Browder:"WHAT,Infestors?No,what are you talking about?I just played the damn multiplayer to see what all this AI fuss is about.AND WHAT DO I SEE?!? Dev guy:"W..Wha...What sir?" Browder:"A BLUE FLAME HELLION UPGRADE,BLUE,NOT GREEN,NOT RED,BLUE-FLAME. AND SOME SMART ASS MADE THE UPGRADE RED.ANYONE CARE TO EXPLAIN? Dev guy:We..were sorry sir,we just thought it would be a silly little inside joke um..... Browder:"I DONT CARE.Change the god damn thing ASAP.Oh and someone better tell the people on the forums that the guy who made the icon was colorblind,I'm not standing up for this shit.I'm getting enough crap for those goddamn rocks as it is.Got it?Ok,next topic. Steve,whats the graph on bunker rushes these days,did we get it right this time or should we tweak that baby some more?
I don't think Browder is THAT much of a srs bizness type... :/
IMO, they could've just ninja patched it and no one would've noticed or cared.
You sir,have no sense of humor.
We just have different taste of humor, that's all. :/
I don't see how that is worthy of finger-pointing... <.<
The joke kept going too long, should cut out the last dev/browder comments and having done that, expand on browders new last comment
Interesting~~~~~~ Their answer regarding latency is interesting, are they saying KR and Taiwan were running through the same servers already so we should have really good latency already?
Like, I think the KR servers are located in Seoul, so were the Taiwanese connecting via Seoul already?
Yeah, I think that's right. We already knew that they shared a chat server. NA and LA, for example, could chat in the same channels and even be RealID friends across those servers (SDream and I did this). It's realistic to believe they're using the same game servers too and just segregate based on region during game searches, which will obviously no longer happen after this merge.
Yes. My friend from Brazil had same lags playin on Both LA and NA servers.
On July 12 2011 03:17 JustPlay wrote: I doubt it's a factor when I have lower ping to EU than NA and I live in the US.
It's a real dick moving have servers on the west coast when chicago exists.
Blizzard is based in Irvine, CA so why wouldn't they put the servers right there?
Do you know why the European servers aren't located in Irvine, CA? If you do, you should probably know why it isn't a good idea to have all the US servers there. Not that I know where they're located.
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock. Look at Zenio vs Byun. GHOSTS. I hope they don't mess with too much, balance feels pretty good at the moment. I'm guessing itl just be some new maps + the linked regions & some minor changes like the the hellion icon.
If you don't play terran, don't suggest new strat. There are so much problem against that composition that adding a single unit isn't gonna make it better
How ignorant are you? a zerg tells you exactly what you need to do to kill his "ultimate" unit comp and you yell at him. Remember when idra asked incontrol what he hated the most in PvZ and incontrol said drops? guess what, it became a staple of ZvP. Now they tell you what the best thing for terran late game is, ghosts, and you push it off with some elitist BS. I can personally say from experiance that any time i have gotten the infestor broodlord combo out vs terran, any terran that had 5+ ghosts killed my entire army without issue and proceeded to roll my base. if you think spending 500 gas to hard counter my 2500+gas army is not worth it than there is something wrong with you
Doesn't matter what a zerg player tells a terran do do...if they don't know what they are talking about then they shouldn't say anything.
And in response to the bolded...you can't be any more dense to think that gas, and not minerals, is what slows terran down in production. Even then, spending money on tanks, vikings, and ghosts isn't necessarily cheap on gas either.
I know its a travesty that anything, especially reacting (cause terrans never do that, pfft not in a million years) could possibly take away from your mass marine strategy! Im sorry that having a million of the same unit could possibly hurt your gameplay. maby if you had another unit to counter the counter to your mass marines? butbutbut.... that means less marines. I know its awful and im sorry.
Also someones idea should be only be shot down via evidence, not ignorance that he doesent play your race so there no way he can tell what kills his entire army
On July 12 2011 03:24 TheKefka wrote: Hahaha oh man. I can picture the scenario in my head that led to this icon change.
Blizzard headquarters. Game design team meeting. Everyone sits at a round table getting ready to discuss new ideas and the implementation,while waiting for Dustin Browder. All of a sudden a cold breeze of air fills the room,the conference room door slams open and a blood crazed Browder enters the room looking like he is going to murder someone any second. Browder:"WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS?!?!?I WANT ANSWERS." A dev guy stands up,shrugs his shoulders:" W..we...we were about to discuss some options to change the infestor......we had no idea zergs would start massing them so much...... Browder:"WHAT,Infestors?No,what are you talking about?I just played the damn multiplayer to see what all this AI fuss is about.AND WHAT DO I SEE?!? Dev guy:"W..Wha...What sir?" Browder:"A BLUE FLAME HELLION UPGRADE,BLUE,NOT GREEN,NOT RED,BLUE-FLAME. AND SOME SMART ASS MADE THE UPGRADE RED.ANYONE CARE TO EXPLAIN? Dev guy:We..were sorry sir,we just thought it would be a silly little inside joke um..... Browder:"I DONT CARE.Change the god damn thing ASAP.Oh and someone better tell the people on the forums that the guy who made the icon was colorblind,I'm not standing up for this shit.I'm getting enough crap for those goddamn rocks as it is.Got it?Ok,next topic. Steve,whats the graph on bunker rushes these days,did we get it right this time or should we tweak that baby some more?
I don't think Browder is THAT much of a srs bizness type... :/
IMO, they could've just ninja patched it and no one would've noticed or cared.
You sir,have no sense of humor.
We just have different taste of humor, that's all. :/
I don't see how that is worthy of finger-pointing... <.<
Hahaa, I thought it was a pretty funny story, especially that part about Browder being so stressed about what we complain about on TL:
On July 12 2011 01:08 Jsanko wrote: People were asking for patch, so they released one without any changes.
It's sad that people idolize David Kim, a guy whose sole accomplishement was to dominate the first 3 weeks of Beta after several years of solo-practice. A guy who also said that it was no big deal if several units/abilities had no point whatsoever in high level multiplayer.
With the exception of roaches to 2 food, warpgate research time increase, I can't think at one single change which was really good in the absolute since Beta.
They always chose the solution of facility, the mindless 1 dimensional approach. Warpgate is tough to deal with in the beginning ? Increase the research time ad infinitim... Zerg have a hardtime against tanks ? Decrease the dmg... Against HSM? Decrease the dmg, make it useless if needed... etc etc...
On July 12 2011 03:24 TheKefka wrote: Hahaha oh man. I can picture the scenario in my head that led to this icon change.
Blizzard headquarters. Game design team meeting. Everyone sits at a round table getting ready to discuss new ideas and the implementation,while waiting for Dustin Browder. All of a sudden a cold breeze of air fills the room,the conference room door slams open and a blood crazed Browder enters the room looking like he is going to murder someone any second. Browder:"WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS?!?!?I WANT ANSWERS." A dev guy stands up,shrugs his shoulders:" W..we...we were about to discuss some options to change the infestor......we had no idea zergs would start massing them so much...... Browder:"WHAT,Infestors?No,what are you talking about?I just played the damn multiplayer to see what all this AI fuss is about.AND WHAT DO I SEE?!? Dev guy:"W..Wha...What sir?" Browder:"A BLUE FLAME HELLION UPGRADE,BLUE,NOT GREEN,NOT RED,BLUE-FLAME. AND SOME SMART ASS MADE THE UPGRADE RED.ANYONE CARE TO EXPLAIN? Dev guy:We..were sorry sir,we just thought it would be a silly little inside joke um..... Browder:"I DONT CARE.Change the god damn thing ASAP.Oh and someone better tell the people on the forums that the guy who made the icon was colorblind,I'm not standing up for this shit.I'm getting enough crap for those goddamn rocks as it is.Got it?Ok,next topic. Steve,whats the graph on bunker rushes these days,did we get it right this time or should we tweak that baby some more?
I don't think Browder is THAT much of a srs bizness type... :/
IMO, they could've just ninja patched it and no one would've noticed or cared.
You sir,have no sense of humor.
We just have different taste of humor, that's all. :/
I don't see how that is worthy of finger-pointing... <.<
Hahaa, I thought it was a pretty funny story, especially that part about Browder being so stressed about what we complain about on TL:
Wow there finally going to change it to blue flame icon even though its been talked about forever now lol. That never made sense in the first place to have the icon for the change from standard red/orange into red/orange but I'm glad since its better late than never I suppose. Can't wait to see maps. ^^
On July 12 2011 02:04 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: thanks for the pic, the new icon is awesome :D
also, how come I can't log in ?
Once I try to press connect, it has the connection error or server down error message, with options of "play offline" and "cancel"
you can connect and use existing maps you've previously DL'd by playing offline otherwise that's it until multiplayer gets enabled.
Ohh ok thanks. When the OP said multi was disabled, I thought he meant you could go online, but just had to play against AI or such.
On July 12 2011 02:10 shizna wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:51 Silent331 wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:46 xbankx wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:28 Wr3k wrote:
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock. Look at Zenio vs Byun. GHOSTS. I hope they don't mess with too much, balance feels pretty good at the moment. I'm guessing itl just be some new maps + the linked regions & some minor changes like the the hellion icon.
If you don't play terran, don't suggest new strat. There are so much problem against that composition that adding a single unit isn't gonna make it better
How ignorant are you? a zerg tells you exactly what you need to do to kill his "ultimate" unit comp and you yell at him. Remember when idra asked incontrol what he hated the most in PvZ and incontrol said drops? guess what, it became a staple of ZvP. Now they tell you what the best thing for terran late game is, ghosts, and you push it off with some elitist BS. I can personally say from experiance that any time i have gotten the infestor broodlord combo out vs terran, any terran that had 5+ ghosts killed my entire army without issue and proceeded to roll my base. if you think spending 500 gas to hard counter my 2500+gas army is not worth it than there is something wrong with you
5 ghosts hardcounter a 2500+ gas army? really?
learn to spread your infestors, then laugh at the terran as his army is destroyed by his own siege tanks and fungal growth.
it's not an unbeatable composition, but it's waaaay too hard to stop. it means that smart terrans will aim to end the game before the zerg can get hive tech. having fun in all of those two rax losses? no? well it's the smart thing for terran to do unfortunately.
personally i feel that ghosts need to have their full energy drain back again... having to double emp enemy casters when they have them spread = a joke.
in late game if the economies are even, HT and infestor lol all over terran late game. your army dies in seconds unless you get perfect emps, and they can still reinforce faster than you.
If the ghosts have enough energy, sure.
I don't know about bio, but ghosts are perfect for mech. Tanks deal with the Infestors. Ghosts, hellions, and thors deal with the Broodlords. Then again, you can just get vikings but you'd have to sit them close to your tanks or else they might get fungal'd. You could do this with bio too ofc.
Also, when they spread the infestors, it's a lot harder to fungal. Unless they want to send them in a couple at a time, in which they can be sniped.
Either way, bio or mech, you can deal with infestor/broodlord with tank/viking or tank/ghost (along with the normal MMM or thor/hellion), you just can't move your vikings very far away from your tanks or else they'd get fungald. Same with ghosts, they can die when not careful.
Easier said then done. There is a good reason why blizzard plans to rework the synergy of broods+infestors in the future.
The way i see it, tanks make it so that infestors can't get in range to fungal, but broodlords make it so that tanks have to retreat, and now ghosts cant get in range to snipe/emp. Then, vikings make it so that broodlords have to retreat, and now ghosts can get in and cast. Not sure what zerg does after that, maybe corrupter or ultra. Seems fair to me.
If you keep the vikings just in front of the tanks, couldn't they shoot the brood lords before they force the tanks to unsiege? The tanks would then protect the vikings from being fungaled.
On July 12 2011 04:19 Demonhunter04 wrote: If you keep the vikings just in front of the tanks, couldn't they shoot the brood lords before they force the tanks to unsiege? The tanks would then protect the vikings from being fungaled.
This is true, but then the Zerg will get Corruptors and your Vikings will be killed off rapidly, as will your Siege Tanks during the retreat.
On July 12 2011 04:19 Demonhunter04 wrote: If you keep the vikings just in front of the tanks, couldn't they shoot the brood lords before they force the tanks to unsiege? The tanks would then protect the vikings from being fungaled.
This is true, but then the Zerg will get Corruptors and your Vikings will be killed off rapidly, as will your Siege Tanks during the retreat.
Correct me if I'm wrong..but aren't vikings a soft counter to corruptors? Yeah zerg does have the advantage when it comes to rapid army comp switches, but if you have two starports with reactors you should be fine.
They actually changed something about blue flame hellions and DIDN'T nerf the ridiculous damage it does? I don't understand how Blizzard can look at BFH, banshees, and infestor/BL and not think those are overpowered. I guess they want to make up for SC2's easier interface by making it "harder" in that 1 mistake loses you the game...
On July 12 2011 04:53 iamke55 wrote: They actually changed something about blue flame hellions and DIDN'T nerf the ridiculous damage it does? I don't understand how Blizzard can look at BFH, banshees, and infestor/BL and not think those are overpowered. I guess they want to make up for SC2's easier interface by making it "harder" in that 1 mistake loses you the game...
Uhhh im pretty sure Ultralisk defiler were more ridiculous vs T then infester brood...
OR maybe ur just being sarcastic and im falling for it -.-
On July 12 2011 04:53 iamke55 wrote: They actually changed something about blue flame hellions and DIDN'T nerf the ridiculous damage it does? I don't understand how Blizzard can look at BFH, banshees, and infestor/BL and not think those are overpowered. I guess they want to make up for SC2's easier interface by making it "harder" in that 1 mistake loses you the game...
Uhhh im pretty sure Ultralisk defiler were more ridiculous vs T then infester brood...
OR maybe ur just being sarcastic and im falling for it -.-
but you're forgetting that defliers actually required micro to effectively use (and for the terran to respond).
They swapped the roach upgrade icons at the end of beta, so changing them back is unlikely, unless it was somehow made by mistake(considering they did nothing else related to them that would be pretty strange).
On July 12 2011 04:53 iamke55 wrote: They actually changed something about blue flame hellions and DIDN'T nerf the ridiculous damage it does? I don't understand how Blizzard can look at BFH, banshees, and infestor/BL and not think those are overpowered. I guess they want to make up for SC2's easier interface by making it "harder" in that 1 mistake loses you the game...
I strongly disagree with both, BFH and Banshees being OP, especially Banshees. BFH is the only thing which helps mech not to be overrun by chargelots/speedlings early/mid game. BFH drops early game are strong indeed, but if you fail with them, it's pretty much gg as it would have been for your opponent if you have killed all his mineral line with them. Mid/Late game BFH run-bys can be easily countered by both, Zerg and Protoss (Zerg has full map control and really mobile army (also spines), meanwhile toss can be saved with proper maze which includes cannons, also warp-in makes it really easy). Also, BFH/Reactor Hellion openings on big maps seems to be the only way to harass zerg, which is necessary.
And about banshees... I barely use them apart TvT. In TvP, if I'm going mech on map like XNC, I will open 1/1/1 and get only one banshee without cloak (for map control, and hoping protoss will overreact), because if protoss decides to go 1 Gate Robo FE/2 gate Robo FE, you will be so ridiculously behind, that it's not even funny. Hell, even 3 Gate FE is strong against it, after first poke, if you see bunker/reactor rax you thrown down Robo immediatily and Cloaked Banshee won't even deal enough damage to put 3 gate FE protoss behind. And before warp-gate nerf, that "poke" could have easily killed greedy cloaked banshee opening on some maps. And against zerg, I found banshees to suck unless it's 2 port banshee. Yes, cloaked banshees can do damage if zerg doesn't know how to defend them properly or is very greedy, but it's not worth the risk. If you kill like "only" 11 drones with cloaked banshee opening, you will still be behind, because it delays any kind of push/tech you would go to, and zerg players knows that, so they will drone like mad. And defending them is not so hard, if zerg doesn't delay his lair. But if zerg knows you are going cloaked banshees, after they fail (because they really will), you will need to take hell lots of risks/gambles in order to get back to the game. They sometimes can be good against fast infestor play from zerg, but it's very situational. Although they seem to be pretty strong in TvT.
And BFH/Banshess comparison to Infestor/BL is kinda silly, because they are nowhere as versatile as Infestor/BL, especially Infestor/BL combo, which yet I have failed to see to be countered at all.
Am i the only one that thinks that the game is perfectly balanced right now? of course a few tweaks here and there but now its perfect to the pros to start perfecting each race!
On July 12 2011 04:53 iamke55 wrote: They actually changed something about blue flame hellions and DIDN'T nerf the ridiculous damage it does? I don't understand how Blizzard can look at BFH, banshees, and infestor/BL and not think those are overpowered. I guess they want to make up for SC2's easier interface by making it "harder" in that 1 mistake loses you the game...
On July 12 2011 04:53 iamke55 wrote: They actually changed something about blue flame hellions and DIDN'T nerf the ridiculous damage it does? I don't understand how Blizzard can look at BFH, banshees, and infestor/BL and not think those are overpowered. I guess they want to make up for SC2's easier interface by making it "harder" in that 1 mistake loses you the game...
I disagree. Blueflame hellion makes mech more viable (but still not viable enough), and nerfing them would make mech impossible.
And BFH/Banshess comparison to Infestor/BL is kinda silly, because they are nowhere as versatile as Infestor/BL, especially Infestor/BL combo, which yet I have failed to see to be countered at all.
yeah, and apart from that it is silly to compare a single unit to a unit combination. it is even more silly that people keep on talking about "Broodlord/Infestor is OP", when big parts of this strategy involve other units (banelings/zerglings,spines,corruptors/mutas) that are necessary to make the BL/Infestor combo work.
not going to go further into detail about the strategy, because I don't think this is the thread for this...
Blue flame is fine, Banshee's aren't really a problem unless its that stupid marine tank raven banshee 1 base allin that you need pretty perfect micro to defeat.
On July 12 2011 04:53 iamke55 wrote: They actually changed something about blue flame hellions and DIDN'T nerf the ridiculous damage it does? I don't understand how Blizzard can look at BFH, banshees, and infestor/BL and not think those are overpowered. I guess they want to make up for SC2's easier interface by making it "harder" in that 1 mistake loses you the game...
On July 12 2011 04:53 iamke55 wrote: They actually changed something about blue flame hellions and DIDN'T nerf the ridiculous damage it does? I don't understand how Blizzard can look at BFH, banshees, and infestor/BL and not think those are overpowered. I guess they want to make up for SC2's easier interface by making it "harder" in that 1 mistake loses you the game...
Brue frame is very micro intensive, and this color buff is huge for those in the community that have OCD. And I think you play Protoss.
On July 12 2011 06:48 dooraven wrote: Blue flame is fine, Banshee's aren't really a problem unless its that stupid marine tank raven banshee 1 base allin that you need pretty perfect micro to defeat.
Agree complety. Let's see what they shall give us! Looking forward to see some old maps get removed.
On July 12 2011 04:53 iamke55 wrote: They actually changed something about blue flame hellions and DIDN'T nerf the ridiculous damage it does? I don't understand how Blizzard can look at BFH, banshees, and infestor/BL and not think those are overpowered. I guess they want to make up for SC2's easier interface by making it "harder" in that 1 mistake loses you the game...
Brue frame is very micro intensive, and this color buff is huge for those in the community that have OCD. And I think you play Protoss.
I just drop 4 hellions onto mineral lines and then the opponent leaves the game. Run away + shoot is not much of a micro -.-
On July 12 2011 04:53 iamke55 wrote: They actually changed something about blue flame hellions and DIDN'T nerf the ridiculous damage it does? I don't understand how Blizzard can look at BFH, banshees, and infestor/BL and not think those are overpowered. I guess they want to make up for SC2's easier interface by making it "harder" in that 1 mistake loses you the game...
Brue frame is very micro intensive, and this color buff is huge for those in the community that have OCD. And I think you play Protoss.
I don't really have a problem with hellions doing ridic damage to light. What I do have a problem with is that hellions LAUGH at stalker shots(no joke). Even with preparation and stalkers, the hellions often run in, roast some probes and can get away with a whole crapton of stalkers shooting at them.
Terran needs to be nerfed. Theres not much argument against them being OP since retail still. And the BL + Infestor thing, well if you're in masters you would have seen the gsl strats 3 months in advance, just like all the other "new gsl" strats out there.
On July 12 2011 08:23 Cartel wrote: Terran needs to be nerfed. Theres not much argument against them being OP since retail still. And the BL + Infestor thing, well if you're in masters you would have seen the gsl strats 3 months in advance, just like all the other "new gsl" strats out there.
Lol, sure. If anything needs to be nerfed, it's zerg's late game ZvT.
On July 12 2011 08:15 iCCup.Diamond wrote: Did they fix input limit reached yet?
I think it's on their long list of things to implement. It's right under shared replay viewing and LAN. It's always something to look forward to, and I've heard rumours about it currently being worked on, and is planned to be implemented within the next 25-30 years.
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock. Look at Zenio vs Byun. GHOSTS. I hope they don't mess with too much, balance feels pretty good at the moment. I'm guessing itl just be some new maps + the linked regions & some minor changes like the the hellion icon.
Oh yeah, that one game where he used ghosts and lost
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock. Look at Zenio vs Byun. GHOSTS. I hope they don't mess with too much, balance feels pretty good at the moment. I'm guessing itl just be some new maps + the linked regions & some minor changes like the the hellion icon.
Oh yeah, that one game where he used ghosts and lost
Because he had HORRIBLE positioning. Tanks unsieged and ghosts/bio in a ball against a wall as banelings rolled in.
You guys need to learn to take into account what actually happened rather than simply. He had this, and he had this and he won, thus I conclude... fail.
yea positioning and unit control changes everything In Starcraft II, a simple example is how 1-2 stalkers can take down 15 marines without stim if controlled correctly, if they go head on the stalkers vapourise instantly. That same logic goes for 200 vs 200 armies and use of terrain.
Since I'm still rather new, I thought I'd post to get some feedback on my analysis. I main Terran, so most of it will be from that perspective. Any additions and feedback will be awesome. <3
Test1 Players spawn at roughly the 2, 5, 8, 11 o'clock positions. The main has a ton of surface area, with a small ramp leading down to a moderately sized choke and natural. The ramp is small so that walling off is easy (2 depot, 1 rax or other variations) and the choke at the natural looks smaller than Xel'naga Cavern's natural, but larger than Tal'darim Altar's natural, so walling off there will take some large structures to do. A unique feature about this map is the curve of Line of sight plants in front of the natural (They look like LOS plants anyway; they may be rocks). I want to try to tackle this later because it's not been seen before to my knowledge). The central area is really flat, except for 4 raised platforms with a Xel'naga tower on each. This is pretty awesome for Siege tanks.
Additionally, there's plenty of air room along the perimeter of the map, but this will depend on where the map bounds are set in the editor, so it may actually be smaller than it appears. If there's a good amount of room, Banshee harassment and drop play will be good things to exercise on this map because of the ease of getting away. Large surface area in the main may increase the chance of finding a blind spot as well. Gold expansions at 12, 3, 6 and 9 positions are on low ground, have rocks blocking expanding, and the vespene geysers are placed such that they are vulnerable to air harass along the perimeter of the map.
For cross positions, it will be interesting to see if any new strategy revolves around double gold expanding. Unlike other maps, they're really accessible for this spawn state, but this will probably develop like any other macro game.
For close positions, the player that spawns counter-clockwise from the other player looks to have the advantage (e.g., P1 at 8, P2 at 5, P1 > P2), and I think part of this has to do with 1) your main having a large perpendicular area in relation to the other player for Air and drop harass, and low ground tank sieges, and 2) the path the disadvantaged player would have to take to move out towards the enemy is at risk of encountering a good arc setup. For some extra cheesiness, take a look at the shelf above the gold's mineral line, and you'll see that you should be able to siege from the low ground and hit the player's gas and closer portion of his mineral line. It may even be possible to place the tanks out of range of retaliation from the main, which would be really painful. It will require a spotter or a scan, but there is also some good air space nearby to spot from without much danger, so 1/1/1 with tanks and a spotter may be a strong build for close positions when you're in this advantage.
Test2 This map looks really cool - the way it's setup and its aesthetics. Narrow ramp at the main, and wide ramp at the natural ala Backwater Gulch. On top of that, there is also an extra ramp nearby that gives an additional path up to your natural. They are close enough to be covered by one tank group, however. Walling at the natural will probably take 2 rax, 2 depot or something similar. A smaller, third ramp is opposite of the second ramp, but is protected by a row of destructible rocks. A spotter watching for an early break here will be critical if you don't wall your main off. Gold expansions are pretty exposed. There's high ground nearby, and air access to the gold mineral line, making it a pain to defend.
One real interesting point is a small two-step cliff access to the main from the gold. Not only will this expose your main production buildings, but also your natural's mineral line. May want to try 1 Reaper FE for some sneaky scouting and harass. Later game, colossi may be able to use this to do some hit and running too. I also anticipate this little area will be a probable blind spot for less sim-city aware players, making them vulnerable to drops.
There is also a plateau between the top and bottom spawn third bases, and if you happen to spawn in these positions, will definitely be a point of conflict for anyone trying to take a third there. You're probably better off taking the gold as a third. There are some LOS plants, but nothing too interesting. 4 small rows around the Xel'naga tower, and a curve at the ground-level gold entrance.
Test3 Left and right half spawns are close by air (and I mean uncomfortably close!), with a moderate sized choke at the natural. This is a really similar setup to Shattered Temple or Metalopolis, but with a narrower choke at the natural. Ramps are small and easy to wall off. The spawns at 2 and 8 o'clock look like they have a wide open air space, while the 10 and 4 spawns seem closer to the map boundary and have less surface area to freely harass.
The center has 4 narrow chokes, with two of them blocked by destructible rocks. The lone Xel'naga is on a very small piece of land, with gaps on the top and bottom of it. Like the curved LOS plants at the natural in Test1, this looks pretty unique. It looks like it will be hard to dislodge anyone entrenched at the tower because of the narrow chokes and restricted movement (hi2u tanks). To top it off, LOS plants are at the chokes closest to the tower, making ambushes a fun surprise.
This map looks like a comfortable 2 base strategy map, seeing that there are no easy 3rds, and the no matter what 3rd base you take, it's going to be heavily vulnerable to either cliff fire and simply being too distant to readily respond with a defense if your army isn't sitting between the natural and third. For cross map spawns, control of the tower will be essential because of its defensibility. Melee units will have to take a long route to get to whomever's in the center, greatly reducing their effectiveness. The chokes look narrow enough that you could even wall off with two bunkers.
Test4 Touted as the macro map, the spawns are very conducive to early defense. The main is two cliffs up, while the natural is 1 cliff up, and the third is also 1 cliff up. Most of the map is on the lowest ground. The ramp to the main is small, and the ramp to the natural is wide, but looks like 2 rax, 2 depot or something similar will wall it off. Destructible rocks block a ramp to the thirds, and it's pretty easy to approach once it's down, though you can still reach part of the path to the natural while defending this ramp. Two golds in the center that will probably never ever be taken because they are so bloody exposed. This map has a really similar layout to Shakuras Plateau, though there shouldn't be any spawn restrictions since ground distance is the same from spawn to spawn in a counter-clock wise direction.
Like Test2, there are step-cliffs for reaper/colossus access. A wall of LOS smoke is also there, but it won't be too hard to put a spotter up. Mains are really vulnerable to takes sitting in the nearby third and using a spotter to hit the geyser and maybe part of the mineral line. Doesn't look like there will be much air space around the edges of the map, and the main is small enough to easily set up spotting, so drop and harass might be a little less effective than on the other maps. Unlike Test1, the player that spawns clockwise from another player will be a bit more vulnerable, i.e., P1 at 4:30 and P2 at 7:30, therefore P1 > P2. Reasoning being is that the third for P1 doesn't expand towards the opponent, and it's also not vulnerable to siege fire from the main.
Final thoughts - It's hard to judge distance from pictures alone, so I might be wrong about some of the siege potential. - Two of these maps seem to have features specifically for cliff walkers, so that's kind of cool. - Overall, I'm really liking Test1 and Test2, but all of these maps have some new features we haven't dealt with before, so this is hopefully going to change up some strategies, or at the least, some positioning decisions. - See you in Season 3. :D
The patch "enUS\Mods\Liberty.SC2Mod\enUS.SC2Assets\Assets\modeltextures.db" could not be applied. (MD5 mismatch: expected 0xA0B1F5E871CF48EE410526CBAF2C28B5, actual 0xD41D8CD98F00B204E9800998ECF8427E.)(PTCApply_BSDiff failed.) If this problem persists, you may be able to solve it by uninstalling and then reinstalling the game. If you are unable to correct this problem, please contact Blizzard Technical Support. (BNUpdate:TCApply)
I personally think if blizzard doesn't change the bunker again, it won't be a real patch, it'll just be a suspenseful patch, keeping us on baited breath until the next bunker change. Also, a change in zealot build time would be nice too.
On a serious note, I'm really surprised blizzard hasn't undone some of the nerfs to reapers yet, such as build time. Nor has blizzard changed the overseer or done anything to make HSM on ravens worth anyone's time... will be waiting to see if blizzard adds any new changes into the PTR as time moves on.
On July 12 2011 08:08 willoc wrote: Now people are whining about blue flame hellions?!?!?! Wow. People will whine about anything.
Actually if I'm not mistaken its been something thats been 'brought up' for quite a while now. people (even quite a few terrans) have been saying that the potential reward exceeds opportunity cost too greatly. But I have no idea how they can make hellions less powerful against mineral lines without making the unit itself useless in normal battles.
On July 12 2011 08:08 willoc wrote: Now people are whining about blue flame hellions?!?!?! Wow. People will whine about anything.
Actually if I'm not mistaken its been something thats been 'brought up' for quite a while now. people (even quite a few terrans) have been saying that the potential reward exceeds opportunity cost too greatly. But I have no idea how they can make hellions less powerful against mineral lines without making the unit itself useless in normal battles.
On July 12 2011 10:12 OhNoItsTheMunch wrote: So I took a look at the test maps and all i can say is:
Rocks. Rocks everywhere.
I swear this is all Zergs care about. Blizz could release a map with 40 mineral patches per base, no ramps or chokes, bases on complete opposites of a max sized map, and 1 chunk of rock in the very middle, and all we'd hear from Zerg players is:
Rocks. Rocks everywhere.
Let's give these maps a few weeks on the ladder before we crucify them.
On July 12 2011 10:12 OhNoItsTheMunch wrote: So I took a look at the test maps and all i can say is:
Rocks. Rocks everywhere.
I swear this is all Zergs care about. Blizz could release a map with 40 mineral patches per base, no ramps or chokes, bases on complete opposites of a max sized map, and 1 chunk of rock in the very middle, and all we'd hear from Zerg players is:
On July 12 2011 10:12 OhNoItsTheMunch wrote: So I took a look at the test maps and all i can say is:
Rocks. Rocks everywhere.
I swear this is all Zergs care about. Blizz could release a map with 40 mineral patches per base, no ramps or chokes, bases on complete opposites of a max sized map, and 1 chunk of rock in the very middle, and all we'd hear from Zerg players is:
Rocks. Rocks everywhere.
Let's give these maps a few weeks on the ladder before we crucify them.
you do know like everybody complains about it not just zergs?
Recent surveys on TL show a large majority as Zerg. If you look around, T and P are somewhat split on the subject, but that unanimous Zerg collective make it seem like most players hate rocks.
On July 12 2011 10:12 OhNoItsTheMunch wrote: So I took a look at the test maps and all i can say is:
Rocks. Rocks everywhere.
I swear this is all Zergs care about. Blizz could release a map with 40 mineral patches per base, no ramps or chokes, bases on complete opposites of a max sized map, and 1 chunk of rock in the very middle, and all we'd hear from Zerg players is:
Let's give these maps a few weeks on the ladder before we crucify them.
Well I am a zerg, but personally like to see how a map with LESS minerals per base would work out. If the assumption that "zerg can take expansions easier" is true, at what point is it imbalanced for zerg if it forces players to expand more. What if they made 5-6 patches?
I thought he meant 40 mineral patches with normal count.. Just because the other races are a minority vote against rocks doesn't mean their votes don't count. And more than half of players dislike the rockfest. But we'll get used to it and accept it because that's the reality of the blizzard ladder.
On July 12 2011 10:12 OhNoItsTheMunch wrote: So I took a look at the test maps and all i can say is:
Rocks. Rocks everywhere.
I swear this is all Zergs care about. Blizz could release a map with 40 mineral patches per base, no ramps or chokes, bases on complete opposites of a max sized map, and 1 chunk of rock in the very middle, and all we'd hear from Zerg players is:
Rocks. Rocks everywhere.
Let's give these maps a few weeks on the ladder before we crucify them.
you do know like everybody complains about it not just zergs?
On July 12 2011 10:12 OhNoItsTheMunch wrote: So I took a look at the test maps and all i can say is:
Rocks. Rocks everywhere.
I swear this is all Zergs care about. Blizz could release a map with 40 mineral patches per base, no ramps or chokes, bases on complete opposites of a max sized map, and 1 chunk of rock in the very middle, and all we'd hear from Zerg players is:
Rocks. Rocks everywhere.
Let's give these maps a few weeks on the ladder before we crucify them.
you do know like everybody complains about it not just zergs?
says the zerg
I have also seen lots of pro terrans like Jinro say they don't like it and protosses. -_-
On July 12 2011 10:12 OhNoItsTheMunch wrote: So I took a look at the test maps and all i can say is:
Rocks. Rocks everywhere.
I swear this is all Zergs care about. Blizz could release a map with 40 mineral patches per base, no ramps or chokes, bases on complete opposites of a max sized map, and 1 chunk of rock in the very middle, and all we'd hear from Zerg players is:
Rocks. Rocks everywhere.
Let's give these maps a few weeks on the ladder before we crucify them.
you do know like everybody complains about it not just zergs?
Recent surveys on TL show a large majority as Zerg. If you look around, T and P are somewhat split on the subject, but that unanimous Zerg collective make it seem like most players hate rocks.
I hope that you understand why all Zergs hate rocks, because Zerg has the hardest time killing them.
Rocks have a limited surface area which means that you can only put so many lings on a rock at one time. Rocks blocking paths are probably the worst when it comes to this. Zealots do a lot more dps per surface area than a ling, which means that it isn't as big of a problem. Killing rocks is really easy with multiple stalkers/marines/marauders, which are very standard units to get for any P/T build.
In order for a zerg player to kill rocks in a remotely timely manner they have to build roaches, which may or may not be called for in their game plan.
On July 12 2011 13:00 Tantaburs wrote: Hold on is this a PTR where the only change is the Icon for blue flame?
And maps, and general performance fixes. we dont need any unit balance changes in sc2 at the moment, not at the same time as new maps as the maps is a balance factor in itself.
On July 12 2011 10:12 OhNoItsTheMunch wrote: So I took a look at the test maps and all i can say is:
Rocks. Rocks everywhere.
I swear this is all Zergs care about. Blizz could release a map with 40 mineral patches per base, no ramps or chokes, bases on complete opposites of a max sized map, and 1 chunk of rock in the very middle, and all we'd hear from Zerg players is:
Rocks. Rocks everywhere.
Let's give these maps a few weeks on the ladder before we crucify them.
you do know like everybody complains about it not just zergs?
Recent surveys on TL show a large majority as Zerg. If you look around, T and P are somewhat split on the subject, but that unanimous Zerg collective make it seem like most players hate rocks.
I hope that you understand why all Zergs hate rocks, because Zerg has the hardest time killing them.
Rocks have a limited surface area which means that you can only put so many lings on a rock at one time. Rocks blocking paths are probably the worst when it comes to this. Zealots do a lot more dps per surface area than a ling, which means that it isn't as big of a problem. Killing rocks is really easy with multiple stalkers/marines/marauders, which are very standard units to get for any P/T build.
In order for a zerg player to kill rocks in a remotely timely manner they have to build roaches, which may or may not be called for in their game plan.
Rocks also have 3 armors so lings deal 2 damage to them. Zealots deal 5x2 and marines deal 3 but since they are ranged, they much greater efficient.
On July 12 2011 13:24 DarKcS wrote: How did anyone get the new maps? Afaik they come from battle.net which is done, so arent stored locally..or are they?
I don't usually complain about imbalances, but the infestor is ridiculous. Seriously fuck the new fungals. Totally unnecessary for that to be changed, the infestor was already a good unit with neurals/infested terrans/original fungal.
Marines and blink stalkers are literally useless in late game vs zerg. Marines can be understandable in some sense, but stalkers? 125 min/50 gas is not cheap brah. And all thses other late game units for toss are crap when fungaled as well. HTS, Voids, coli, seriously wtf. Splitting units doesn't do much to help -_-
On July 12 2011 14:29 stormchaser wrote: I don't usually complain about imbalances, but the infestor is ridiculous. Seriously fuck the new fungals. Totally unnecessary for that to be changed, the infestor was already a good unit with neurals/infested terrans/original fungal.
Marines and blink stalkers are literally useless in late game vs zerg. Marines can be understandable in some sense, but stalkers? 125 min/50 gas is not cheap brah. And all thses other late game units for toss are crap when fungaled as well. HTS, Voids, coli, seriously wtf. Splitting units doesn't do much to help -_-
Somebody tell MC he's playing all wrong!!!
Anywho i agree with the whole anti rock sentiment. I guess i can't really judge till i play the maps but the rock novelty is really wearing off.
On July 12 2011 14:29 stormchaser wrote: I don't usually complain about imbalances, but the infestor is ridiculous. Seriously fuck the new fungals. Totally unnecessary for that to be changed, the infestor was already a good unit with neurals/infested terrans/original fungal.
Marines and blink stalkers are literally useless in late game vs zerg. Marines can be understandable in some sense, but stalkers? 125 min/50 gas is not cheap brah. And all thses other late game units for toss are crap when fungaled as well. HTS, Voids, coli, seriously wtf. Splitting units doesn't do much to help -_-
Somebody tell MC he's playing all wrong!!!
Anywho i agree with the whole anti rock sentiment. I guess i can't really judge till i play the maps but the rock novelty is really wearing off.
It's just such a frustrating unit to face in PvZ and kinda ruins the later stages of the matchup for me.
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock.
Agreed, Zerg was having unbelievable trouble with protoss deathballs for MONTHS, and the response was always, "Just play better noob lol"
And the thing is, Terrans already have the unit that'll beat brood/infestor, they just need to get good at using them.
Sorry if this is fanning the fire of a balance flame war, I just felt that was an important point to make.
The thing with rocks at the third on some maps is that say in ZvP and in ZvT in some circumstances the other player goes for a fast second, like a forge FE, or a 2 rax CC for example. A proper response for a zerg would would be to take a quick 3rd but with those rocks there it takes forever to kill them with lings or you have to get roaches. Nether is optimal for the zerg, just my option though.
Nice to see blue flame is going to be blue in the picture, never did make sense for it not to be.
On July 12 2011 04:53 iamke55 wrote: They actually changed something about blue flame hellions and DIDN'T nerf the ridiculous damage it does? I don't understand how Blizzard can look at BFH, banshees, and infestor/BL and not think those are overpowered. I guess they want to make up for SC2's easier interface by making it "harder" in that 1 mistake loses you the game...
Brue frame is very micro intensive, and this color buff is huge for those in the community that have OCD. And I think you play Protoss.
I don't really have a problem with hellions doing ridic damage to light. What I do have a problem with is that hellions LAUGH at stalker shots(no joke). Even with preparation and stalkers, the hellions often run in, roast some probes and can get away with a whole crapton of stalkers shooting at them.
thats true, u can have like 8 stalkers and they still kill probes
On July 12 2011 04:53 iamke55 wrote: They actually changed something about blue flame hellions and DIDN'T nerf the ridiculous damage it does? I don't understand how Blizzard can look at BFH, banshees, and infestor/BL and not think those are overpowered. I guess they want to make up for SC2's easier interface by making it "harder" in that 1 mistake loses you the game...
Brue frame is very micro intensive, and this color buff is huge for those in the community that have OCD. And I think you play Protoss.
I don't really have a problem with hellions doing ridic damage to light. What I do have a problem with is that hellions LAUGH at stalker shots(no joke). Even with preparation and stalkers, the hellions often run in, roast some probes and can get away with a whole crapton of stalkers shooting at them.
thats true, u can have like 8 stalkers and they still kill probes
And how many helions? Of course like 5 helions outrun 8 stalkers, scout it and prepare for it better: blocking the entrance with your stalkers EH?
I remember there was a WoW patch in which one of the only changes was "leopards now properly show footprints when walking backwards in snow." Be glad it's not as much of a waste as that one, I guess.
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock.
Agreed, Zerg was having unbelievable trouble with protoss deathballs for MONTHS, and the response was always, "Just play better noob lol"
And the thing is, Terrans already have the unit that'll beat brood/infestor, they just need to get good at using them.
Sorry if this is fanning the fire of a balance flame war, I just felt that was an important point to make.
No. I use ghost viking, its still slightly OP. I think FG doesn't need to root in the first place, its already good.
On July 12 2011 04:53 iamke55 wrote: They actually changed something about blue flame hellions and DIDN'T nerf the ridiculous damage it does? I don't understand how Blizzard can look at BFH, banshees, and infestor/BL and not think those are overpowered. I guess they want to make up for SC2's easier interface by making it "harder" in that 1 mistake loses you the game...
Brue frame is very micro intensive, and this color buff is huge for those in the community that have OCD. And I think you play Protoss.
I don't really have a problem with hellions doing ridic damage to light. What I do have a problem with is that hellions LAUGH at stalker shots(no joke). Even with preparation and stalkers, the hellions often run in, roast some probes and can get away with a whole crapton of stalkers shooting at them.
thats true, u can have like 8 stalkers and they still kill probes
And how many helions? Of course like 5 helions outrun 8 stalkers, scout it and prepare for it better: blocking the entrance with your stalkers EH?
8 Stalkers won't stop 4 hellions from killing probes unless you are able to completely block them from getting in, which is doable if you see it coming perfectly, but it's pretty wishy-washy a lot of the time.
My bigger concern is that if the terran keeps making hellions, they actually become cost effective against stalkers in large numbers -_-. The AoE damage from them, and the absolute shit damage from the stalker combines to result in a much cheaper, mineral only anti-light unit demolish an armored, expensive gas unit.
Note that I don't think it's unbalanced really, but I do feel that a few units in this game are too punishing for a slight control mistake. No unit should be able to make your entire mineral line disappear with just a quick misstep. It's not really IMBA in the sense that it can be completely prevented through near perfect play, but it's too punishing for something that easy to execute.
Not just hellions, DTs, Banshees, burrowed roaches/infestors, etc.
Ever considered just spreading your stalkers out a bit? I mean its just like the banelings, a few numbers they are easy to deal with because they die to marines before they get close, once you more if you dont spread you stand no chance.. If they make 100 banelings you probably should have scouted it and made something else than marines... I dont think the mass hellion is really a "problem" as much as it is people letting Terrans get away with it.
Anyway, I mainly play zerg at the moment so what do I know
I really hope they look into the ghost in TvP. Seems a couple EMPs could turn the table completely no matter Protoss is 40 supplies up ( watch MC vs Puma game 1)
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock.
Agreed, Zerg was having unbelievable trouble with protoss deathballs for MONTHS, and the response was always, "Just play better noob lol"
And the thing is, Terrans already have the unit that'll beat brood/infestor, they just need to get good at using them.
Sorry if this is fanning the fire of a balance flame war, I just felt that was an important point to make.
No. I use ghost viking, its still slightly OP. I think FG doesn't need to root in the first place, its already good.
Zerg has to have something to deal with blinking stalkers. But rooting in itself is too strong and practically screws micro up. Once you get hit, you cant run back, you just sit there and take it.
One suggestion I have is to make Fungal Growth simply restrict movement like Ensnare from BW. I'm sure it would help just a little bit and wouldn't be a TOO unreasonable change.
ensare instead of root would be so much better, esp if stops blink still. At least then maybe stim marines could move a little bit ( and vikings for later ).
On July 12 2011 10:12 OhNoItsTheMunch wrote: So I took a look at the test maps and all i can say is:
Rocks. Rocks everywhere.
I swear this is all Zergs care about. Blizz could release a map with 40 mineral patches per base, no ramps or chokes, bases on complete opposites of a max sized map, and 1 chunk of rock in the very middle, and all we'd hear from Zerg players is:
Rocks. Rocks everywhere.
Let's give these maps a few weeks on the ladder before we crucify them.
you do know like everybody complains about it not just zergs?
Recent surveys on TL show a large majority as Zerg. If you look around, T and P are somewhat split on the subject, but that unanimous Zerg collective make it seem like most players hate rocks.
I hope that you understand why all Zergs hate rocks, because Zerg has the hardest time killing them.
Rocks have a limited surface area which means that you can only put so many lings on a rock at one time. Rocks blocking paths are probably the worst when it comes to this. Zealots do a lot more dps per surface area than a ling, which means that it isn't as big of a problem. Killing rocks is really easy with multiple stalkers/marines/marauders, which are very standard units to get for any P/T build.
In order for a zerg player to kill rocks in a remotely timely manner they have to build roaches, which may or may not be called for in their game plan.
Zerg benefits the most from having a fast "takeble" 3ed and/or multiple attack routes. If i was Zerg i would like all maps to be wide open, have many, many easy to take expansions and no rocks in sight. As a terran/ protoss though, i hate it when Zerg can take a 3ed/ 4th without making more then a few lings. Jump to 70 drones in 8 minutes and then make just attacking units. That's why we have the early pressure and yes, rocks I hate them to though for vs. non Zerg.
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock.
Agreed, Zerg was having unbelievable trouble with protoss deathballs for MONTHS, and the response was always, "Just play better noob lol"
And the thing is, Terrans already have the unit that'll beat brood/infestor, they just need to get good at using them.
Sorry if this is fanning the fire of a balance flame war, I just felt that was an important point to make.
No. I use ghost viking, its still slightly OP. I think FG doesn't need to root in the first place, its already good.
Zerg has to have something to deal with blinking stalkers. But rooting in itself is too strong and practically screws micro up. Once you get hit, you cant run back, you just sit there and take it.
Make it a projectile, maybe? I know they were planning on that a couple patches ago, though I can't remember if that was the patch that also included the damage/DPS buff.
On an unrelated note, I sorta wish they brought back VR speed given how good fungal is against anything armored/how popular brood lord/infestor/ling is lategame ZvP.
This blue flame change has been a long time coming, but I feel like it might be imbalanced in the lowest sections of the ladder where the noobies will now be able to find the upgrade easier. Bronze zergs beware.
On July 12 2011 15:25 tuho1234 wrote: I really hope they look into the ghost in TvP. Seems a couple EMPs could turn the table completely no matter Protoss is 40 supplies up ( watch MC vs Puma game 1)
protoss players need to feedback our ghosts - just like we need to emp/snipe your HTs =]~
Why is everyone whining about fungal? Infestors cost a crap ton of gas, and ghosts just hardcounter all t3, while being the cheapest t2 caster unit in the game. HTs are excellent to kill infestors. Also you can split your army to avoid fungal just like you do with banelings. And stim/blink a small group to snipe infestors.
And EMP takes about 1/3rd of the protoss units life INSTANTLY + 100 energy so in my opinion its a lot stronger while the ghost costing less gas.
On July 12 2011 18:37 Pred8oar wrote: Why is everyone whining about fungal? Infestors cost a crap ton of gas, and ghosts just hardcounter all t3, while being the cheapest t2 caster unit in the game. Also you can split your army to avoid fungal just like you do with banelings. And stim/blink a small group to snipe infestors.
-____- roaches and infesters can both be on the same hot key. All zerg has to do is 1 A and drop 3 4 F keys.... Toss, on the other hand has to drop FF and guardian shield, and if you got blink/HT got to cycle threw them to do blink or feed back and then with HT you actually have to FB befor a FG drops.... so much more micro for toss and terran its ridicules..
Lets not even start to compare HT to infesters..... it worst when HT had KA
On July 12 2011 18:37 Pred8oar wrote: Why is everyone whining about fungal? Infestors cost a crap ton of gas, and ghosts just hardcounter all t3, while being the cheapest t2 caster unit in the game. Also you can split your army to avoid fungal just like you do with banelings. And stim/blink a small group to snipe infestors.
-____- roaches and infesters can both be on the same hot key. All zerg has to do is 1 A and drop 3 4 F keys.... Toss, on the other hand has to drop FF and guardian shield, and if you got blink/HT got to cycle threw them to do blink or feed back and then with HT you actually have to FB befor a FG drops.... so much more micro for toss and terran its ridicules..
Zerg does benefit from having a concave..? Going 1a results in a dead Zerg army. Always.
Also, Zerg macro requires much more APM, MUCH MORE APM, so it is only fair to make the micro less demanding? Protoss is supposed to be the specialist army, remember?
On July 12 2011 18:37 Pred8oar wrote: Why is everyone whining about fungal? Infestors cost a crap ton of gas, and ghosts just hardcounter all t3, while being the cheapest t2 caster unit in the game. Also you can split your army to avoid fungal just like you do with banelings. And stim/blink a small group to snipe infestors.
-____- roaches and infesters can both be on the same hot key. All zerg has to do is 1 A and drop 3 4 F keys.... Toss, on the other hand has to drop FF and guardian shield, and if you got blink/HT got to cycle threw them to do blink or feed back and then with HT you actually have to FB befor a FG drops.... so much more micro for toss and terran its ridicules..
Zerg does benefit from having a concave..? Going 1a results in a dead Zerg army. Always.
Also, Zerg macro requires much more APM, MUCH MORE APM, so it is only fair to make the micro less demanding? Protoss is supposed to be the specialist army, remember?
toss has to drop FF or there dead ALL the time and if you have HT on the same hot key it hard to drop FF, plus if you look away from your mini map for 1 sec zerg army can get a surround like that and before you no it no matter how good the death ball or 200 food toss army is when its surrounded its dead....
On July 12 2011 18:37 Pred8oar wrote: Why is everyone whining about fungal? Infestors cost a crap ton of gas, and ghosts just hardcounter all t3, while being the cheapest t2 caster unit in the game. Also you can split your army to avoid fungal just like you do with banelings. And stim/blink a small group to snipe infestors.
-____- roaches and infesters can both be on the same hot key. All zerg has to do is 1 A and drop 3 4 F keys.... Toss, on the other hand has to drop FF and guardian shield, and if you got blink/HT got to cycle threw them to do blink or feed back and then with HT you actually have to FB befor a FG drops.... so much more micro for toss and terran its ridicules..
Lets not even start to compare HT to infesters..... it worst when HT had KA
Im not sure. At least againt ht/colossus mix, I can still attack their units. Against fungal, Im just stuck there getting hit.
^ is makes no sense. do not get me wrong KA was a lil OP, but you give zerg a buff on infester with there AK and infester is faster + you cant move out of a FG idk sound bla to me... AND 33% more damage to armor witch is all toss units....
A special sneak peek at new ladder maps is now available! Several performance and memory improvements have been made. "Player Left" messages will once again appear in replays. The Hellion's Infernal Pre-Igniter upgrade icon has been updated (now with more blue flames!). StarCraft II Editor Improvements
UI errors will now go into a newly-created Error Display Message window. Cooldowns shorter than 1/4 of a second no longer display on the command card.
As this is a test server, please anticipate uneven game performance, and note that restarts and downtime may occur without warning. We'll provide information regarding extended downtimes, should they occur, in the Public Test forum.
I love it!
Reality: Red -> Blue
Blizzard: Less blue -> More blue
That is the company that has made time a new concept.
On July 12 2011 01:02 Nerski wrote: Known Changes (checked all unit cost/stats via test map on PTR) - Blue Flame Picture Icon Change to Have Blue Flames
But when will they correct the roach speed / tunneling claws icons? They were swapped in beta and they've never been put back! I am outraged!! (tunneling claws has the speed icon; speed has the tunneling claws icon).
On July 12 2011 15:25 tuho1234 wrote: I really hope they look into the ghost in TvP. Seems a couple EMPs could turn the table completely no matter Protoss is 40 supplies up ( watch MC vs Puma game 1)
protoss players need to feedback our ghosts - just like we need to emp/snipe your HTs =]~
ghost has clock + longer range (emp range + radius =12 feedback = 9) At least make them equal
On July 12 2011 18:59 ki11z0ne wrote: ^ is makes no sense. do not get me wrong KA was a lil OP, but you give zerg a buff on infester with there AK and infester is faster + you cant move out of a FG idk sound bla to me... AND 33% more damage to armor witch is all toss units....
Protoss can recycle used HT's, Zerg have to wait for them to recharge....alls fair I guess
I tried to download the PTR patch but got this error message. Bnet appears to be down as well so I dunno if its that or something else that is wrong T.T;;
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock.
Agreed, Zerg was having unbelievable trouble with protoss deathballs for MONTHS, and the response was always, "Just play better noob lol"
And the thing is, Terrans already have the unit that'll beat brood/infestor, they just need to get good at using them.
Sorry if this is fanning the fire of a balance flame war, I just felt that was an important point to make.
Really ? Actually zerg is the race which has adapted the least from the BETA. Why ? Because almost everything which was considered 'op' from Terran/Protoss get nerfed or totally fucked up (reapers). Deathballs became not such a big problem after fungal growth buff, and all zergs say that they adapted, they made sick strategies, they are being the most innovative of all races and other type of this bu!!sh!t.
On July 12 2011 18:59 ki11z0ne wrote: ^ is makes no sense. do not get me wrong KA was a lil OP, but you give zerg a buff on infester with there AK and infester is faster + you cant move out of a FG idk sound bla to me... AND 33% more damage to armor witch is all toss units....
Protoss can recycle used HT's, Zerg have to wait for them to recharge....alls fair I guess
so it is fair if we can recycle a unit used only one time for which we had to research storm? FG doesnt need research. And archons dont storm nor feedback so....
On July 12 2011 18:59 ki11z0ne wrote: ^ is makes no sense. do not get me wrong KA was a lil OP, but you give zerg a buff on infester with there AK and infester is faster + you cant move out of a FG idk sound bla to me... AND 33% more damage to armor witch is all toss units....
Protoss can recycle used HT's, Zerg have to wait for them to recharge....alls fair I guess
so it is fair if we can recycle a unit used only one time for which we had to research storm? FG doesnt need research. And archons dont storm nor feedback so....
You still have to research the Energy upgrade in order to get Infesters to hatch with Fungal. This was due to infesters having a build time and HTs being warped instantly with Warp Gate.
Didn't we go already discuss this on the KA thread?
It's astonishing that this thread degrades into stupid pointless bitching about game balance when the PTR doesn't even contain any balance changes.
Ontopic: I am mildly concerned about joining Russian servers - I am under the impression that many russian players do not speak english? I often chat with opponents after a match, and being unable to do so is somewhat irritating (without learning russian, ofc )
On July 12 2011 22:33 Hairy wrote: It's astonishing that this thread degrades into stupid pointless bitching about game balance when the PTR doesn't even contain any balance changes.
In all honesty, people are really concerned with the state of the game once that icon change comes in
On July 12 2011 04:53 iamke55 wrote: They actually changed something about blue flame hellions and DIDN'T nerf the ridiculous damage it does? I don't understand how Blizzard can look at BFH, banshees, and infestor/BL and not think those are overpowered. I guess they want to make up for SC2's easier interface by making it "harder" in that 1 mistake loses you the game...
Brue frame is very micro intensive, and this color buff is huge for those in the community that have OCD. And I think you play Protoss.
I don't really have a problem with hellions doing ridic damage to light. What I do have a problem with is that hellions LAUGH at stalker shots(no joke). Even with preparation and stalkers, the hellions often run in, roast some probes and can get away with a whole crapton of stalkers shooting at them.
thats true, u can have like 8 stalkers and they still kill probes
And how many helions? Of course like 5 helions outrun 8 stalkers, scout it and prepare for it better: blocking the entrance with your stalkers EH?
Funny thing is, considering that gas is slightly more valuable more than minerals, hellions actually are equally cost efficient against stalkers; the bigger the sample size, the closer it favors Hellions. And let's not forget, in the early game, Protoss is sure to have zealots/sentries, not just stalkers, making the Hellions even more dangerous.
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock.
Agreed, Zerg was having unbelievable trouble with protoss deathballs for MONTHS, and the response was always, "Just play better noob lol"
And the thing is, Terrans already have the unit that'll beat brood/infestor, they just need to get good at using them.
Sorry if this is fanning the fire of a balance flame war, I just felt that was an important point to make.
Really ? Actually zerg is the race which has adapted the least from the BETA. Why ? Because almost everything which was considered 'op' from Terran/Protoss get nerfed or totally fucked up (reapers). Deathballs became not such a big problem after fungal growth buff, and all zergs say that they adapted, they made sick strategies, they are being the most innovative of all races and other type of this bu!!sh!t.
On July 12 2011 22:33 Hairy wrote: It's astonishing that this thread degrades into stupid pointless bitching about game balance when the PTR doesn't even contain any balance changes.
People are bitching about game balance precisely because this patch does not contain any balance changes.
Funny about the icon, I think there was always a disconnect going on in my head when I wanted to research it and the name was "blue flame" but the icon was a yellow flame. Can't believe they left it all this time like that. I am very keen to play some new maps, pretty bored with the current ones.
I think blizz wants to see how people respond to the new maps w/o also factoring in any balance changes. They will probably let season 3 get going then release a balance patch in the near future.
I'm seriously amaze that people are convince that infestors will got nerf. TLPD show us that the buff did make zerg come back to balance, not go to being stronger than other. :/
On July 12 2011 22:33 Hairy wrote: It's astonishing that this thread degrades into stupid pointless bitching about game balance when the PTR doesn't even contain any balance changes.
People are bitching about game balance precisely because this patch does not contain any balance changes.
yea i think a lot of people were themselves expecting changes. if im not mistaken i think most non-Z players who have complaints usually complain about infestors. but that is where the dissapointment is coming from
On July 12 2011 01:26 darkness wrote: I'm curious whether Blizzard will really patch infestor+broodlord as David Kim claimed it was OP. I also hope protoss doesn't get another nerf. ^^
Honestly I think infestor+bl being op is a crock.
Agreed, Zerg was having unbelievable trouble with protoss deathballs for MONTHS, and the response was always, "Just play better noob lol"
And the thing is, Terrans already have the unit that'll beat brood/infestor, they just need to get good at using them.
Sorry if this is fanning the fire of a balance flame war, I just felt that was an important point to make.
Really ? Actually zerg is the race which has adapted the least from the BETA. Why ? Because almost everything which was considered 'op' from Terran/Protoss get nerfed or totally fucked up (reapers). Deathballs became not such a big problem after fungal growth buff, and all zergs say that they adapted, they made sick strategies, they are being the most innovative of all races and other type of this bu!!sh!t.
agree lol, Zerg hadn't changed their play at all until infestor buff. I guess the QQ really worthy right?
On July 12 2011 10:12 OhNoItsTheMunch wrote: So I took a look at the test maps and all i can say is:
Rocks. Rocks everywhere.
I swear this is all Zergs care about. Blizz could release a map with 40 mineral patches per base, no ramps or chokes, bases on complete opposites of a max sized map, and 1 chunk of rock in the very middle, and all we'd hear from Zerg players is:
Rocks. Rocks everywhere.
Let's give these maps a few weeks on the ladder before we crucify them.
you do know like everybody complains about it not just zergs?
Recent surveys on TL show a large majority as Zerg. If you look around, T and P are somewhat split on the subject, but that unanimous Zerg collective make it seem like most players hate rocks.
I hope that you understand why all Zergs hate rocks, because Zerg has the hardest time killing them.
Rocks have a limited surface area which means that you can only put so many lings on a rock at one time. Rocks blocking paths are probably the worst when it comes to this. Zealots do a lot more dps per surface area than a ling, which means that it isn't as big of a problem. Killing rocks is really easy with multiple stalkers/marines/marauders, which are very standard units to get for any P/T build.
In order for a zerg player to kill rocks in a remotely timely manner they have to build roaches, which may or may not be called for in their game plan.
I understand why Zergs hate rocks. My only point is that they blow all instances of rocks out of proportion. You guys are all missing the joking points of my post and the clear hyperbole used to make them.
On a more serious note, I hope we get a chance to test drive these maps tonight, or tomorrow at the latest.
I see the rocks as a lack of creativity. If Blizzard wants to add doodads and other auxiliary things to their maps how about mix it up a bit. We're not all geologists. =(
A special sneak peek at new ladder maps is now available! Several performance and memory improvements have been made. "Player Left" messages will once again appear in replays. The Hellion's Infernal Pre-Igniter upgrade icon has been updated (now with more blue flames!). StarCraft II Editor Improvements
UI errors will now go into a newly-created Error Display Message window. Cooldowns shorter than 1/4 of a second no longer display on the command card.
As this is a test server, please anticipate uneven game performance, and note that restarts and downtime may occur without warning. We'll provide information regarding extended downtimes, should they occur, in the Public Test forum.
I love it!
Reality: Red -> Blue
Blizzard: Less blue -> More blue
That is the company that has made time a new concept.
Well, no. The new icon definitively contains a lot more blue flames than the old one, so their statement is absolutely correct.
On July 12 2011 19:04 Jiddra wrote: Official Notes (from removed June 21's blog)
StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty - PTR Patch 1.3.5
Table of Contents
General StarCraft II Editor Improvements
General
A special sneak peek at new ladder maps is now available! Several performance and memory improvements have been made. "Player Left" messages will once again appear in replays. The Hellion's Infernal Pre-Igniter upgrade icon has been updated (now with more blue flames!). StarCraft II Editor Improvements
UI errors will now go into a newly-created Error Display Message window. Cooldowns shorter than 1/4 of a second no longer display on the command card.
As this is a test server, please anticipate uneven game performance, and note that restarts and downtime may occur without warning. We'll provide information regarding extended downtimes, should they occur, in the Public Test forum.
I love it!
Reality: Red -> Blue
Blizzard: Less blue -> More blue
That is the company that has made time a new concept.
Well, no. The new icon definitively contains a lot more blue flames than the old one, so their statement is absolutely correct.
And what part makes Jiddra's statement wrong exactly?
On July 13 2011 03:27 aksfjh wrote: I understand why Zergs hate rocks. My only point is that they blow all instances of rocks out of proportion. You guys are all missing the joking points of my post and the clear hyperbole used to make them.
On a more serious note, I hope we get a chance to test drive these maps tonight, or tomorrow at the latest.
Sorry if I came off a bit harsh. I just hate that rocks are playing an increasingly large role in the maps when the difficulty of clearing those rocks in the early stages of the game is not balanced between the races.
I'm perfectly fine with rocks that don't need to be broken till later in the game, such as those blocking alternate attack paths, back doors, and gold expos, but not those blocking access to early expos.
Examples of 'ok' rocks are the ones in the center path on scrap, the rocks to open up alternate routes on GSL crevasse. By the time that these rocks 'need' to be opened up higher tier units are out that are much better at breaking them down in a timely manner.
On July 12 2011 01:02 Nerski wrote: Test server is back up any changes not shown just yet...I'll update this post as soon as any changes can be figured out.
Currently (7/11/11) Known Changes (checked all unit cost/stats via test map on PTR) - Blue Flame Picture Icon Change to Have Blue Flames
[/QUOTE]
Hopefully IdrA will stop qqing about blizzard not making awesome patch changes now.
On July 12 2011 01:02 Nerski wrote: Test server is back up any changes not shown just yet...I'll update this post as soon as any changes can be figured out.
Currently (7/11/11) Known Changes (checked all unit cost/stats via test map on PTR) - Blue Flame Picture Icon Change to Have Blue Flames
Hopefully IdrA will stop qqing about blizzard not making awesome patch changes now.
Hopefully people stop being snide about players far better than them.
so THIS is why blizz has fallen off the face of the earth for the past month or so! Heaven forbid that we have the red flame icon for the infernal pre-igniter!
On July 12 2011 01:08 Jsanko wrote: People were asking for patch, so they released one without any changes.
It's sad that people idolize David Kim, a guy whose sole accomplishement was to dominate the first 3 weeks of Beta after several years of solo-practice. A guy who also said that it was no big deal if several units/abilities had no point whatsoever in high level multiplayer.
With the exception of roaches to 2 food, warpgate research time increase, I can't think at one single change which was really good in the absolute since Beta.
They always chose the solution of facility, the mindless 1 dimensional approach. Warpgate is tough to deal with in the beginning ? Increase the research time ad infinitim... Zerg have a hardtime against tanks ? Decrease the dmg... Against HSM? Decrease the dmg, make it useless if needed... etc etc...
Eh, I actually agree with him that its not a big deal if some units are useless for competitive play... in 99% of situations.
Ghosts in SC1 were useless most of the time but could still be made in that 1% and it was cool. People (except for Liquid`Drone of course :D!) thought queens were useless in SC1 for like 12 years then suddenly they are standard.
On July 12 2011 01:08 Jsanko wrote: People were asking for patch, so they released one without any changes.
It's sad that people idolize David Kim, a guy whose sole accomplishement was to dominate the first 3 weeks of Beta after several years of solo-practice. A guy who also said that it was no big deal if several units/abilities had no point whatsoever in high level multiplayer.
With the exception of roaches to 2 food, warpgate research time increase, I can't think at one single change which was really good in the absolute since Beta.
They always chose the solution of facility, the mindless 1 dimensional approach. Warpgate is tough to deal with in the beginning ? Increase the research time ad infinitim... Zerg have a hardtime against tanks ? Decrease the dmg... Against HSM? Decrease the dmg, make it useless if needed... etc etc...
Eh, I actually agree with him that its not a big deal if some units are useless for competitive play... in 99% of situations.
Ghosts in SC1 were useless most of the time but could still be made in that 1% and it was cool. People (except for Liquid`Drone of course :D!) thought queens were useless in SC1 for like 12 years then suddenly they are standard.
Agree ^_^
I think it is definitely good they try to make many strategies viable, but even if a unit is "useless" there will always be some unique case where they have a use, and it's just that much more exciting when they are used well.
Also remember the expansion will still come out, I expect units like the Raven and etc. will be "fixed" and no one unit will be as rare as Ghosts like in BW. If not, it won't be tooo big of a deal like David Kim apparently said as long as the competitive scene has a wide enough variety of strategies and units to use. After all, it's important to keep "useless" units/abilities in for newbies to love and continue to play the game, or possibly even for team games.
On July 13 2011 15:30 SoniStreet wrote: Hey guys, I was just browsing the EU SC2 Battle.net forum and came across this current hot topic. http://eu.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/1088191100 which states:
Zerg
• The Ultralisk’s arc-shaped damage area is now centered at the front of the Ultralisk instead of at its center.
On July 13 2011 15:30 SoniStreet wrote: Hey guys, I was just browsing the EU SC2 Battle.net forum and came across this current hot topic. http://eu.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/1088191100 which states:
Zerg
• The Ultralisk’s arc-shaped damage area is now centered at the front of the Ultralisk instead of at its center.
Sorry didn't know it was an old bumped topic, I will check from now on before posting something like this, but it was just so weird that a patch hit live and this topic becomes one of the top 3... weird. Thanks for pointing out though.
On July 12 2011 01:08 Jsanko wrote: People were asking for patch, so they released one without any changes.
It's sad that people idolize David Kim, a guy whose sole accomplishement was to dominate the first 3 weeks of Beta after several years of solo-practice. A guy who also said that it was no big deal if several units/abilities had no point whatsoever in high level multiplayer.
With the exception of roaches to 2 food, warpgate research time increase, I can't think at one single change which was really good in the absolute since Beta.
They always chose the solution of facility, the mindless 1 dimensional approach. Warpgate is tough to deal with in the beginning ? Increase the research time ad infinitim... Zerg have a hardtime against tanks ? Decrease the dmg... Against HSM? Decrease the dmg, make it useless if needed... etc etc...
Eh, I actually agree with him that its not a big deal if some units are useless for competitive play... in 99% of situations.
Ghosts in SC1 were useless most of the time but could still be made in that 1% and it was cool. People (except for Liquid`Drone of course :D!) thought queens were useless in SC1 for like 12 years then suddenly they are standard.
And let's not forget scouts, devourers(except very rarely ZvZ), valkyries recently, etc. If anything, SC2 doesn't have enough fluff units yet.
Seems like a small patch meant to fix small things. I am glad that the Pre-Igniter icon is getting a new icon. The old one never made sense. Get an upgrade with an orange flame to get blue flame? Confused me the first time that I saw a commentary where someone was doing a blue flame drop waaay back in the beta.
On July 12 2011 01:08 Jsanko wrote: People were asking for patch, so they released one without any changes.
It's sad that people idolize David Kim, a guy whose sole accomplishement was to dominate the first 3 weeks of Beta after several years of solo-practice. A guy who also said that it was no big deal if several units/abilities had no point whatsoever in high level multiplayer.
With the exception of roaches to 2 food, warpgate research time increase, I can't think at one single change which was really good in the absolute since Beta.
They always chose the solution of facility, the mindless 1 dimensional approach. Warpgate is tough to deal with in the beginning ? Increase the research time ad infinitim... Zerg have a hardtime against tanks ? Decrease the dmg... Against HSM? Decrease the dmg, make it useless if needed... etc etc...
Thats just selective memory, I can think of lots of good changes. The reduction to Thor size, for example, was a fantastic change. It made repairing thors less effective (a big issue at the time) and made them less of a clunky, annoying, dragoon-ai'd unit.
Raising priority on repairing SCVs was also fantastic. It lets SCVs operate as meat shields still, but prevents Zealot/Lings from running around like morons.
The adjusted Obs cost. Instead of just nerfing banshee timings they addressed a large issue of the protoss race.
I also thing the recent changes to Archon's were fantastic. Sure, there are some silly, one dimensional changes, but a lot of the changes have been thoughtful and effective. These are the changes that you forget WERE changes. That you just accept as how the game is.
On July 12 2011 01:08 Jsanko wrote: People were asking for patch, so they released one without any changes.
It's sad that people idolize David Kim, a guy whose sole accomplishement was to dominate the first 3 weeks of Beta after several years of solo-practice. A guy who also said that it was no big deal if several units/abilities had no point whatsoever in high level multiplayer.
With the exception of roaches to 2 food, warpgate research time increase, I can't think at one single change which was really good in the absolute since Beta.
They always chose the solution of facility, the mindless 1 dimensional approach. Warpgate is tough to deal with in the beginning ? Increase the research time ad infinitim... Zerg have a hardtime against tanks ? Decrease the dmg... Against HSM? Decrease the dmg, make it useless if needed... etc etc...
Eh, I actually agree with him that its not a big deal if some units are useless for competitive play... in 99% of situations.
Ghosts in SC1 were useless most of the time but could still be made in that 1% and it was cool. People (except for Liquid`Drone of course :D!) thought queens were useless in SC1 for like 12 years then suddenly they are standard.
Jinro giving a good point (again). Units that are useless now might not be useless later. IIRC at NASL Artosis mentioned that the first years of SC1, everyone said vultures are horrible and you shouldn't build them (i myself often was on the 'vultures are good' side back then but got shot down so i followed the majority)... now they are standard (i soooo could have been a progamer now ).
In a year or two, we might see ravens with HSM every game moving in front of the army and shooting their missiles into clumps of banelings waiting to run into the terran army, denying the green wave wiping the whole terran ball... or for something i can't even imagine now.
Also, people now start to use overseers more for contamination. They aren't just quicker scout-overlords and mobile detection, they can delay the tech (and the following timing push) of your opponent significantly.
SC2 is currently in quite a good state, i can't think of anything that is really "imba", "broken" or completely useless (well, except for the medivac energy upgrade :p), if you are creative you can think of uses for every unit, eventhough you might not (yet) find a way to integrate it into standard play.
On July 12 2011 01:08 Jsanko wrote: People were asking for patch, so they released one without any changes.
It's sad that people idolize David Kim, a guy whose sole accomplishement was to dominate the first 3 weeks of Beta after several years of solo-practice. A guy who also said that it was no big deal if several units/abilities had no point whatsoever in high level multiplayer.
With the exception of roaches to 2 food, warpgate research time increase, I can't think at one single change which was really good in the absolute since Beta.
They always chose the solution of facility, the mindless 1 dimensional approach. Warpgate is tough to deal with in the beginning ? Increase the research time ad infinitim... Zerg have a hardtime against tanks ? Decrease the dmg... Against HSM? Decrease the dmg, make it useless if needed... etc etc...
Eh, I actually agree with him that its not a big deal if some units are useless for competitive play... in 99% of situations.
Ghosts in SC1 were useless most of the time but could still be made in that 1% and it was cool. People (except for Liquid`Drone of course :D!) thought queens were useless in SC1 for like 12 years then suddenly they are standard.
Jinro giving a good point (again). Units that are useless now might not be useless later. IIRC at NASL Artosis mentioned that the first years of SC1, everyone said vultures are horrible and you shouldn't build them (i myself often was on the 'vultures are good' side back then but got shot down so i followed the majority)... now they are standard (i soooo could have been a progamer now ).
In a year or two, we might see ravens with HSM every game moving in front of the army and shooting their missiles into clumps of banelings waiting to run into the terran army, denying the green wave wiping the whole terran ball... or for something i can't even imagine now.
Also, people now start to use overseers more for contamination. They aren't just quicker scout-overlords and mobile detection, they can delay the tech (and the following timing push) of your opponent significantly.
SC2 is currently in quite a good state, i can't think of anything that is really "imba", "broken" or completely useless (well, except for the medivac energy upgrade :p), if you are creative you can think of uses for every unit, eventhough you might not (yet) find a way to integrate it into standard play.
Yeah I agree. I mean even in Sc2 look at infestors.. not many zergs used to build them now they are way more standard! I think that the "useless" units of today might be the "standard" units of tomorrow. Plus, it makes the game much more versatile imho. I mean you have the OPTION to build ravens with HSM, and let's see where that gets us
To everyone complaining about name changes/clan support, if you really think they are adding that stuff before the expansion you're crazy, odds are they've already developed all of them, they're just waiting to add them
I used to think infestor brood was op, and im a zerg player. My life changed when a grandmaster terran used ghosts on me. He emped half of my infestors and sniped 4 broodlords out of 6, the vikings and marines cleaned up the rest, at the same time he dropped me and i lost.
On July 12 2011 01:08 Jsanko wrote: People were asking for patch, so they released one without any changes.
It's sad that people idolize David Kim, a guy whose sole accomplishement was to dominate the first 3 weeks of Beta after several years of solo-practice. A guy who also said that it was no big deal if several units/abilities had no point whatsoever in high level multiplayer.
With the exception of roaches to 2 food, warpgate research time increase, I can't think at one single change which was really good in the absolute since Beta.
They always chose the solution of facility, the mindless 1 dimensional approach. Warpgate is tough to deal with in the beginning ? Increase the research time ad infinitim... Zerg have a hardtime against tanks ? Decrease the dmg... Against HSM? Decrease the dmg, make it useless if needed... etc etc...
Eh, I actually agree with him that its not a big deal if some units are useless for competitive play... in 99% of situations.
Ghosts in SC1 were useless most of the time but could still be made in that 1% and it was cool. People (except for Liquid`Drone of course :D!) thought queens were useless in SC1 for like 12 years then suddenly they are standard.
Jinro giving a good point (again). Units that are useless now might not be useless later. IIRC at NASL Artosis mentioned that the first years of SC1, everyone said vultures are horrible and you shouldn't build them (i myself often was on the 'vultures are good' side back then but got shot down so i followed the majority)... now they are standard (i soooo could have been a progamer now ).
In a year or two, we might see ravens with HSM every game moving in front of the army and shooting their missiles into clumps of banelings waiting to run into the terran army, denying the green wave wiping the whole terran ball... or for something i can't even imagine now.
Also, people now start to use overseers more for contamination. They aren't just quicker scout-overlords and mobile detection, they can delay the tech (and the following timing push) of your opponent significantly.
SC2 is currently in quite a good state, i can't think of anything that is really "imba", "broken" or completely useless (well, except for the medivac energy upgrade :p), if you are creative you can think of uses for every unit, eventhough you might not (yet) find a way to integrate it into standard play.
Yeah I agree. I mean even in Sc2 look at infestors.. not many zergs used to build them now they are way more standard! I think that the "useless" units of today might be the "standard" units of tomorrow. Plus, it makes the game much more versatile imho. I mean you have the OPTION to build ravens with HSM, and let's see where that gets us
Well to be fair, people used infestors before aswell. But when patch 1.3.0 hit everyone started using them alot more. This has nothing to do with how the metagame has changed. Blizzard made the infestor alot more powerful through balancing.
AH, wonderful. The only three things I have been concerned with in the past 6 months are: 1. Universal Healthcare 2. Gay marriage legislation 3. The icon for Infernal Pre-Igniter.
On July 13 2011 18:51 Darclite wrote: AH, wonderful. The only three things I have been concerned with in the past 6 months are: 1. Universal Healthcare 2. Gay marriage legislation 3. The icon for Infernal Pre-Igniter.
At least I can rest a little bit easier.
You really value universal healthcare over the pre-igniter icon?
How do you even sleep at night?
- - -
The fact that the blue flame icon is of a red flame has always confused me a bit. It's nice that they're fixing it. xD
Yeah I agree. I mean even in Sc2 look at infestors.. not many zergs used to build them now they are way more standard! I think that the "useless" units of today might be the "standard" units of tomorrow. Plus, it makes the game much more versatile imho. I mean you have the OPTION to build ravens with HSM, and let's see where that gets us
Yeah, but that was a change due to patching ( they increaed FG damge to armored), BW got its last patch years ago, and its metagame evolution was due to player, not to patch...
Yeah I agree. I mean even in Sc2 look at infestors.. not many zergs used to build them now they are way more standard! I think that the "useless" units of today might be the "standard" units of tomorrow. Plus, it makes the game much more versatile imho. I mean you have the OPTION to build ravens with HSM, and let's see where that gets us
Yeah, but that was a change due to patching ( they increaed FG damge to armored), BW got its last patch years ago, and its metagame evolution was due to player, not to patch...
It was not because of the increase of damage to armored, it was cutting the duration in half making it much more useful as a dps spell rather than just a hold.
I wonder why they dont implement team stats for team games. When watching a team rep and the score screen its very hard to get a picture of the overall team performance because you have to add all the individual players stats. Especially if it is a 4v4!
On July 13 2011 20:56 Doodsmack wrote: So the PTR is working for other people? I'm getting an error message during patching. This is just after I installed the relocalizer...
Yeah I get the error message at 99% that I'm sure you're also getting.
On July 13 2011 20:56 Doodsmack wrote: So the PTR is working for other people? I'm getting an error message during patching. This is just after I installed the relocalizer...
Yeah I get the error message at 99% that I'm sure you're also getting.
Several performance and memory improvements have been made.
I didn't really pay attention to this the first time but now I noticed that this seems important - No more memory leaks?
I'm not sure about others but if I have Starcraft 2 running a long time (just playing normal maps, so it's not custom maps causing this), memory usage keeps going higher and higher and it starts to lag.
Same thing with the editor (sometimes it becomes really laggy after hours of use, requires a restart).
Anyway good news for those who have also experienced this (assuming they fixed this that is).
PTR really is up now... I am playing some games on it. Don't know what to think about the new maps yet. The Rush map feels a bit odd. And behind your mineral line theres a lot of comfortable places for terran drops... As for the rest I still need to play more to see what I think.
Confirmed PTR is up, and for those asking what the map pool is, that is still up for debate i guess... The PTR ladder only has the 4 new maps, so we have no hints on what maps they are replacing these with.
Wooo finally up!! And now I can't play... hrm tonight its testing time!!
People saying the maps are uninspirering has to remember that people forced blizz to do that themselfs.
Maps like Desert Oasis will never see the light of day again due to the massive whining of having to change the style of play even though that map for instance created some of the most dynamic games of all.
Now all we got is simple symmetric maps that aren't allowed to do too much to freak you out. So enjoy that!
I am happy with anything new personally, so really looking forward to the new ladder maps.
Depending on the maps they take out, I may be switching away from the ladder to just playing people in my clan/that I know on better maps. I've played them all and all but the macro maps are a joke. The "normal" maps are absolutely ridiculous. If they're wanting terrans to 2rax, zergs to roach/ling all in, and protoss to return to thier 1 base all in ways, then blizzard will be successful.
I guess it all comes down to what maps they take out, if any.
People saying the maps are uninspirering has to remember that people forced blizz to do that themselfs.
People don't complain about the GSL maps. Those maps are awesome. Has nothing to do with your Desert Oasis example.
when you say "People" you gotta remember that you talk about a very very very small part of the community. If the same amount of people played the GSL maps I assure you someone would come up with a problem with them, people are never satisfied. TL is not a reflection of the overall playerbase.
There is a reason why blizzard is not just copying the layout of the GSL maps, and most likely because they don't create the dynamic that Blizzard is trying to create. (not sure what dynamic exactly but Dustin constantly says in interviews that they want maps for all types of play like rush tactics, macro games and what not.)
Looking at the numbers in general, bases have spread out quite a bit by ground. Even the "rush" map gives quite a bit of leeway for the defender to respond. Meanwhile, cross spawns aren't nearly as far away as TDA. It's a fairly tame map update, tbqh.
when you say "People" you gotta remember that you talk about a very very very small part of the community. If the same amount of people played the GSL maps I assure you someone would come up with a problem with them, people are never satisfied. TL is not a reflection of the overall playerbase.
that's fine, but my post was in response to your accusation that we somehow "forced" Blizzard to make maps like this, which is ridiculous.
Close spots on those maps doesnt look so bad actually. They are WAY better than slag pits and meta on close spots... But we will see how it will look in the actuall game.
On July 14 2011 09:50 dabom88 wrote: Cross spots on those maps look okay. But god dammit Blizzard, when will they learn people don't like maps that spawn that closely.
Well so far it looks " okay " . The distance in close spawns is bigger than on meta or slag... will see tho in game
I really don't like the feel of the expo for Map 2 I believe right now (it has the two entrances). So far I have had my units do a couple of stupid things like split up around the blockage and march to their deaths individually.
Looking at the numbers in general, bases have spread out quite a bit by ground. Even the "rush" map gives quite a bit of leeway for the defender to respond. Meanwhile, cross spawns aren't nearly as far away as TDA. It's a fairly tame map update, tbqh.
Wow thank you so much! I was worried a couple of the close positions actually looked like they weren't that much farther, but wow, aside from the bigger map where it was 150 units ground distance, the average was 135-140, which is about 35 more then metal :D
On July 14 2011 09:09 Jayrod wrote: I approve of whatever map this is + Show Spoiler +
all joking aside does anyone think it would actually be viable to forge fe vs zerg on that map? it seems like if he just goes for a straight up roach bust you'd have to build a lot of cannons
If you've got a sea copy and your trying to access the ptr but are getting that irritating blue box that says ptr is not up now, log into starcraft normal, logout, log into your u.s account exit the game, and then execute the ptr file, the patch should download, and you'll be able to play the ptr once that is done.
On July 14 2011 11:38 seupac wrote: when i lose on ptr i blame it on the fact that half of my zerglings suffered severe brain damage from bashing their faces on rocks all game
On July 14 2011 11:38 seupac wrote: when i lose on ptr i blame it on the fact that half of my zerglings suffered severe brain damage from bashing their faces on rocks all game
Test map 2 is horrible for zerg, I could keep throwing forcefields at the natural, and kill infinite zerglings and roaches. I just dont see how blizzard didnt see this coming. It might be okay if they close off the hole in the natural, but then the rush distance feels like it's half the size of steppes of war.
EDIT: Nevermind.. misread your post... thought you were just saying the rush distance was that short as it currently was. I'll agree the map is just odd/bad.
On July 14 2011 11:23 neobowman wrote: Played a few games.
Haha wow nice find.
On July 14 2011 12:25 dartoo wrote: Test map 2 is horrible for zerg, I could keep throwing forcefields at the natural, and kill infinite zerglings and roaches. I just dont see how blizzard didnt see this coming. It might be okay if they close off the hole in the natural, but then the rush distance feels like it's half the size of steppes of war.
The wording in the last sentence is confusing... if they close off the hole, the rush distance would be longer right?
^^ ahh yes, I meant even if they do close the hole off, the rush distance is still feels pretty close, the best thing to do would be to remove close spawns on that map.
I spawned at 8'o clock, and my opp spawned at 10'o clock.
On July 14 2011 12:35 dartoo wrote: ^^ ahh yes, I meant even if they do close the hole off, the rush distance is still feels pretty close, the best thing to do would be to remove close spawns on that map.
yeah thats not happening blizzard doesn't believe in that I am pretty sure :p
If someone can upload the map number "4" into live region, we will be thankful
It's definitely there. Did you try creating it or joining it? Joining, it's lost on a further back page for some strange reason. Creating, it should be with the other 3.
On July 14 2011 12:35 dartoo wrote: ^^ ahh yes, I meant even if they do close the hole off, the rush distance is still feels pretty close, the best thing to do would be to remove close spawns on that map.
I spawned at 8'o clock, and my opp spawned at 10'o clock.
On July 14 2011 12:35 dartoo wrote: ^^ ahh yes, I meant even if they do close the hole off, the rush distance is still feels pretty close, the best thing to do would be to remove close spawns on that map.
I spawned at 8'o clock, and my opp spawned at 10'o clock.
This map is fucking horrible.
Yeah, I haven't played it against a Protoss yet but it looks incredibly bad, I can't see how that wall at the natural does anything but screw a Zerg over when facing force fields.
On July 14 2011 11:38 seupac wrote: when i lose on ptr i blame it on the fact that half of my zerglings suffered severe brain damage from bashing their faces on rocks all game
is that... Idra?
these new maps looks pretty bad, and the ones that do look good kinda look like metalopolis ><
Ive played every map except Testmap2. ( From a zerg point of view ) Testmap1 - Third bases are pretty bad at this map, its either a gold with rocks(that is easy to seige with tanks/colosis) or another main/expo. Whats with the bushes outside your nat? Tank pushes can be scary on this map because of the vision. Testmap3 - So far the best ive played. Open areas and multiple attack routes. Different games based on position too which is kinda cool. (only change i'd suggest is making the natural entrance a bit wider. Testmap4 - I reallyyyyyyy hate this ones. Tanks are brutal on this map seems easily abused
On July 14 2011 13:41 BroboCop wrote: are these maps posted on us ladder yet? if so, can someone tell me what to search? thanks!
These maps are on Public test server, you can acces it in your starcraft 2 folder, its an diffrent executable.
pretty hard for me to access those maps given that when I run it using the ptr client it goes "it's not up" at me = =;
EDIT: oh derp I found out why (and normally other people won't have this problem, some of my freaking shortcuts were screwed up or something o.O EU client overwrote all of them to use it's folder rather than the NA one.... T_T)
A little preview of Terran hot spots in 1.3.5. The last one was inspired by Boxer . The one showing the racks is just showing a nice 3 rax wall off location defending your nat.
On July 14 2011 13:56 DooMDash wrote: A little preview of Terran hot spots in 1.3.5. The last one was inspired by Boxer . The one showing the racks is just showing a nice 3 rax wall off location defending your nat.
On July 14 2011 13:56 DooMDash wrote: A little preview of Terran hot spots in 1.3.5. The last one was inspired by Boxer . The one showing the racks is just showing a nice 3 rax wall off location defending your nat.
as a zerg player, I now officially hate these maps.
Talk about abusive positions against zerg. Hopefully I'll be able to spend my veto's on these instead of the other maps I veto'd now.
On July 14 2011 13:58 sick_transit wrote: Which maps came out of the pool? Forgive me if there is a post about this somewhere above. Tried to find it, too much.
We don't know yet, the ladder on the ptr is only the 4 new maps.
On July 14 2011 13:56 DooMDash wrote: A little preview of Terran hot spots in 1.3.5. The last one was inspired by Boxer . The one showing the racks is just showing a nice 3 rax wall off location defending your nat.
On July 14 2011 13:56 DooMDash wrote: A little preview of Terran hot spots in 1.3.5. The last one was inspired by Boxer . The one showing the racks is just showing a nice 3 rax wall off location defending your nat.
On July 14 2011 13:56 DooMDash wrote: A little preview of Terran hot spots in 1.3.5. The last one was inspired by Boxer . The one showing the racks is just showing a nice 3 rax wall off location defending your nat.
On July 14 2011 09:09 Jayrod wrote: I approve of whatever map this is + Show Spoiler +
all joking aside does anyone think it would actually be viable to forge fe vs zerg on that map? it seems like if he just goes for a straight up roach bust you'd have to build a lot of cannons
well, u can do it on crevasse, should be pretty much the same thing i guess
On July 14 2011 13:56 DooMDash wrote: A little preview of Terran hot spots in 1.3.5. The last one was inspired by Boxer . The one showing the racks is just showing a nice 3 rax wall off location defending your nat.
On July 14 2011 13:56 DooMDash wrote: A little preview of Terran hot spots in 1.3.5. The last one was inspired by Boxer . The one showing the racks is just showing a nice 3 rax wall off location defending your nat.
i can't connect to PTR, says that my b.net account either doesn't include a copy of starcraft 2, or my game time has run out. Fun stuff. Obviously I've got a NA account and everything is in order. I can login on NA, but not PTR.
On July 14 2011 14:12 ribboo wrote: i can't connect to PTR, says that my b.net account either doesn't include a copy of starcraft 2, or my game time has run out. Fun stuff. Obviously I've got a NA account and everything is in order. I can login on NA, but not PTR.
your ptr files might be overwritten with EU data, if you also have an EU client installed. Someone else had that problem earlier.
On July 14 2011 13:56 DooMDash wrote: A little preview of Terran hot spots in 1.3.5. The last one was inspired by Boxer . The one showing the racks is just showing a nice 3 rax wall off location defending your nat.
On July 14 2011 13:56 DooMDash wrote: A little preview of Terran hot spots in 1.3.5. The last one was inspired by Boxer . The one showing the racks is just showing a nice 3 rax wall off location defending your nat.
Why isn't David Kim yet fired ? I don't get it ...
He can go along with Dustin Browder Pls.
It's called a PTR for a reason. They want to see how players will play these maps and show them any exploits that they might have missed that they feel are imbalanced. Honestly these maps feel pretty good after playing a few games on each one. Why should David Kim be fired? I think he and blizz have done a pretty good job, especially at listening to the community.
On July 14 2011 14:12 ribboo wrote: i can't connect to PTR, says that my b.net account either doesn't include a copy of starcraft 2, or my game time has run out. Fun stuff. Obviously I've got a NA account and everything is in order. I can login on NA, but not PTR.
your ptr files might be overwritten with EU data, if you also have an EU client installed. Someone else had that problem earlier.
thank you! that's probably the problem then. will do the reinstall/repair and whatnot, thanks a bunch
On July 14 2011 13:56 DooMDash wrote: A little preview of Terran hot spots in 1.3.5. The last one was inspired by Boxer . The one showing the racks is just showing a nice 3 rax wall off location defending your nat.
On July 14 2011 12:35 dartoo wrote: ^^ ahh yes, I meant even if they do close the hole off, the rush distance is still feels pretty close, the best thing to do would be to remove close spawns on that map.
I spawned at 8'o clock, and my opp spawned at 10'o clock.
Ah, ok
And yeah the map does seem imbalanced, but maybe (hopefully) it's not too bad... the rush distances are pretty short especially just outside of nat to outside of nat
TvP though, I think its great (and even TvT) because I think Mech will do pretty well on this map..
blizzard shouldn't try making maps, they obviously need a new approach. Maybe get some GSL maps and MLG in the rotation? I mean these maps are ok for bronze to gold league play, but i dont even think diamond and master level players could play a fair game on these maps.
On July 14 2011 13:56 DooMDash wrote: A little preview of Terran hot spots in 1.3.5. The last one was inspired by Boxer . The one showing the racks is just showing a nice 3 rax wall off location defending your nat.
Omg, that space map is ridiclous good for TvZ when u get close position i was able to assault his third with help from tanks in my main...... that was way to easy it was ridiclous. Theres like a million nooks and crannys to so after i took his third my tank spread was unbreakable.
On July 14 2011 14:12 ribboo wrote: i can't connect to PTR, says that my b.net account either doesn't include a copy of starcraft 2, or my game time has run out. Fun stuff. Obviously I've got a NA account and everything is in order. I can login on NA, but not PTR.
your ptr files might be overwritten with EU data, if you also have an EU client installed. Someone else had that problem earlier.
thank you! that's probably the problem then. will do the reinstall/repair and whatnot, thanks a bunch
if you installed EU after NA, the default shortcuts and such for SC2 are then renamed/path redone to EU, so you need to edit it to NA (properties) or just open it from the NA account.
at least that's if you're doing the same setup I'm doing, if not, meh.
The lightblue tile map with the rocks at the natural( if that narrows it down...) seems reasonably good, the others are just more terrible maps, that I won't have room to veto.
On July 14 2011 14:12 ribboo wrote: i can't connect to PTR, says that my b.net account either doesn't include a copy of starcraft 2, or my game time has run out. Fun stuff. Obviously I've got a NA account and everything is in order. I can login on NA, but not PTR.
your ptr files might be overwritten with EU data, if you also have an EU client installed. Someone else had that problem earlier.
thank you! that's probably the problem then. will do the reinstall/repair and whatnot, thanks a bunch
if you installed EU after NA, the default shortcuts and such for SC2 are then renamed/path redone to EU, so you need to edit it to NA (properties) or just open it from the NA account.
at least that's if you're doing the same setup I'm doing, if not, meh.
hehe, its a mess. think I installed EU first, then korea, then NA, might have reinstalled one of them at some point. tried the repair tool but couldn't get it to work. i am starting the .exe in my NA folder, thats for sure
I know you Zergs are raging mad looking at the screens I posted, but I think a lot of those are much easier to deal with then it would seem at first, and although there are some Terran spots on each map they do a good job of catering to Zergs advantages too else where.
I know I am a Terran player but I am more pleased with these maps over all old additions.
^^ hehe, of course you'll say that, I'm the one who got roflstomped even with BLs XD Given, I did move them near your marines He's right though, I just made some rather bad mistakes but there are some pretty abusive areas in those maps like that last one XD
On July 14 2011 14:37 Msr wrote: The lightblue tile map with the rocks at the natural( if that narrows it down...) seems reasonably good, the others are just more terrible maps, that I won't have room to veto.
I think you mean the purple one actually? Not very light
On July 14 2011 15:10 DannyJ wrote: Ew, they are worse than i thought they'd be
They actually aren't that bad at all. I played the PTR today, and they all seemed actually like really good and interesting maps. People are just way to quick to judge. I remember posts on Shakuras being a terrible map when it was being tested, now its one of the most beloved maps blizzard has released. My point is, don't be so quick to judge.
On July 14 2011 13:56 DooMDash wrote: A little preview of Terran hot spots in 1.3.5. The last one was inspired by Boxer . The one showing the racks is just showing a nice 3 rax wall off location defending your nat.
One thing I think is interesting with test map 2 is that the wall at your natural, you cant see the other side of the wall without something on the other side. May be ways to use that as an advantage early game, nestea spine crawler ZvP rush with ovey spotting? storm harass with ob/prism spotting? and do i even need to say one base terran all-ins with tanks and banshees on the other side of that wall :X i havent tested out if like void rays can kill turrets from the other side of wall yet but might be possible, just an intriguing aspect I think of that map.
NOTE: I am not saying any of those ideas are ones that would work, just throwing out what I believe to be some possible ways to use the wall, and if I am completely wrong then apologies
EDIT: test map 2 not test map 3 like i accidentally said at first
On July 14 2011 13:56 DooMDash wrote: A little preview of Terran hot spots in 1.3.5. The last one was inspired by Boxer . The one showing the racks is just showing a nice 3 rax wall off location defending your nat.
I don't understand the disconnect between two things at the moment: -The dev team is doing amazingly well with listening to pro & community feedback in order to make fantastic balance changes. -The dev team is continuing to add maps which are poorly designed and do not take into account pro & community feedback.
It seriously makes me scratch my head. Take a lesson from the map pools of major pro tournaments such as GSL & MLG and start making changes to the map pool that actually make sense. If blizzard wants this game to develop depth while being balanced and encouraging competition, they need to start paying more attention to the map pools.
Maps like tal-darim altar, crevasse, terminus RE, Iccup testbug etc. are the future of SC2 maps. On a daily basis we see pro level players showcase a plethora of complex strategies which are extremely enjoyable to watch on these larger, well-designed maps.
Maps like slag pits, delta quadrant, and 3/4 of the new test maps encourage all-in rush strategies as well specific abuses with tanks & bunker rushes generally in tvz which blizzard has worked to remove in the past (see changes to LT, shakuras, and how many of the smaller maps were turfed). I can't help but shake my head that the same mistakes being made over and over in map design. It's almost as if the goal here is to replace solid macro style tvz with cheese tailored to specific abusable characteristics on each map.
Extremely short distance to a nearly un-stoppable bunker position (Can't get at the scv to stop it from building on 3/4 sides). Test2. http://i.imgur.com/GJ9Oy.jpg
On July 14 2011 13:56 DooMDash wrote: A little preview of Terran hot spots in 1.3.5. The last one was inspired by Boxer . The one showing the racks is just showing a nice 3 rax wall off location defending your nat.
the fourth one is actually standard, the 3x3 buildings to wall off the nat but yeah i called 2 of them (the 3rd being able to siege the main on the macro map and the gas being seigeable on the lava map) but... well... ARRRRG BLIZZARD, WHY ME, WHY DID I HAVE TO PICK ZERG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! One can only hope that these problems will be fixed. + Show Spoiler +
I made an album of some more strong positions on the maps, bunker placements that you can wall in marines behind, or wall off a ramp from the bottom with only 2 bunkers.
On July 14 2011 15:24 Wr3k wrote: I don't understand the disconnect between two things at the moment: -The dev team is doing amazingly well with listening to pro & community feedback in order to make fantastic balance changes. -The dev team is continuing to add maps which are poorly designed and do not take into account pro & community feedback.
It seriously makes me scratch my head. Take a lesson from the map pools of major pro tournaments such as GSL & MLG and start making changes to the map pool that actually make sense. If blizzard wants this game to develop depth while being balanced and encouraging competition, they need to start paying more attention to the map pools.
Maps like tal-darim altar, crevasse, terminus RE, Iccup testbug etc. are the future of SC2 maps. On a daily basis we see pro level players showcase a plethora of complex strategies which are extremely enjoyable to watch on these larger, well-designed maps.
Maps like slag pits, delta quadrant, and 3/4 of the new test maps encourage all-in rush strategies as well specific abuses with tanks & bunker rushes generally in tvz which blizzard has worked to remove in the past (see changes to LT, shakuras, and how many of the smaller maps were turfed). I can't help but shake my head that the same mistakes being made over and over in map design. It's almost as if the goal here is to replace solid macro style tvz with cheese tailored to specific abusable characteristics on each map.
Extremely short distance to a nearly un-stoppable bunker position (Can't get at the scv to stop it from building on 3/4 sides). Test2. http://i.imgur.com/GJ9Oy.jpg
seriously though, blizzard removes maps like steppes because of rush distance....and then not only doesnt remove close spawns on metalopolis/shattered temple/slag pits/delta quadrant/backwater gultch, but then introduces maps for the upcoming season with those glaring positional imbalances as well as several others???
WTF?!?!?!!?!?
i would really love to sit in on a blizzard balance meeting and hear their rationalizations for these issues even after the vast majority of the community is in disagreement with their decisions.
On July 14 2011 15:24 Wr3k wrote: It's almost as if the goal here is to replace solid macro style tvz with cheese tailored to specific abusable characteristics on each map.
That's more or less catering to Terrans strengths. If Blizzard designed every map with out any advantageous positions or abuses Terrans would probably do pretty poorly since they are not meant to win in straight up macro battles. The maps are good because Terran can play to its strengths and abuses, yet they are still great macro maps with plenty of spots for Zergs to take advantage of.
On July 14 2011 15:24 Wr3k wrote: It's almost as if the goal here is to replace solid macro style tvz with cheese tailored to specific abusable characteristics on each map.
That's more or less catering to Terrans strengths. If Blizzard designed every map with out any advantageous positions or abuses Terrans would probably do pretty poorly since they are not meant to win in straight up macro battles. The maps are good because Terran can play to its strengths and abuses, yet they are still great macro maps with plenty of spots for Zergs to take advantage of.
Uhhhh, last I checked terran in every major tournament does fairly okay in straight up macro battles and didn't need cheesy or abusive map tactics to win. GSL particularly.
The maps are good because Terran can play to its strengths and abuses, yet they are still great macro maps with plenty of spots for Zergs to take advantage of.
so after losing my natural due to an "unsoppable" bunker rush, I can take advantage of being contained one base?
On July 14 2011 15:24 Wr3k wrote: It's almost as if the goal here is to replace solid macro style tvz with cheese tailored to specific abusable characteristics on each map.
That's more or less catering to Terrans strengths. If Blizzard designed every map with out any advantageous positions or abuses Terrans would probably do pretty poorly since they are not meant to win in straight up macro battles. The maps are good because Terran can play to its strengths and abuses, yet they are still great macro maps with plenty of spots for Zergs to take advantage of.
Uhhhh, last I checked terran in every major tournament does fairly okay in straight up macro battles and didn't need cheesy or abusive map tactics to win. GSL particularly.
I see Terrans abusing positions a lot, but the whole point of the matter is if all these abusable spots were that good the pros would be using them more. This means just because maps have abuseable spots does not make them broken, if they were broken we'd see the pros use them every game. Why don't they? Because the pros they are playing against actually prepare or know how to deal with the abuses, so the Terran pro cannot always rely on these.
So basically what I am saying is most people who will actually let these do damage to them repeatedly are not pro level for a reason.
On July 14 2011 09:09 Jayrod wrote: I approve of whatever map this is + Show Spoiler +
all joking aside does anyone think it would actually be viable to forge fe vs zerg on that map? it seems like if he just goes for a straight up roach bust you'd have to build a lot of cannons
Honestly its pretty rare now that you wouldnt have to build alot of cannons anyways. The Chinese version of the forge FE features 4 cannons at the natural on most maps and it doesnt really put you behind at all or make you unsafe if theyre well positioned. Taking their style I can safely forge FE on xel naga caverns already. I think the destructibles would give you enough time to make more wall or warp in more cannons, etc.
On July 14 2011 11:23 neobowman wrote: Played a few games.
Why would seige tanks right there even really matter and if hes got tanks there why dont you have any vision of the left of your base so he cant do that drop? Not so sure the map's to blame for those scenarios and honestly if a terran seiges up that far away from everything with the second exit on the base he be flanked. If he doesnt
On July 14 2011 15:24 Wr3k wrote: It's almost as if the goal here is to replace solid macro style tvz with cheese tailored to specific abusable characteristics on each map.
That's more or less catering to Terrans strengths. If Blizzard designed every map with out any advantageous positions or abuses Terrans would probably do pretty poorly since they are not meant to win in straight up macro battles. The maps are good because Terran can play to its strengths and abuses, yet they are still great macro maps with plenty of spots for Zergs to take advantage of.
On July 14 2011 11:23 neobowman wrote: Played a few games.
Why would seige tanks right there even really matter and if hes got tanks there why dont you have any vision of the left of your base so he cant do that drop? Not so sure the map's to blame for those scenarios and honestly if a terran seiges up that far away from everything with the second exit on the base he be flanked. If he doesnt
Well those tanks can hit the main and allow marines to be dropped in, and as for vision of that base, well if the Terran isn't allowed to seige tanks at his own third (where by the way, they can hit your main...) and so becuase of how a Terran can push through that he can kill your main pretty easily and then gets a high ground advantage killing your nat, where ALL of your tech will be as well, basically making it GG right there. Making in conclusion, that if Terran ever gets a third in those positions (which any competent T can) the Zerg will instantly lose.
On July 14 2011 15:24 Wr3k wrote: It's almost as if the goal here is to replace solid macro style tvz with cheese tailored to specific abusable characteristics on each map.
That's more or less catering to Terrans strengths. If Blizzard designed every map with out any advantageous positions or abuses Terrans would probably do pretty poorly since they are not meant to win in straight up macro battles. The maps are good because Terran can play to its strengths and abuses, yet they are still great macro maps with plenty of spots for Zergs to take advantage of.
MULE would like to have a word with you.
Inject/CB would like to have a word with you first.
On July 14 2011 15:24 Wr3k wrote: I don't understand the disconnect between two things at the moment: -The dev team is doing amazingly well with listening to pro & community feedback in order to make fantastic balance changes. -The dev team is continuing to add maps which are poorly designed and do not take into account pro & community feedback.
It seriously makes me scratch my head. Take a lesson from the map pools of major pro tournaments such as GSL & MLG and start making changes to the map pool that actually make sense. If blizzard wants this game to develop depth while being balanced and encouraging competition, they need to start paying more attention to the map pools.
Maps like tal-darim altar, crevasse, terminus RE, Iccup testbug etc. are the future of SC2 maps. On a daily basis we see pro level players showcase a plethora of complex strategies which are extremely enjoyable to watch on these larger, well-designed maps.
Maps like slag pits, delta quadrant, and 3/4 of the new test maps encourage all-in rush strategies as well specific abuses with tanks & bunker rushes generally in tvz which blizzard has worked to remove in the past (see changes to LT, shakuras, and how many of the smaller maps were turfed). I can't help but shake my head that the same mistakes being made over and over in map design. It's almost as if the goal here is to replace solid macro style tvz with cheese tailored to specific abusable characteristics on each map.
Extremely short distance to a nearly un-stoppable bunker position (Can't get at the scv to stop it from building on 3/4 sides). Test2. http://i.imgur.com/GJ9Oy.jpg
The Zerg entitlement that idra brought to SCII has to end. Let's just play on huge empty squares where no one can abuse anything, that way Zerg can win every game. As if they actually struggle anymore.
On July 14 2011 16:45 DooMDash wrote: The Zerg entitlement that idra brought to SCII has to end. Let's just play on huge empty squares where no one can abuse anything, that way Zerg can win every game. As if they actually struggle anymore.
The "Zerg QQ" has nothing at all to do with blizzards total incompetence to make any decent maps. These maps sucks regardless if the races are balanced or not. They are just trash from a map-making perspective.
On July 14 2011 16:45 DooMDash wrote: The Zerg entitlement that idra brought to SCII has to end. Let's just play on huge empty squares where no one can abuse anything, that way Zerg can win every game. As if they actually struggle anymore.
Damn those Zergs wanting maps that are fair to play on for all!
On July 14 2011 16:45 DooMDash wrote: The Zerg entitlement that idra brought to SCII has to end. Let's just play on huge empty squares where no one can abuse anything, that way Zerg can win every game. As if they actually struggle anymore.
Damn those Zergs wanting maps that are fair to play on for all!
Damn those Terrans for wanting maps that are fair to play on for all!
Seriously ledge abuse does not = not fair, there a tons of other things to consider when looking at a map.
Shak has a really cool abusable spot, and its a great map and pretty damn balanced. Zergs learned that, oh hey if I destroy the rocks before tank / medivac tech come I can just walk up and kill them with ease. Imagine that, Zerg players having to adapt to things.
Alter has one too, in fact most maps have plenty of spots where tanks can hit mains.
On July 14 2011 16:45 DooMDash wrote: The Zerg entitlement that idra brought to SCII has to end. Let's just play on huge empty squares where no one can abuse anything, that way Zerg can win every game. As if they actually struggle anymore.
The "Zerg QQ" has nothing at all to do with blizzards total incompetence to make any decent maps. These maps sucks regardless if the races are balanced or not. They are just trash from a map-making perspective.
And the fact that those changes actually mostly Burt Zerg (ex: most of the problems are weird bunker/tank places that really only affect ZvT or TvT (but TvT is well A mirror match-up so no one cares.) and everyone of those trash changes are hurting a fairly balanced albeit fragile ZvT early game, but the sheer number of seigable gases is just atrocious and I have no idea why Blizzard even let that ever hit the drawing board...
By the way, do we know which maps they are going to remove from the current pool? I assume they will dump Scrap Station and Delta Quadrant, but which one will be the other two? I can already foresee a bad joke like leaving Slag Pits and removing Shakuras/XelNaga because of the "its been there for long" factor :<
Regarding those maps, i find them not as bad as all these complains would like to make us believe, you people sound just as if they added Steppes of war x4 ~~
On July 14 2011 17:12 BobMcJohnson wrote: By the way, do we know which maps they are going to remove from the current pool? I assume they will dump Scrap Station and Delta Quadrant, but which one will be the other two? I can already foresee a bad joke like leaving Slag Pits and removing Shakuras/XelNaga because of the "its been there for long" factor :<
Regarding those maps, i find them not as bad as all these complains would like to make us believe, you people sound just as if they added Steppes of war x4 ~~
We do not know, the ptr map pool on ladder is only the 4 new maps.
On July 14 2011 16:45 DooMDash wrote: The Zerg entitlement that idra brought to SCII has to end. Let's just play on huge empty squares where no one can abuse anything, that way Zerg can win every game. As if they actually struggle anymore.
Damn those Zergs wanting maps that are fair to play on for all!
Damn those Terrans for wanting maps that are fair to play on for all!
Seriously ledge abuse does not = not fair, there a tons of other things to consider when looking at a map.
Shak has a really cool abusable spot, and its a great map and pretty damn balanced. Zergs learned that, oh hey if I destroy the rocks before tank / medivac tech come I can just walk up and kill them with ease. Imagine that, Zerg players having to adapt to things.
Alter has one too, in fact most maps have plenty of spots where tanks can hit mains.
Ya defending the push through the rocks was so easy tournaments didn't have to make it cross spawn positions only or remove the map and blizzard didn't edit it to remove the back door path on the ladder. Good thing that didn't have to happen!
Though I do remember zergs losing to it in GSL even if they destroyed the rocks early. Guess they were just really bad that they couldn't "kill them with ease"
Also are tournament maps big empty squares? Cause if people could play on a ladder with tournament maps there wouldn't be much complaining there should really be a choice of map pool.
On July 14 2011 15:33 Handfoot wrote: Anyone know what this means?
"SC2 Public Test server is not available right now. Please check http://www.battle.net/sc2/game/ptr/ for more information." Yet the PTR is up.
which server are you accessing it from (the shortcut you prob use is like pointing to which...folder...?)
you need to use the NA one.
I am using the NA one.
I have this problem also.
I changed my voices to korean recently by adjusting Variables.txt. Maybe this was the problem seeing as everyone else has no problem getting on the ptr?
On July 14 2011 16:45 DooMDash wrote: The Zerg entitlement that idra brought to SCII has to end. Let's just play on huge empty squares where no one can abuse anything, that way Zerg can win every game. As if they actually struggle anymore.
Damn those Zergs wanting maps that are fair to play on for all!
Damn those Terrans for wanting maps that are fair to play on for all!
Seriously ledge abuse does not = not fair, there a tons of other things to consider when looking at a map.
Shak has a really cool abusable spot, and its a great map and pretty damn balanced. Zergs learned that, oh hey if I destroy the rocks before tank / medivac tech come I can just walk up and kill them with ease. Imagine that, Zerg players having to adapt to things.
Alter has one too, in fact most maps have plenty of spots where tanks can hit mains.
Ya defending the push through the rocks was so easy tournaments didn't have to make it cross spawn positions only or remove the map and blizzard didn't edit it to remove the back door path on the ladder. Good thing that didn't have to happen!
Though I do remember zergs losing to it in GSL even if they destroyed the rocks early. Guess they were just really bad that they couldn't "kill them with ease"
Also are tournament maps big empty squares? Cause if people could play on a ladder with tournament maps there wouldn't be much complaining there should really be a choice of map pool.
Why everyone complains about siege tank positions against zerg? as if tanks only worked against zerg....We protoss dont complain so much but feel the same.
On July 14 2011 18:23 escruting wrote: Why everyone complains about siege tank positions against zerg? as if tanks only worked against zerg....We protoss dont complain so much but feel the same.
Zergs would probably be happy only if Blizzard creates a completely flat map without any rocks / cliffs and a gigantic battlefield in the middle with 30 bases all around. I'm not sure though, they probably find something else to bash Blizzard about if that were the case.
Dear Zerg users, do everybody a favor and at least *try* to appreciate Blizzard's effort to create new maps and on top of that, please try to stop acting as if your race is still the weakest because all sensible people agree the balance is quite OK right now. If anything, Terrans are saying Infestor/Broodlord is too strong. Zerg units too strong? Blasphemy!
A better option, actually, is to switch to T/P and see for yourself how terrifying it is to play vs a competent Zerg player who controls the entire map and has creep everywhere. You have no idea.
Apparently the majority of the 40 or so people on the PTR are d-bags. I think I was BM'd and trash talked more in the past couple hours than this entire season on Live. =/
On July 14 2011 16:45 DooMDash wrote: The Zerg entitlement that idra brought to SCII has to end. Let's just play on huge empty squares where no one can abuse anything, that way Zerg can win every game. As if they actually struggle anymore.
Damn those Zergs wanting maps that are fair to play on for all!
Zerg's definition of fairplay usually means no attacks until 4 bases, 80 workers and hive tech for the Zerg though so I'm not sure if their opinion on maps can really be trusted.
On July 14 2011 18:30 Officedrone wrote: Apparently the majority of the 40 or so people on the PTR are d-bags. I think I was BM'd and trash talked more in the past couple hours than this entire season on Live. =/
On July 14 2011 16:45 DooMDash wrote: The Zerg entitlement that idra brought to SCII has to end. Let's just play on huge empty squares where no one can abuse anything, that way Zerg can win every game. As if they actually struggle anymore.
Damn those Zergs wanting maps that are fair to play on for all!
Zerg's definition of fairplay usually means no attacks until 4 bases, 80 workers and hive tech for the Zerg though so I'm not sure if their opinion on maps can really be trusted.
Zergs would probably be happy only if Blizzard creates a completely flat map without any rocks / cliffs and a gigantic battlefield in the middle with 30 bases all around. I'm not sure though, they probably find something else to bash Blizzard about if that were the case.
Dear Zerg users, do everybody a favor and at least *try* to appreciate Blizzard's effort to create new maps and on top of that, please try to stop acting as if your race is still the weakest because all sensible people agree the balance is quite OK right now. If anything, Terrans are saying Infestor/Broodlord is too strong. Zerg units too strong? Blasphemy!
A better option, actually, is to switch to T/P and see for yourself how terrifying it is to play vs a competent Zerg player who controls the entire map and has creep everywhere. You have no idea.
Thank you !
Posts like this make my brain hurt so much. When will you people realise it has NOTHING to do about zerg's QQ. Its about blizzards maps being generally shitty with rocks everywhere, no accesible third, promoting 2 base allin play, and LOTS of map imbalances where people can really abuse certain postions. Like on these new maps where tanks can shoot FAR into the main on some positions.
And dont say "well zerg's just have to learn how to survive the map imbalances". Maybe people should LEARN how to play without counting on getting cheap ladder wins due to map imbalances.
You dont see all the terran/protoss pro's whining about GSL maps do you? Do you know why? BECAUSE THEY ARE GENERALLY GOOD MAPS. Otherwise we might just play on shit maps like Steppes of War and Delta Quadrant our entire lifes and lets see how well the game will prosper then.
On July 14 2011 18:30 Officedrone wrote: Apparently the majority of the 40 or so people on the PTR are d-bags. I think I was BM'd and trash talked more in the past couple hours than this entire season on Live. =/
Made me laugh :D Well but you can have the WHOLE changes right now! Isn't it incredible this new icon?
On July 14 2011 16:45 DooMDash wrote: The Zerg entitlement that idra brought to SCII has to end. Let's just play on huge empty squares where no one can abuse anything, that way Zerg can win every game. As if they actually struggle anymore.
Damn those Zergs wanting maps that are fair to play on for all!
Zerg's definition of fairplay usually means no attacks until 4 bases, 80 workers and hive tech for the Zerg though so I'm not sure if their opinion on maps can really be trusted.
Zergs would probably be happy only if Blizzard creates a completely flat map without any rocks / cliffs and a gigantic battlefield in the middle with 30 bases all around. I'm not sure though, they probably find something else to bash Blizzard about if that were the case.
Dear Zerg users, do everybody a favor and at least *try* to appreciate Blizzard's effort to create new maps and on top of that, please try to stop acting as if your race is still the weakest because all sensible people agree the balance is quite OK right now. If anything, Terrans are saying Infestor/Broodlord is too strong. Zerg units too strong? Blasphemy!
A better option, actually, is to switch to T/P and see for yourself how terrifying it is to play vs a competent Zerg player who controls the entire map and has creep everywhere. You have no idea.
Thank you !
Posts like this make my brain hurt so much. When will you people realise it has NOTHING to do about zerg's QQ. Its about blizzards maps being generally shitty with rocks everywhere, no accesible third, promoting 2 base allin play, and LOTS of map imbalances where people can really abuse certain postions. Like on these new maps where tanks can shoot FAR into the main on some positions.
And dont say "well zerg's just have to learn how to survive the map imbalances". Maybe people should LEARN how to play without counting on getting cheap ladder wins due to map imbalances.
You dont see all the terran/protoss pro's whining about GSL maps do you? Do you know why? BECAUSE THEY ARE GENERALLY GOOD MAPS. Otherwise we might just play on shit maps like Steppes of War and Delta Quadrant our entire lifes and lets see how well the game will prosper then.
I don't understand this, your second sentence states this isn't about Zerg QQ, then the rest of the post is pure Zerg whining.
Maybe you can understand the "zerg QQ" when the present maps which make it impossible to wall.
According to the (terran)community:
Steppes of war is balanced against Zerg! Close spawn on metalopolis is balanced against zerg! Tank drops on Lost temple next to the natural is balanced against zerg! Having the ability to shoot the zergs main from my own third way before he can get mutas out is balanced against zerg! Constructing a bunker in zergs natural in a place where you cant attack with lings/drones is balanced against zerg!
Zerg QQ is pretty natural with new maps, since the way zerg is designed means they normally are on the bad end of abusable terrain features moreso than the other races
On July 14 2011 16:45 DooMDash wrote: The Zerg entitlement that idra brought to SCII has to end. Let's just play on huge empty squares where no one can abuse anything, that way Zerg can win every game. As if they actually struggle anymore.
Damn those Zergs wanting maps that are fair to play on for all!
Zerg's definition of fairplay usually means no attacks until 4 bases, 80 workers and hive tech for the Zerg though so I'm not sure if their opinion on maps can really be trusted.
Zergs would probably be happy only if Blizzard creates a completely flat map without any rocks / cliffs and a gigantic battlefield in the middle with 30 bases all around. I'm not sure though, they probably find something else to bash Blizzard about if that were the case.
Dear Zerg users, do everybody a favor and at least *try* to appreciate Blizzard's effort to create new maps and on top of that, please try to stop acting as if your race is still the weakest because all sensible people agree the balance is quite OK right now. If anything, Terrans are saying Infestor/Broodlord is too strong. Zerg units too strong? Blasphemy!
A better option, actually, is to switch to T/P and see for yourself how terrifying it is to play vs a competent Zerg player who controls the entire map and has creep everywhere. You have no idea.
Thank you !
Posts like this make my brain hurt so much. When will you people realise it has NOTHING to do about zerg's QQ. Its about blizzards maps being generally shitty with rocks everywhere, no accesible third, promoting 2 base allin play, and LOTS of map imbalances where people can really abuse certain postions. Like on these new maps where tanks can shoot FAR into the main on some positions.
And dont say "well zerg's just have to learn how to survive the map imbalances". Maybe people should LEARN how to play without counting on getting cheap ladder wins due to map imbalances.
You dont see all the terran/protoss pro's whining about GSL maps do you? Do you know why? BECAUSE THEY ARE GENERALLY GOOD MAPS. Otherwise we might just play on shit maps like Steppes of War and Delta Quadrant our entire lifes and lets see how well the game will prosper then.
I don't understand this, your second sentence states this isn't about Zerg QQ, then the rest of the post is pure Zerg whining.
???
Its not "pure zerg whining", if anything its whining about poor map design and map imbalances. Seriously, is that so hard to realise?. Im done answering these ignorant posts now. Go read what i said again.
For me I dont like how few expansions i se on the maps, I think there is to few, and to far away from eachother. Maybe its fine for thier size, but in that case i want bigger maps.
On July 14 2011 15:10 DannyJ wrote: Ew, they are worse than i thought they'd be
They actually aren't that bad at all. I played the PTR today, and they all seemed actually like really good and interesting maps. People are just way to quick to judge. I remember posts on Shakuras being a terrible map when it was being tested, now its one of the most beloved maps blizzard has released. My point is, don't be so quick to judge.
Shakuras is still one of the worse map in term of balance. And they had to change it like 10 times before it was acceptable. :s
On July 14 2011 19:22 joshboy42 wrote: Zerg QQ is pretty natural with new maps, since the way zerg is designed means they normally are on the bad end of abusable terrain features moreso than the other races
Unless they get a bunch of mutalisks. Then it's role reversal.
On July 14 2011 22:54 Numy wrote: Why does blizzard have the mindset that only high level players want good maps?
Because having a balanced map pool means having a balance of macro maps and rush maps.
I reaaaaaaaaaaaaaaly hope that scrap station and delta quadrant go, I'd bet money (small amounts of it) that those 2 maps are the most vetoed (although I have a terrible gut feeling tal'darim is up there.)
On July 14 2011 22:54 Numy wrote: Why does blizzard have the mindset that only high level players want good maps?
Because having a balanced map pool means having a balance of macro maps and rush maps.
I reaaaaaaaaaaaaaaly hope that scrap station and delta quadrant go, I'd bet money (small amounts of it) that those 2 maps are the most vetoed (although I have a terrible gut feeling tal'darim is up there.)
Having maps be "macro" and "rush" is one of the dumbest ways of making a map. All maps should facilitate and reward both plays, some more than others. TDA is a big map which often goes to at least 20min+ games but that doesn't mean people still do not rush on that map. Meanwhile a map like Dual Sight in the GSL pool is a small map with 5 bases for both players in total and it's easier to rush on that map due to the rush distance but macro games happen often because the map is not a mess of rocks everywhere and cliffs where siege tanks get too much of an advantage.
I won't condemn these maps yet because i haven't played on them, but they do not look good so far.
holy - starter edition, the new WoW upgrade, where they made it free to play, they called it starter edition. do you see the connection? Oo
does that mean what i think it means?
Yeah it looks like they're trying to get more people to play the game, but it could be used like how guest accounts were used to create mayhem on the ladders, unless blizzard has a way of separating these accounts from the general ladder.
On July 14 2011 15:24 Wr3k wrote: It's almost as if the goal here is to replace solid macro style tvz with cheese tailored to specific abusable characteristics on each map.
That's more or less catering to Terrans strengths. If Blizzard designed every map with out any advantageous positions or abuses Terrans would probably do pretty poorly since they are not meant to win in straight up macro battles. The maps are good because Terran can play to its strengths and abuses, yet they are still great macro maps with plenty of spots for Zergs to take advantage of.
Uhhhh, last I checked terran in every major tournament does fairly okay in straight up macro battles and didn't need cheesy or abusive map tactics to win. GSL particularly.
I see Terrans abusing positions a lot, but the whole point of the matter is if all these abusable spots were that good the pros would be using them more. This means just because maps have abuseable spots does not make them broken, if they were broken we'd see the pros use them every game. Why don't they? Because the pros they are playing against actually prepare or know how to deal with the abuses, so the Terran pro cannot always rely on these.
So basically what I am saying is most people who will actually let these do damage to them repeatedly are not pro level for a reason.
Pros do just fine without 5 or 6 spots where a bunker rush or tank positioning is extremely difficult to effectively deal with. Look at GSL or MLG maps. There are spots where there is good positioning, but no spots where terran can plop down a tank and fire upon an opponents main with impunity, no spots where a bunker can be set up and protected by rocks on 3 sides while being right next to the natural. The new maps are full of mistakes in design, period.
On July 14 2011 18:23 escruting wrote: Why everyone complains about siege tank positions against zerg? as if tanks only worked against zerg....We protoss dont complain so much but feel the same.
this is a good point also id say they should remove air space around base because protoss really doesnt have a way to deal with the muta abuse.
On July 14 2011 18:23 escruting wrote: Why everyone complains about siege tank positions against zerg? as if tanks only worked against zerg....We protoss dont complain so much but feel the same.
this is a good point also id say they should remove air space around base because protoss really doesnt have a way to deal with the muta abuse.
I don't want to be rude, but protoss is abusing air play against zerg way more than zerg can abuse muta vs protoss. ~~
On July 14 2011 18:23 escruting wrote: Why everyone complains about siege tank positions against zerg? as if tanks only worked against zerg....We protoss dont complain so much but feel the same.
this is a good point also id say they should remove air space around base because protoss really doesnt have a way to deal with the muta abuse.
I don't want to be rude, but protoss is abusing air play against zerg way more than zerg can abuse muta vs protoss. ~~
Z complains about siege tank positions because their whole composition is mostly melee and they cant reach the tanks that way.
And the airspace is needed, not only for Terran drop-harass and banshee, but also Overlord placement, so there is a chance that Z can scout the inbase
On July 14 2011 22:54 Numy wrote: Why does blizzard have the mindset that only high level players want good maps?
Because having a balanced map pool means having a balance of macro maps and rush maps.
I reaaaaaaaaaaaaaaly hope that scrap station and delta quadrant go, I'd bet money (small amounts of it) that those 2 maps are the most vetoed (although I have a terrible gut feeling tal'darim is up there.)
Haha - that's genius, those are the three maps I veto! :O :D
I haven't played on the new maps (EU *sadface*) but I don't think they look horrible, apart from a few abusive features that it would be nice if they fixed before release. They may well not, of course, but I'm really interested to see which of the existing maps are removed, regardless of what gets added in their place.
On July 14 2011 22:54 Numy wrote: Why does blizzard have the mindset that only high level players want good maps?
Because having a balanced map pool means having a balance of macro maps and rush maps.
I reaaaaaaaaaaaaaaly hope that scrap station and delta quadrant go, I'd bet money (small amounts of it) that those 2 maps are the most vetoed (although I have a terrible gut feeling tal'darim is up there.)
Haha - that's genius, those are the three maps I veto! :O :D
I haven't played on the new maps (EU *sadface*) but I don't think they look horrible, apart from a few abusive features that it would be nice if they fixed before release. They may well not, of course, but I'm really interested to see which of the existing maps are removed, regardless of what gets added in their place.
The maps are uploaded on EU and US. Search for "ptr" in the create game section.
I'm pretty sure Browder and his team recently found that the TvZ MU wasn't balanced in the higher leagues, particulary in the late stage of the game.
So instead of fixing the balance issues that are either mass mutalisks and arguably infestors/ghosts, they released goofy maps so that Terran call all-in and 2 base all-in and win game based on map imbalance.
I already hate it that Blizzard balanced the game only for maps with ramp, now I'm afraid that they might do the same thing for even more gimmicky things.
I was playing the PTR but got fed up with all the cheesy crap people do. Map 4 seems really good but Map 3 just seems too small with a lack of open areas. Terran Bio vs Protoss will get demolished.
Just played the maps as Z (only diamond level so take with grain of salt): Map 1, certainly veto, got close pos bunker rushed..just not worth it as I can see that happening every tvz. Map 2, I actually like as Z, the rocks in front of the nat will cause problems with ling run bys early, could see the same with hellions. 3rd is a little far though. It's different and dynamic, though some may not like it Map 3, just feels odd, the shape and the positions. Cross positions is nice but the other two I'm not sure about. The guy I was playing with and me both thought it was a 2v2 map at first.. Map 4, probably the best for Z and the best in general. Didn't try out the tank seige from base to base as others have mentioned, but the middle is pretty open.
On July 15 2011 01:14 TeWy wrote: I'm pretty sure Browder and his team recently found that the TvZ MU wasn't balanced in the higher leagues, particulary in the late stage of the game.
So instead of fixing the balance issues that are either mass mutalisks and arguably infestors/ghosts, they released goofy maps so that Terran call all-in and 2 base all-in and win game based on map imbalance.
I already hate it that Blizzard balanced the game only for maps with ramp, now I'm afraid that they might do the same thing for even more gimmicky things.
Or they are working on HotS for Blizzcon? I don't think we are going to see any major balance changes until then.
Personally I will wait to play the maps and hear what the pros have to stay before make a decision on the new maps. Really, I'm so bored with the current maps, I am execited for anything new.
I played a couple of ZvP's on Map 1, and so far I like it. It even has a nice look to it. It seemed fine in that matchup in the positions that we had. I haven't played a ZvT on it yet though, that might change my opinion of it.
Map 2 is an instant veto from me. I hate it. The terrain is easy to abuse for T, especially if the game goes on longer. It's also quite ugly.
Map 3...seems like a worse version of Metalopolis (although close ground rush distance is further, which is nice). I'm not a fan of the positions of the thirds though, they're too far. Also the golds, ugh. I'd like to see the gold bases changed to a blue base with no rock.
Map 4 does seem Zerg favoured early on, but I don't like the third. If you spawn close to your opponent, they can easily hit your third with tanks or even blink stalkers in to it, which means you have to take a third that is incredibly far away. It's also a really ugly map.
Depending on what maps get taken out of the map pool, my vetoes are going to be Map 2 and 3 for sure.
So far i'm starting to get frustrated as T at how easy it is for P to FF a lot of the expos since they are so small and tight. Map 2 and 3 specifically I have been wrecked a few times by 6 gate mass sentry with zealot + stalker support where there's really no room for a bio army to maneuver due to how tiny the expo area and the choke is. At least on XNC there's two small chokes instead of one so it gives a little more maneuverability versus forcefields.
I would be interested to see what things they're struggling to balance. i don't need to know that how much they're nerfing/ buffing, but just that they actually know what they want to be balancing... it would also be pretty cool if they didn't balance anything though.
Still, patch notes are always more interesting when there's balance. That being said, blue flames needed to be blue, i would be lying if i said that shit didn't annoy me.
Here is the counterpart thread in the Blizz forums, everyone should ask for GSL maps on this thread, Blizzard needs to let the map makers do the maps, blizz has never been good at map making.
I wish people would just realize that ladder maps are ladder maps and tournament maps are tournament maps. I like GSL maps as much as everyone else but I enjoy playing on more fun maps on ladder as well, and if that means some unique things about the map that make it exciting that's OK with me. Last I checked ladder didn't get you money, and is still plenty of good practice.
:/ The sad state of ladder maps continues. I remember telling jc three months after release, that most ladder maps would be community made tournament maps a year from then. You made me a liar Blizzard D:
i dont understend blizzard... they care abouth icon to be blue or yellow ...
and game is in my opinion faling a part... mass infestor (before that mass marines ) mass colloss... mass banglings... what is going on ?
i dont whont to be negative but whay blizzar is afreid to nerf things to game be bether ? to play and gameplay will be a lot bether... if some unites is nerfed....
league of legends look at this game patchs.... thay nerfed and buffed wholl game to be betther gameplay...
whay blizzard cant do that ... first thing thay could do nerf infestor energy ... stim .. colloss. dps... maby force feadls to be destractible...banglings dps... thx for reading...sry for my eng
whont to add : this ppl from league of legends is what blizzard was 10 years ago...before WOW come out...
ppl from LofL is wery pasion abouth their game and do everything to fix game and to made gameplay 10 time bether....look at their patch prewiew..
yust whont to point out what was blizzard 10 years ago... pasion and comunity fedback...
add : pasion for games made best games not many... ideas and pasion make games to be the best...
Blizzard polls everyone and we tell them we hate rocks, and so they stack their next 4 maps with rocks. Wha? -_-
Test Map 1: To take a 3rd you either need to break rocks at the Gold or expand super far away
Test Map 2: Every single position is close positions and there's rocks all over the place. This map feels like a 4 spawn version of Steppes of War.
Test Map 3: Close positions; taking a 3rd seems near impossible and, again, rocks are in the way
Test Map 4: This map seems ok, but Siege Tanks from one positions 3rd can shell your main. To get to them with ground units you'd have to leave your main, go through your natural, cross the entire map, enter the other natural and then the 3rd. It takes ~20 - 30 seconds, but the Tanks are shelling your base the whole time. When you get there the Tanks could just elevator 2 feet into your main and you'd have to run all the way back. If you split up your ground forces, the Terran army gets to fight your army in two halves. Basically, you need Mutas on this map if a Terran is going to abuse that 3rd, which makes me think this map is broken just as Lost Temple was (remember the cliff abuse). I think Blink Stalkers could also seriously abuse that 3rd.
yust whont to point out what was blizzard 10 years ago... pasion and comunity fedback...
add : pasion for games made best games not many... ideas and pasion make games to be the best...
Forgot to mention the fact that Riot servers are shit and you always have to wait an hour just so you can actually play the game... They also have their problems.
I like GSL maps as much as everyone else but I enjoy playing on more fun maps on ladder as well, and if that means some unique things about the map that make it exciting that's OK with me.
Thats fine for you, but on the opposite side: I DON'T enjoy playing on maps which can be abused in every way possible. I DON'T enjoy getting marine + svc all-inned every 2nd game. I DON'T enjoy having to watch a bunker going up because my ling/drones cant reach the scvs. I DON'T enjoy getting my main maimed by tanks which stand in your own 3rd. I hear most terrans actually enjoy DQ - on the other hand I don't know a single zerg who hasn't vetoed this map.
I like GSL maps as much as everyone else but I enjoy playing on more fun maps on ladder as well, and if that means some unique things about the map that make it exciting that's OK with me.
Thats fine for you, but on the opposite side: I DON'T enjoy playing on maps which can be abused in every way possible. I DON'T enjoy getting marine + svc all-inned every 2nd game. I DON'T enjoy having to watch a bunker going up because my ling/drones cant reach the scvs. I DON'T enjoy getting my main maimed by tanks which stand in your own 3rd. I hear most terrans actually enjoy DQ - on the other hand I don't know a single zerg who hasn't vetoed this map.
I hate DQ, but I refuse to veto it because it's basically a standard map. It's so frustrating to see Zergs complain time and time again because of small aspects of a map that aren't in favor of Zerg. Not every map can showcase wide open lanes of attack, easy to take 3rd, 4th, and 5th bases, and lots of winding terrain and open spaces for mutas to harass and retreat.
Not every map has easily accessible cliffs or positions to abuse with tanks. Sure, there are places tanks can be to attack one of your bases, but it's not like those positions are exactly easy to get to with a Zerg who even half attempts to ward off those attacks. When was the last time you lost a game because a Terran was able to siege your natural on TDA or Shakuras? What about all those times you lost your 3rd on XNC to tanks on the ledge? OH WAIT! That actually rarely happens because of how out of position and indefensible those spots are.
Zergs need to stop spouting this nonsense that the world is against them because a few Zerg players loaded up the test map as Terran and sieged up every nook and cranny to get the best screen shots out of context.
I like GSL maps as much as everyone else but I enjoy playing on more fun maps on ladder as well, and if that means some unique things about the map that make it exciting that's OK with me.
Thats fine for you, but on the opposite side: I DON'T enjoy playing on maps which can be abused in every way possible. I DON'T enjoy getting marine + svc all-inned every 2nd game. I DON'T enjoy having to watch a bunker going up because my ling/drones cant reach the scvs. I DON'T enjoy getting my main maimed by tanks which stand in your own 3rd. I hear most terrans actually enjoy DQ - on the other hand I don't know a single zerg who hasn't vetoed this map.
I hate DQ, but I refuse to veto it because it's basically a standard map. It's so frustrating to see Zergs complain time and time again because of small aspects of a map that aren't in favor of Zerg. Not every map can showcase wide open lanes of attack, easy to take 3rd, 4th, and 5th bases, and lots of winding terrain and open spaces for mutas to harass and retreat.
Not every map has easily accessible cliffs or positions to abuse with tanks. Sure, there are places tanks can be to attack one of your bases, but it's not like those positions are exactly easy to get to with a Zerg who even half attempts to ward off those attacks. When was the last time you lost a game because a Terran was able to siege your natural on TDA or Shakuras? What about all those times you lost your 3rd on XNC to tanks on the ledge? OH WAIT! That actually rarely happens because of how out of position and indefensible those spots are.
Zergs need to stop spouting this nonsense that the world is against them because a few Zerg players loaded up the test map as Terran and sieged up every nook and cranny to get the best screen shots out of context.
You miss the point completely. Zerg players aren't calling out for every map to be in their favor, what they don't want is maps that have the odds so heavily stacked against them that should the Terran choose to abuse the terrain [which they almost always will if they can, as they should] that they don't have any sort of reasonable chance. On TDA your natural can be sieged but Zerg still have a fighting chance, you just gotta run down and fight on the low ground. on Shakuras you just gotta break the rocks early and you can engage on land. On these Test maps the terrain looks practically unassailable should the Terran choose to dig his heels in. Shakuras was a bad map too until Blizzard had to revisit and fix the terrain so it wasn't so obviously Terran-favored. These maps aren't completely awful, but they're going to need to be worked on more..
I like GSL maps as much as everyone else but I enjoy playing on more fun maps on ladder as well, and if that means some unique things about the map that make it exciting that's OK with me.
Thats fine for you, but on the opposite side: I DON'T enjoy playing on maps which can be abused in every way possible. I DON'T enjoy getting marine + svc all-inned every 2nd game. I DON'T enjoy having to watch a bunker going up because my ling/drones cant reach the scvs. I DON'T enjoy getting my main maimed by tanks which stand in your own 3rd. I hear most terrans actually enjoy DQ - on the other hand I don't know a single zerg who hasn't vetoed this map.
I hate DQ, but I refuse to veto it because it's basically a standard map. It's so frustrating to see Zergs complain time and time again because of small aspects of a map that aren't in favor of Zerg. Not every map can showcase wide open lanes of attack, easy to take 3rd, 4th, and 5th bases, and lots of winding terrain and open spaces for mutas to harass and retreat.
Not every map has easily accessible cliffs or positions to abuse with tanks. Sure, there are places tanks can be to attack one of your bases, but it's not like those positions are exactly easy to get to with a Zerg who even half attempts to ward off those attacks. When was the last time you lost a game because a Terran was able to siege your natural on TDA or Shakuras? What about all those times you lost your 3rd on XNC to tanks on the ledge? OH WAIT! That actually rarely happens because of how out of position and indefensible those spots are.
Zergs need to stop spouting this nonsense that the world is against them because a few Zerg players loaded up the test map as Terran and sieged up every nook and cranny to get the best screen shots out of context.
You miss the point completely. Zerg players aren't calling out for every map to be in their favor, what they don't want is maps that have the odds so heavily stacked against them that should the Terran choose to abuse the terrain [which they almost always will if they can, as they should] that they don't have any sort of reasonable chance. On TDA your natural can be sieged but Zerg still have a fighting chance, you just gotta run down and fight on the low ground. on Shakuras you just gotta break the rocks early and you can engage on land. On these Test maps the terrain looks practically unassailable should the Terran choose to dig his heels in. Shakuras was a bad map too until Blizzard had to revisit and fix the terrain so it wasn't so obviously Terran-favored. These maps aren't completely awful, but they're going to need to be worked on more..
i agree with u about abusing terrain but u gotta admit zerg abuse terrain on every map with mutas so it would be nice if they removed that as well
The whole point of the siege tank is to be abusive, might as well reduce its range if they didn't intend for it to be used abusively. Tanks aren't even close to BW level so consider yourself lucky.
Just played the PTR for awhile. Test Map 1 is pretty good, I like it. (there are no longer rocks or gold expansions like a few people said so actually taking 4 bases is easier). I think it's one of my favorite maps I've played on.
As far as the other 3 maps, I'd be a lot happier if there weren't so many good siege tank spots. :[
i got to play to 2 games. one of the maps have 3 rocks or so blocking the whole path (2nd path). i thought it only blocked partially. i move my army to flank the terran seeing that there is enough room for me to pass his army and get to his main, siege up and force him to run into my siege line.
next thing i know my army is 3/4 dead running into their siege line. i was using minimap to move my main army while controlling my 2 medivacs to harass.
that pissed me off so i stopped playing. ( i was ahead the whole game )
I like GSL maps as much as everyone else but I enjoy playing on more fun maps on ladder as well, and if that means some unique things about the map that make it exciting that's OK with me.
Thats fine for you, but on the opposite side: I DON'T enjoy playing on maps which can be abused in every way possible. I DON'T enjoy getting marine + svc all-inned every 2nd game. I DON'T enjoy having to watch a bunker going up because my ling/drones cant reach the scvs. I DON'T enjoy getting my main maimed by tanks which stand in your own 3rd. I hear most terrans actually enjoy DQ - on the other hand I don't know a single zerg who hasn't vetoed this map.
I hate DQ, but I refuse to veto it because it's basically a standard map. It's so frustrating to see Zergs complain time and time again because of small aspects of a map that aren't in favor of Zerg. Not every map can showcase wide open lanes of attack, easy to take 3rd, 4th, and 5th bases, and lots of winding terrain and open spaces for mutas to harass and retreat.
Not every map has easily accessible cliffs or positions to abuse with tanks. Sure, there are places tanks can be to attack one of your bases, but it's not like those positions are exactly easy to get to with a Zerg who even half attempts to ward off those attacks. When was the last time you lost a game because a Terran was able to siege your natural on TDA or Shakuras? What about all those times you lost your 3rd on XNC to tanks on the ledge? OH WAIT! That actually rarely happens because of how out of position and indefensible those spots are.
Zergs need to stop spouting this nonsense that the world is against them because a few Zerg players loaded up the test map as Terran and sieged up every nook and cranny to get the best screen shots out of context.
You miss the point completely. Zerg players aren't calling out for every map to be in their favor, what they don't want is maps that have the odds so heavily stacked against them that should the Terran choose to abuse the terrain [which they almost always will if they can, as they should] that they don't have any sort of reasonable chance. On TDA your natural can be sieged but Zerg still have a fighting chance, you just gotta run down and fight on the low ground. on Shakuras you just gotta break the rocks early and you can engage on land. On these Test maps the terrain looks practically unassailable should the Terran choose to dig his heels in. Shakuras was a bad map too until Blizzard had to revisit and fix the terrain so it wasn't so obviously Terran-favored. These maps aren't completely awful, but they're going to need to be worked on more..
i agree with u about abusing terrain but u gotta admit zerg abuse terrain on every map with mutas so it would be nice if they removed that as well
I like GSL maps as much as everyone else but I enjoy playing on more fun maps on ladder as well, and if that means some unique things about the map that make it exciting that's OK with me.
Thats fine for you, but on the opposite side: I DON'T enjoy playing on maps which can be abused in every way possible. I DON'T enjoy getting marine + svc all-inned every 2nd game. I DON'T enjoy having to watch a bunker going up because my ling/drones cant reach the scvs. I DON'T enjoy getting my main maimed by tanks which stand in your own 3rd. I hear most terrans actually enjoy DQ - on the other hand I don't know a single zerg who hasn't vetoed this map.
I hate DQ, but I refuse to veto it because it's basically a standard map. It's so frustrating to see Zergs complain time and time again because of small aspects of a map that aren't in favor of Zerg. Not every map can showcase wide open lanes of attack, easy to take 3rd, 4th, and 5th bases, and lots of winding terrain and open spaces for mutas to harass and retreat.
Not every map has easily accessible cliffs or positions to abuse with tanks. Sure, there are places tanks can be to attack one of your bases, but it's not like those positions are exactly easy to get to with a Zerg who even half attempts to ward off those attacks. When was the last time you lost a game because a Terran was able to siege your natural on TDA or Shakuras? What about all those times you lost your 3rd on XNC to tanks on the ledge? OH WAIT! That actually rarely happens because of how out of position and indefensible those spots are.
Zergs need to stop spouting this nonsense that the world is against them because a few Zerg players loaded up the test map as Terran and sieged up every nook and cranny to get the best screen shots out of context.
You miss the point completely. Zerg players aren't calling out for every map to be in their favor, what they don't want is maps that have the odds so heavily stacked against them that should the Terran choose to abuse the terrain [which they almost always will if they can, as they should] that they don't have any sort of reasonable chance. On TDA your natural can be sieged but Zerg still have a fighting chance, you just gotta run down and fight on the low ground. on Shakuras you just gotta break the rocks early and you can engage on land. On these Test maps the terrain looks practically unassailable should the Terran choose to dig his heels in. Shakuras was a bad map too until Blizzard had to revisit and fix the terrain so it wasn't so obviously Terran-favored. These maps aren't completely awful, but they're going to need to be worked on more..
i agree with u about abusing terrain but u gotta admit zerg abuse terrain on every map with mutas so it would be nice if they removed that as well
apparently you can kill us on these before we even get to mutas, so........ k o_O#
Test Map 1: To take a 3rd you either need to break rocks at the Gold or expand super far away
Test map 1 doesn't have 4 gold expansions with rocks anymore, so this has been fixed =)
They didn't fix the description text for the map though. Still says "do you take the 2nd at the "safe" high ground (the nat) or a high yield?" I thought they meant the 2 in the center, but I guess the older version of this map was even stupider.
I love how one map there aren't only rocks to your third, but they're masked by some tall grass. All in all, the maps just feel too small. Test map 1 feels like it has far too many bases because of just how damn big they look on the minimap and how little space there is between them.
I like GSL maps as much as everyone else but I enjoy playing on more fun maps on ladder as well, and if that means some unique things about the map that make it exciting that's OK with me.
Thats fine for you, but on the opposite side: I DON'T enjoy playing on maps which can be abused in every way possible. I DON'T enjoy getting marine + svc all-inned every 2nd game. I DON'T enjoy having to watch a bunker going up because my ling/drones cant reach the scvs. I DON'T enjoy getting my main maimed by tanks which stand in your own 3rd. I hear most terrans actually enjoy DQ - on the other hand I don't know a single zerg who hasn't vetoed this map.
hell, i dont think you would find many protoss who have that map up, its a joke. sure theres the back warpy thing, but any half decent player can deal with that
I'm so happy they finally fixed pre igniter icon. That seriously annoyed me. Like not even kidding. Watching Hellion openings would annoy me for that sole reason.
for test map 3, is there any reason to why the 3rd expansion is in a giant hole surrounded by high ground and 2 entrances? can anyone explain that to me cuz i honestly cant figure it out.
I hate how your main is so fucking small all the time when it comes to Blizzard maps. And because of tech labs and reactors you can't really clump the barracks together like in BW either. ;_;
So? I have higher APM than white-ra and lzgamer but they would still beat the crap out of me. My Z apm is also 150, it has to do with the fact that everything moves at 100 mph you automatically will have higher APM.
Also it's extremely common for Terran to be down in supply, even at pro level. Terran can't possibly compete with Zerg macro, they are about position, abuse, and maximizing efficiency ( with micro and said position ). I love how your post completely ignores all logic beyond supply and apm.
And that guy had terrible spire position, not my fault I took advantage of his huge mistake. He could have had it a million safe places. I don't put my tech lab researching stim unprotected and say muta are imba because I put it some where stupid, but seems like most Z's do.
Zerg entitlement is out of control... thanks idra.
Since the first post said that multiplayer is now available on the PTR, can anyone tell me what maps they removed from the pool? Read the last four pages but couldn't find anything.
On July 15 2011 17:48 Glimred wrote: Since the first post said that multiplayer is now available on the PTR, can anyone tell me what maps they removed from the pool? Read the last four pages but couldn't find anything.
So far they only have the test maps running on ladder, so we don't know yet.
On July 15 2011 17:48 Glimred wrote: Since the first post said that multiplayer is now available on the PTR, can anyone tell me what maps they removed from the pool? Read the last four pages but couldn't find anything.
So far they only have the test maps running on ladder, so we don't know yet.
So? I have higher APM than white-ra and lzgamer but they would still beat the crap out of me. My Z apm is also 150, it has to do with the fact that everything moves at 100 mph you automatically will have higher APM.
Also it's extremely common for Terran to be down in supply, even at pro level. Terran can't possibly compete with Zerg macro, they are about position, abuse, and maximizing efficiency ( with micro and said position ). I love how your post completely ignores all logic beyond supply and apm.
And that guy had terrible spire position, not my fault I took advantage of his huge mistake. He could have had it a million safe places. I don't put my tech lab researching stim unprotected and say muta are imba because I put it some where stupid, but seems like most Z's do.
Zerg entitlement is out of control... thanks idra.
Do you honestly think Zerg wouldn't complain about badly designed maps if Idra wasn't Zerg?
So? I have higher APM than white-ra and lzgamer but they would still beat the crap out of me. My Z apm is also 150, it has to do with the fact that everything moves at 100 mph you automatically will have higher APM.
Also it's extremely common for Terran to be down in supply, even at pro level. Terran can't possibly compete with Zerg macro, they are about position, abuse, and maximizing efficiency ( with micro and said position ). I love how your post completely ignores all logic beyond supply and apm.
And that guy had terrible spire position, not my fault I took advantage of his huge mistake. He could have had it a million safe places. I don't put my tech lab researching stim unprotected and say muta are imba because I put it some where stupid, but seems like most Z's do.
Zerg entitlement is out of control... thanks idra.
Do you honestly think Zerg wouldn't complain about badly designed maps if Idra wasn't Zerg?
Do you see terrans complaining about taladar? Do you see terrans complaining about the almost unbeatable infestor + broodlord composition? Do you see terrans complaining that they have to micro excellent to be able to stand a chance while the zerg can just 1a? It's a fact that 90% of the zergs just complain whole the time. I got 6 zerg practice partners and 5 of them are very bm whiners who blame their losses on imbalance. I honestly think that this "zerg is so UP" trend is idra's fault.
So? I have higher APM than white-ra and lzgamer but they would still beat the crap out of me. My Z apm is also 150, it has to do with the fact that everything moves at 100 mph you automatically will have higher APM.
Also it's extremely common for Terran to be down in supply, even at pro level. Terran can't possibly compete with Zerg macro, they are about position, abuse, and maximizing efficiency ( with micro and said position ). I love how your post completely ignores all logic beyond supply and apm.
And that guy had terrible spire position, not my fault I took advantage of his huge mistake. He could have had it a million safe places. I don't put my tech lab researching stim unprotected and say muta are imba because I put it some where stupid, but seems like most Z's do.
Zerg entitlement is out of control... thanks idra.
Do you honestly think Zerg wouldn't complain about badly designed maps if Idra wasn't Zerg?
Do you see terrans complaining about taladar? Do you see terrans complaining about the almost unbeatable infestor + broodlord composition? Do you see terrans complaining that they have to micro excellent to be able to stand a chance while the zerg can just 1a? It's a fact that 90% of the zergs just complain whole the time. I got 6 zerg practice partners and 5 of them are very bm whiners who blame their losses on imbalance. I honestly think that this "zerg is so UP" trend is idra's fault.
Whether you Zergs realize it or not when you have someone like idra at the highest level constantly expressing his completely biased views on balance over and over you are going to get a bunch of followers even if he isn't actually right. Sadly this is how people work. Why do you think P and T bitch much less? You can't honestly say because they are better at this point, Zerg is doing fine.
So? I have higher APM than white-ra and lzgamer but they would still beat the crap out of me. My Z apm is also 150, it has to do with the fact that everything moves at 100 mph you automatically will have higher APM.
Also it's extremely common for Terran to be down in supply, even at pro level. Terran can't possibly compete with Zerg macro, they are about position, abuse, and maximizing efficiency ( with micro and said position ). I love how your post completely ignores all logic beyond supply and apm.
And that guy had terrible spire position, not my fault I took advantage of his huge mistake. He could have had it a million safe places. I don't put my tech lab researching stim unprotected and say muta are imba because I put it some where stupid, but seems like most Z's do.
Zerg entitlement is out of control... thanks idra.
Do you honestly think Zerg wouldn't complain about badly designed maps if Idra wasn't Zerg?
Do you see terrans complaining about taladar? Do you see terrans complaining about the almost unbeatable infestor + broodlord composition? Do you see terrans complaining that they have to micro excellent to be able to stand a chance while the zerg can just 1a? It's a fact that 90% of the zergs just complain whole the time. I got 6 zerg practice partners and 5 of them are very bm whiners who blame their losses on imbalance. I honestly think that this "zerg is so UP" trend is idra's fault.
What's wrong with tal alter? I don't see Terrans struggling with the map, or complain about it, so maybe it's a map that isn't too imbalanced either way? So why bring it up?
Yes I do see Terrans complain about infesters. Quite a lot.
I do see that your biased and think Terran is the hardest race eva!
Well I shouldn't argue with your well thought out proven fact that 90% of Zergs complain, along with your facts that Idra is the cancer that makes all Zergs complain. Because how could I argue against someone who provides evidence along with his facts, and clearly knows the difference between opinion and fact.
Also I can't really be bothered to think of some shity anecdotal story to back up my opinion.
because you stopped realizing that you are bitching around a long time ago?
Repaer nerf will kill terran! 5 rax reaper is balanced! Tank nerf will make terran impossible to play and we are the most underpowered race anyway! We need maps we can win by the 9 minute mark because we dont stand a chance in the lategame! Terran macro can never ever compete!
You ARE bitching around.
just look at snowbears post...
Do you see terrans complaining about taladar? Do you see terrans complaining about the almost unbeatable infestor + broodlord composition? Do you see terrans complaining that they have to micro excellent to be able to stand a chance while the zerg can just 1a?
arent these exactly the compains we see on forums nearly every day?
So? I have higher APM than white-ra and lzgamer but they would still beat the crap out of me. My Z apm is also 150, it has to do with the fact that everything moves at 100 mph you automatically will have higher APM.
Also it's extremely common for Terran to be down in supply, even at pro level. Terran can't possibly compete with Zerg macro, they are about position, abuse, and maximizing efficiency ( with micro and said position ). I love how your post completely ignores all logic beyond supply and apm.
And that guy had terrible spire position, not my fault I took advantage of his huge mistake. He could have had it a million safe places. I don't put my tech lab researching stim unprotected and say muta are imba because I put it some where stupid, but seems like most Z's do.
Zerg entitlement is out of control... thanks idra.
Do you honestly think Zerg wouldn't complain about badly designed maps if Idra wasn't Zerg?
Do you see terrans complaining about taladar? Do you see terrans complaining about the almost unbeatable infestor + broodlord composition? Do you see terrans complaining that they have to micro excellent to be able to stand a chance while the zerg can just 1a? It's a fact that 90% of the zergs just complain whole the time. I got 6 zerg practice partners and 5 of them are very bm whiners who blame their losses on imbalance. I honestly think that this "zerg is so UP" trend is idra's fault.
But terran can you obliterate infestor/broodlord with ghosts. Like, 4 terrans use that composition and if they handle it properly they obliterate the composition. It's not the zergs fault terrans havn't ever used ghosts while they are fucking insane and always have been... (I mean, look at PuMa's TvP, you could do that with 150/150 ghosts too...).
While zergs just could really not do anything against things like 50 damage tanks or 5 rax reaper without doing some really economical harming defense, and ZvP was just really hard with old infestors.
You can't just say that people follow IdrA either, simply because Fruitdealer was going insane on playxp.com about how shit zerg was back in 2010, Nestea still whines a bit about balance in his interviews, LosirA is also kinda meh on it, and those last 2 are the best zerg in the world currently.
I don't like using ghost in tvt or tvz for just the sake of using snipe. That skill just takes too much of my apm to focus on that I could be using to control my units to get better position or on macro. It just gives me the uneasy feeling not being able to control your units to get the most out of them, while trying to snipe broodlords.
So? I have higher APM than white-ra and lzgamer but they would still beat the crap out of me. My Z apm is also 150, it has to do with the fact that everything moves at 100 mph you automatically will have higher APM.
Also it's extremely common for Terran to be down in supply, even at pro level. Terran can't possibly compete with Zerg macro, they are about position, abuse, and maximizing efficiency ( with micro and said position ). I love how your post completely ignores all logic beyond supply and apm.
And that guy had terrible spire position, not my fault I took advantage of his huge mistake. He could have had it a million safe places. I don't put my tech lab researching stim unprotected and say muta are imba because I put it some where stupid, but seems like most Z's do.
Zerg entitlement is out of control... thanks idra.
Do you honestly think Zerg wouldn't complain about badly designed maps if Idra wasn't Zerg?
Do you see terrans complaining about taladar? Do you see terrans complaining about the almost unbeatable infestor + broodlord composition? Do you see terrans complaining that they have to micro excellent to be able to stand a chance while the zerg can just 1a? It's a fact that 90% of the zergs just complain whole the time. I got 6 zerg practice partners and 5 of them are very bm whiners who blame their losses on imbalance. I honestly think that this "zerg is so UP" trend is idra's fault.
thats not true. over on the bnet forums there is a huge ammount of QQ about infestors from both terran and toss. in game i get massive ammounts of QQ for using fungal even tho terrans have ghosts and emp to deal with infestors.
also its a fact that 98% of statistics on the internet is made up on the spot. like yours for example. well guess what bro, just because you have 6 zerg practice partners and 5 of them are BM whiners dont magically account them as 90% of zerg players that play this game.
and no its not idras fault. idra was a whiner in BW and he didnt play zerg.
also, infestor broodlord is not unbeatable. ghost for sniping and emp beats it and ravens hunter seeker missles utterly destroy broods. terrans just have yet to experiment with ravens and ghosts more effectively
Now many of you have seen the pictures posted about the current hotspots thread, well I took those pictures and I've been doing my best to find every exploit I can think of and try them out on PTR. Now I am Terran, and I am biased, but I think the only actual problems now are close spawns on these maps. I think that they should either be cross or just like Shakuras plateau in spawn spots.
Getting to those spots cross position would be very very difficult, but as it is now close spawns like North South on the same side on Testmap3 are too good for T.
On July 16 2011 02:45 Dimenus wrote: Has anyone noticed that you can't shift+ Add units to control groups 1 or 2? I can do it with the other numbers but not 1 and 2. Hmmmmm
That would solve a LOT. The problem with most of the spots was not "i dont want to run up there" but "i cant run up there because i will have to run straight through his natural to get there"
That would solve a LOT. The problem with most of the spots was not "i dont want to run up there" but "i cant run up there because i will have to run straight through his natural to get there"
Well I posted in PTR section as a Terran player I think the close spawns should be gone on these maps, then honestlY i think they would all be fine.
So? I have higher APM than white-ra and lzgamer but they would still beat the crap out of me. My Z apm is also 150, it has to do with the fact that everything moves at 100 mph you automatically will have higher APM.
Also it's extremely common for Terran to be down in supply, even at pro level. Terran can't possibly compete with Zerg macro, they are about position, abuse, and maximizing efficiency ( with micro and said position ). I love how your post completely ignores all logic beyond supply and apm.
And that guy had terrible spire position, not my fault I took advantage of his huge mistake. He could have had it a million safe places. I don't put my tech lab researching stim unprotected and say muta are imba because I put it some where stupid, but seems like most Z's do.
Zerg entitlement is out of control... thanks idra.
Do you honestly think Zerg wouldn't complain about badly designed maps if Idra wasn't Zerg?
Do you see terrans complaining about taladar? Do you see terrans complaining about the almost unbeatable infestor + broodlord composition? Do you see terrans complaining that they have to micro excellent to be able to stand a chance while the zerg can just 1a? It's a fact that 90% of the zergs just complain whole the time. I got 6 zerg practice partners and 5 of them are very bm whiners who blame their losses on imbalance. I honestly think that this "zerg is so UP" trend is idra's fault.
thats not true. over on the bnet forums there is a huge ammount of QQ about infestors from both terran and toss. in game i get massive ammounts of QQ for using fungal even tho terrans have ghosts and emp to deal with infestors.
also its a fact that 98% of statistics on the internet is made up on the spot. like yours for example. well guess what bro, just because you have 6 zerg practice partners and 5 of them are BM whiners dont magically account them as 90% of zerg players that play this game.
and no its not idras fault. idra was a whiner in BW and he didnt play zerg.
also, infestor broodlord is not unbeatable. ghost for sniping and emp beats it and ravens hunter seeker missles utterly destroy broods. terrans just have yet to experiment with ravens and ghosts more effectively
People sometimes should really stay silent if they have no idea about high-level play of SC2. Ghosts are far from destroying Infestor/Broodlords combo and to try Hunter seeker missles against Broodlords while there are infestors with NP of range 9 ? lol.
EDIT: People should stop making silly excuses such as: "Terran is not utilizing Ravens/BC/X Unit therefore they are doing so bad against Broodlords/Infestor combo". There is a reason why you never see those units in high-level of play, so why do you think you came up with a genius strategy in your gold league ?...
About ghosts, most of the Terrans are already using them with not such a great success against Infestor/Broodlord.
So? I have higher APM than white-ra and lzgamer but they would still beat the crap out of me. My Z apm is also 150, it has to do with the fact that everything moves at 100 mph you automatically will have higher APM.
Also it's extremely common for Terran to be down in supply, even at pro level. Terran can't possibly compete with Zerg macro, they are about position, abuse, and maximizing efficiency ( with micro and said position ). I love how your post completely ignores all logic beyond supply and apm.
And that guy had terrible spire position, not my fault I took advantage of his huge mistake. He could have had it a million safe places. I don't put my tech lab researching stim unprotected and say muta are imba because I put it some where stupid, but seems like most Z's do.
Zerg entitlement is out of control... thanks idra.
Do you honestly think Zerg wouldn't complain about badly designed maps if Idra wasn't Zerg?
Do you see terrans complaining about taladar? Do you see terrans complaining about the almost unbeatable infestor + broodlord composition? Do you see terrans complaining that they have to micro excellent to be able to stand a chance while the zerg can just 1a? It's a fact that 90% of the zergs just complain whole the time. I got 6 zerg practice partners and 5 of them are very bm whiners who blame their losses on imbalance. I honestly think that this "zerg is so UP" trend is idra's fault.
thats not true. over on the bnet forums there is a huge ammount of QQ about infestors from both terran and toss. in game i get massive ammounts of QQ for using fungal even tho terrans have ghosts and emp to deal with infestors.
also its a fact that 98% of statistics on the internet is made up on the spot. like yours for example. well guess what bro, just because you have 6 zerg practice partners and 5 of them are BM whiners dont magically account them as 90% of zerg players that play this game.
and no its not idras fault. idra was a whiner in BW and he didnt play zerg.
also, infestor broodlord is not unbeatable. ghost for sniping and emp beats it and ravens hunter seeker missles utterly destroy broods. terrans just have yet to experiment with ravens and ghosts more effectively
People sometimes should really stay silent if they have no idea about high-level play of SC2. Ghosts are far from destroying Infestor/Broodlords combo and to try Hunter seeker missles against Broodlords while there is infestors with NP of range 9 ? lol.
How do you know what ravens and ghosts play like at high level play? The only person I've seen use ghosts as a main part of their army was BratOK in a match against Darkforce.
Also I've not seen ravens even used against this composition, so how do you know it wouldn't be good? PDD kills broodlings before they hit the ground. And hunter seeker missle might actually be good, but I've not seen it used.
So really your just as ignorant to these strategy's as everyone else, except your just giving one to why this wouldn't work. And if the only disadvantage this strategy has is NP is range 9, it isn't a very good reason. Considering EMP snipe and tanks.
So? I have higher APM than white-ra and lzgamer but they would still beat the crap out of me. My Z apm is also 150, it has to do with the fact that everything moves at 100 mph you automatically will have higher APM.
Also it's extremely common for Terran to be down in supply, even at pro level. Terran can't possibly compete with Zerg macro, they are about position, abuse, and maximizing efficiency ( with micro and said position ). I love how your post completely ignores all logic beyond supply and apm.
And that guy had terrible spire position, not my fault I took advantage of his huge mistake. He could have had it a million safe places. I don't put my tech lab researching stim unprotected and say muta are imba because I put it some where stupid, but seems like most Z's do.
Zerg entitlement is out of control... thanks idra.
Do you honestly think Zerg wouldn't complain about badly designed maps if Idra wasn't Zerg?
Do you see terrans complaining about taladar? Do you see terrans complaining about the almost unbeatable infestor + broodlord composition? Do you see terrans complaining that they have to micro excellent to be able to stand a chance while the zerg can just 1a? It's a fact that 90% of the zergs just complain whole the time. I got 6 zerg practice partners and 5 of them are very bm whiners who blame their losses on imbalance. I honestly think that this "zerg is so UP" trend is idra's fault.
thats not true. over on the bnet forums there is a huge ammount of QQ about infestors from both terran and toss. in game i get massive ammounts of QQ for using fungal even tho terrans have ghosts and emp to deal with infestors.
also its a fact that 98% of statistics on the internet is made up on the spot. like yours for example. well guess what bro, just because you have 6 zerg practice partners and 5 of them are BM whiners dont magically account them as 90% of zerg players that play this game.
and no its not idras fault. idra was a whiner in BW and he didnt play zerg.
also, infestor broodlord is not unbeatable. ghost for sniping and emp beats it and ravens hunter seeker missles utterly destroy broods. terrans just have yet to experiment with ravens and ghosts more effectively
People sometimes should really stay silent if they have no idea about high-level play of SC2. Ghosts are far from destroying Infestor/Broodlords combo and to try Hunter seeker missles against Broodlords while there is infestors with NP of range 9 ? lol.
How do you know what ravens and ghosts play like at high level play? The only person I've seen use ghosts as a main part of their army was BratOK in a match against Darkforce.
Also I've not seen ravens even used against this composition, so how do you know it wouldn't be good? PDD kills broodlings before they hit the ground. And hunter seeker missle might actually be good, but I've not seen it used.
So really your just as ignorant to these strategy's as everyone else, except your just giving one to why this wouldn't work. And if the only disadvantage this strategy has is NP is range 9, it isn't a very good reason. Considering EMP snipe and tanks.
Try to read more carefully next time. Did I told something about Ghost being bad at high-level of play ? No. I said that they don't "utterly destroy" this combo. And if you saw only Brat_Ok using ghost vs Zerg as main part of Terran army, then ffs, start following sc2 scene before making silly comments about how Terran doesn't utilize ghosts vs zerg.
And please, stfu with you theory crafting when you have completely no idea how TvZ is played late game, in fact, you are even bad at theory crafting. Do you know how much gas Ravens costs ? Do you know what number of infestors will zerg have by the time you will have Ravens ? Do you know how long does it take to produce Raven? Do you know how slow is HSM ? In the end, he will either fungal your Ravens to death or will use them to blow you apart with your own units.
Zerg can get infestor/broodlords from four bases if he goes fast for it. Terran is almost always one base behind, so you are saying that Terran should go Ravens/Ghosts/Tanks/Vikings/Thors/Medivacs/Marines from three bases ? Yeah, I'm being ignorant.
You have no idea how much time people spent experimenting with Ravens, trying to find their place at the game and you just call them ignorant, because they refuse to use them anymore. I like how people tries to theory craft while they are not even capable of doing that.
So? I have higher APM than white-ra and lzgamer but they would still beat the crap out of me. My Z apm is also 150, it has to do with the fact that everything moves at 100 mph you automatically will have higher APM.
Also it's extremely common for Terran to be down in supply, even at pro level. Terran can't possibly compete with Zerg macro, they are about position, abuse, and maximizing efficiency ( with micro and said position ). I love how your post completely ignores all logic beyond supply and apm.
And that guy had terrible spire position, not my fault I took advantage of his huge mistake. He could have had it a million safe places. I don't put my tech lab researching stim unprotected and say muta are imba because I put it some where stupid, but seems like most Z's do.
Zerg entitlement is out of control... thanks idra.
Do you honestly think Zerg wouldn't complain about badly designed maps if Idra wasn't Zerg?
Do you see terrans complaining about taladar? Do you see terrans complaining about the almost unbeatable infestor + broodlord composition? Do you see terrans complaining that they have to micro excellent to be able to stand a chance while the zerg can just 1a? It's a fact that 90% of the zergs just complain whole the time. I got 6 zerg practice partners and 5 of them are very bm whiners who blame their losses on imbalance. I honestly think that this "zerg is so UP" trend is idra's fault.
thats not true. over on the bnet forums there is a huge ammount of QQ about infestors from both terran and toss. in game i get massive ammounts of QQ for using fungal even tho terrans have ghosts and emp to deal with infestors.
also its a fact that 98% of statistics on the internet is made up on the spot. like yours for example. well guess what bro, just because you have 6 zerg practice partners and 5 of them are BM whiners dont magically account them as 90% of zerg players that play this game.
and no its not idras fault. idra was a whiner in BW and he didnt play zerg.
also, infestor broodlord is not unbeatable. ghost for sniping and emp beats it and ravens hunter seeker missles utterly destroy broods. terrans just have yet to experiment with ravens and ghosts more effectively
People sometimes should really stay silent if they have no idea about high-level play of SC2. Ghosts are far from destroying Infestor/Broodlords combo and to try Hunter seeker missles against Broodlords while there is infestors with NP of range 9 ? lol.
How do you know what ravens and ghosts play like at high level play? The only person I've seen use ghosts as a main part of their army was BratOK in a match against Darkforce.
Also I've not seen ravens even used against this composition, so how do you know it wouldn't be good? PDD kills broodlings before they hit the ground. And hunter seeker missle might actually be good, but I've not seen it used.
So really your just as ignorant to these strategy's as everyone else, except your just giving one to why this wouldn't work. And if the only disadvantage this strategy has is NP is range 9, it isn't a very good reason. Considering EMP snipe and tanks.
PDD vs broodlings was patched, hunter seeker missile has a range of 6 and is ridiculously expensive. The problem with ghosts is that you need a shitton of them, because at best you can hit 3 infestors to drain them mana. And 1 shot drains 100 mana, so you have to hit like 20 emps, there's not much left for sniping action. Just pointing out the difficulties, not saying it's imbalanced or anything.
So? I have higher APM than white-ra and lzgamer but they would still beat the crap out of me. My Z apm is also 150, it has to do with the fact that everything moves at 100 mph you automatically will have higher apm.
Also it's extremely common for Terran to be down in supply, even at pro level. Terran can't possibly compete with Zerg macro, they are about position, abuse, and maximizing efficiency ( with micro and said position ). I love how your post completely ignores all logic beyond supply and apm.
And that guy had terrible spire position, not my fault I took advantage of his huge mistake. He could have had it a million safe places. I don't put my tech lab researching stim unprotected and say muta are imba because I put it some where stupid, but seems like most Z's do.
Zerg entitlement is out of control... thanks idra.
Do you honestly think Zerg wouldn't complain about badly designed maps if Idra wasn't Zerg?
Do you see terrans complaining about taladar? Do you see terrans complaining about the almost unbeatable infestor + broodlord composition? Do you see terrans complaining that they have to micro excellent to be able to stand a chance while the zerg can just 1a? It's a fact that 90% of the zergs just complain whole the time. I got 6 zerg practice partners and 5 of them are very bm whiners who blame their losses on imbalance. I honestly think that this "zerg is so UP" trend is idra's fault.
thats not true. over on the bnet forums there is a huge ammount of QQ about infestors from both terran and toss. in game i get massive ammounts of QQ for using fungal even tho terrans have ghosts and emp to deal with infestors.
also its a fact that 98% of statistics on the internet is made up on the spot. like yours for example. well guess what bro, just because you have 6 zerg practice partners and 5 of them are BM whiners dont magically account them as 90% of zerg players that play this game.
and no its not idras fault. idra was a whiner in BW and he didnt play zerg.
also, infestor broodlord is not unbeatable. ghost for sniping and emp beats it and ravens hunter seeker missles utterly destroy broods. terrans just have yet to experiment with ravens and ghosts more effectively
People sometimes should really stay silent if they have no idea about high-level play of SC2. Ghosts are far from destroying Infestor/Broodlords combo and to try Hunter seeker missles against Broodlords while there are infestors with NP of range 9 ? lol.
EDIT: People should stop making silly excuses such as: "Terran is not utilizing Ravens/BC/X Unit therefore they are doing so bad against Broodlords/Infestor combo". There is a reason why you never see those units in high-level of play, so why do you think you came up with a genius strategy in your gold league ?...
About ghosts, most of the Terrans are already using them with not such a great success against Infestor/Broodlord.
Remember that's exactly what people said about infestors too. I have yet to see a game where ghost are not extremely effective/gamewinning. You should probably start trying out some new things instead of crying imba.
So? I have higher APM than white-ra and lzgamer but they would still beat the crap out of me. My Z apm is also 150, it has to do with the fact that everything moves at 100 mph you automatically will have higher apm.
Also it's extremely common for Terran to be down in supply, even at pro level. Terran can't possibly compete with Zerg macro, they are about position, abuse, and maximizing efficiency ( with micro and said position ). I love how your post completely ignores all logic beyond supply and apm.
And that guy had terrible spire position, not my fault I took advantage of his huge mistake. He could have had it a million safe places. I don't put my tech lab researching stim unprotected and say muta are imba because I put it some where stupid, but seems like most Z's do.
Zerg entitlement is out of control... thanks idra.
Do you honestly think Zerg wouldn't complain about badly designed maps if Idra wasn't Zerg?
Do you see terrans complaining about taladar? Do you see terrans complaining about the almost unbeatable infestor + broodlord composition? Do you see terrans complaining that they have to micro excellent to be able to stand a chance while the zerg can just 1a? It's a fact that 90% of the zergs just complain whole the time. I got 6 zerg practice partners and 5 of them are very bm whiners who blame their losses on imbalance. I honestly think that this "zerg is so UP" trend is idra's fault.
thats not true. over on the bnet forums there is a huge ammount of QQ about infestors from both terran and toss. in game i get massive ammounts of QQ for using fungal even tho terrans have ghosts and emp to deal with infestors.
also its a fact that 98% of statistics on the internet is made up on the spot. like yours for example. well guess what bro, just because you have 6 zerg practice partners and 5 of them are BM whiners dont magically account them as 90% of zerg players that play this game.
and no its not idras fault. idra was a whiner in BW and he didnt play zerg.
also, infestor broodlord is not unbeatable. ghost for sniping and emp beats it and ravens hunter seeker missles utterly destroy broods. terrans just have yet to experiment with ravens and ghosts more effectively
People sometimes should really stay silent if they have no idea about high-level play of SC2. Ghosts are far from destroying Infestor/Broodlords combo and to try Hunter seeker missles against Broodlords while there are infestors with NP of range 9 ? lol.
EDIT: People should stop making silly excuses such as: "Terran is not utilizing Ravens/BC/X Unit therefore they are doing so bad against Broodlords/Infestor combo". There is a reason why you never see those units in high-level of play, so why do you think you came up with a genius strategy in your gold league ?...
About ghosts, most of the Terrans are already using them with not such a great success against Infestor/Broodlord.
Remember that's exactly what people said about infestors too. I have yet to see a game where ghost are not extremely effective/gamewinning. You should probably start trying out some new things instead of crying imba.
Lol, I knew someone will bring-up this retarded example again. Buddy, zergs started to use infestors after they got buffed as hell, not because zergs evolved their metagame lol. Amd I'm pretty sure you saw games where Ghosts were extremely cost effective and game winning alone, I'm sure you did.
So? I have higher APM than white-ra and lzgamer but they would still beat the crap out of me. My Z apm is also 150, it has to do with the fact that everything moves at 100 mph you automatically will have higher apm.
Also it's extremely common for Terran to be down in supply, even at pro level. Terran can't possibly compete with Zerg macro, they are about position, abuse, and maximizing efficiency ( with micro and said position ). I love how your post completely ignores all logic beyond supply and apm.
And that guy had terrible spire position, not my fault I took advantage of his huge mistake. He could have had it a million safe places. I don't put my tech lab researching stim unprotected and say muta are imba because I put it some where stupid, but seems like most Z's do.
Zerg entitlement is out of control... thanks idra.
Do you honestly think Zerg wouldn't complain about badly designed maps if Idra wasn't Zerg?
Do you see terrans complaining about taladar? Do you see terrans complaining about the almost unbeatable infestor + broodlord composition? Do you see terrans complaining that they have to micro excellent to be able to stand a chance while the zerg can just 1a? It's a fact that 90% of the zergs just complain whole the time. I got 6 zerg practice partners and 5 of them are very bm whiners who blame their losses on imbalance. I honestly think that this "zerg is so UP" trend is idra's fault.
thats not true. over on the bnet forums there is a huge ammount of QQ about infestors from both terran and toss. in game i get massive ammounts of QQ for using fungal even tho terrans have ghosts and emp to deal with infestors.
also its a fact that 98% of statistics on the internet is made up on the spot. like yours for example. well guess what bro, just because you have 6 zerg practice partners and 5 of them are BM whiners dont magically account them as 90% of zerg players that play this game.
and no its not idras fault. idra was a whiner in BW and he didnt play zerg.
also, infestor broodlord is not unbeatable. ghost for sniping and emp beats it and ravens hunter seeker missles utterly destroy broods. terrans just have yet to experiment with ravens and ghosts more effectively
People sometimes should really stay silent if they have no idea about high-level play of SC2. Ghosts are far from destroying Infestor/Broodlords combo and to try Hunter seeker missles against Broodlords while there are infestors with NP of range 9 ? lol.
EDIT: People should stop making silly excuses such as: "Terran is not utilizing Ravens/BC/X Unit therefore they are doing so bad against Broodlords/Infestor combo". There is a reason why you never see those units in high-level of play, so why do you think you came up with a genius strategy in your gold league ?...
About ghosts, most of the Terrans are already using them with not such a great success against Infestor/Broodlord.
Remember that's exactly what people said about infestors too. I have yet to see a game where ghost are not extremely effective/gamewinning. You should probably start trying out some new things instead of crying imba.
Yes, I'm sure having infestors at 20 more hp and double dps has nothing to do with zerg suddenly using them. Ghosts are also widely used, but they just don't work they way you say they do. Like other people have stated, stop theorycrafting. If you want to prove something works, go out and do it, and come back with replays and a guide.
So? I have higher APM than white-ra and lzgamer but they would still beat the crap out of me. My Z apm is also 150, it has to do with the fact that everything moves at 100 mph you automatically will have higher APM.
Also it's extremely common for Terran to be down in supply, even at pro level. Terran can't possibly compete with Zerg macro, they are about position, abuse, and maximizing efficiency ( with micro and said position ). I love how your post completely ignores all logic beyond supply and apm.
And that guy had terrible spire position, not my fault I took advantage of his huge mistake. He could have had it a million safe places. I don't put my tech lab researching stim unprotected and say muta are imba because I put it some where stupid, but seems like most Z's do.
Zerg entitlement is out of control... thanks idra.
Do you honestly think Zerg wouldn't complain about badly designed maps if Idra wasn't Zerg?
Do you see terrans complaining about taladar? Do you see terrans complaining about the almost unbeatable infestor + broodlord composition? Do you see terrans complaining that they have to micro excellent to be able to stand a chance while the zerg can just 1a? It's a fact that 90% of the zergs just complain whole the time. I got 6 zerg practice partners and 5 of them are very bm whiners who blame their losses on imbalance. I honestly think that this "zerg is so UP" trend is idra's fault.
thats not true. over on the bnet forums there is a huge ammount of QQ about infestors from both terran and toss. in game i get massive ammounts of QQ for using fungal even tho terrans have ghosts and emp to deal with infestors.
also its a fact that 98% of statistics on the internet is made up on the spot. like yours for example. well guess what bro, just because you have 6 zerg practice partners and 5 of them are BM whiners dont magically account them as 90% of zerg players that play this game.
and no its not idras fault. idra was a whiner in BW and he didnt play zerg.
also, infestor broodlord is not unbeatable. ghost for sniping and emp beats it and ravens hunter seeker missles utterly destroy broods. terrans just have yet to experiment with ravens and ghosts more effectively
People sometimes should really stay silent if they have no idea about high-level play of SC2. Ghosts are far from destroying Infestor/Broodlords combo and to try Hunter seeker missles against Broodlords while there is infestors with NP of range 9 ? lol.
How do you know what ravens and ghosts play like at high level play? The only person I've seen use ghosts as a main part of their army was BratOK in a match against Darkforce.
Also I've not seen ravens even used against this composition, so how do you know it wouldn't be good? PDD kills broodlings before they hit the ground. And hunter seeker missle might actually be good, but I've not seen it used.
So really your just as ignorant to these strategy's as everyone else, except your just giving one to why this wouldn't work. And if the only disadvantage this strategy has is NP is range 9, it isn't a very good reason. Considering EMP snipe and tanks.
Try to read more carefully next time. Did I told something about Ghost being bad at high-level of play ? No. I said that they don't "utterly destroy" this combo. And if you saw only Brat_Ok using ghost vs Zerg as main part of Terran army, then ffs, start following sc2 scene before making silly comments about how Terran doesn't utilize ghosts vs zerg.
And please, stfu with you theory crafting when you have completely no idea how TvZ is played late game, in fact, you are even bad at theory crafting. Do you know how much gas Ravens costs ? Do you know what number of infestors will zerg have by the time you will have Ravens ? Do you know how long does it take to produce Raven? Do you know how slow is HSM ? In the end, he will either fungal your Ravens to death or will use them to blow you apart with your own units.
Zerg can get infestor/broodlords from four bases if he goes fast for it. Terran is almost always one base behind, so you are saying that Terran should go Ravens/Ghosts/Tanks/Vikings/Thors/Medivacs/Marines from three bases ? Yeah, I'm being ignorant.
You have no idea how much time people spent experimenting with Ravens, trying to find their place at the game and you just call them ignorant, because they refuse to use them anymore. I like how people tries to theory craft while they are not even capable of doing that.
No matter how carefully I read your post it's always going to be hard to understand someone who posts with broken English. Now if you don't want me to point out how bad your grammar is because your first language isn't English, don't be a dick when I don't understand you straight away.
Also show me one more game that the Terran was going for a strategy that was based around heavy ghost play through out the game. Not just as a reaction to infesters.
As far as theory crafting goes, I was pointing out that heavy ghost play hasn't been used much at high level, so how would you know how good it is? I didn't mention how it would be used or when. I just pointed out the fact it hasn't been experimented with properly. And unless you give me some proper examples getting all pissy and trying to discredit my argument by talking about my skill level, which you don't know I might add, is pointless.
Also I was calling you ignorant more because you completely shut down ideas, without having a good enough perspective on the situation. You probably have no clue what kind of sample size you would need before calling a strategy safe, effective and sustainable. The games been out a year. In terms of strategy that is absolutely nothing. Go look at poker, chess and countless other examples of strategy. If you think just because people have put in a few months of work it means they have solved strategy, you really are very ignorant.
Zerg hasn't saturated his 4th. Zerg has 1.7k minerals and 1k gas. APM doesn't matter, I don't care if you're a high bronze with 300 APM, that doesn't make you good.
So? I have higher APM than white-ra and lzgamer but they would still beat the crap out of me. My Z apm is also 150, it has to do with the fact that everything moves at 100 mph you automatically will have higher APM.
Also it's extremely common for Terran to be down in supply, even at pro level. Terran can't possibly compete with Zerg macro, they are about position, abuse, and maximizing efficiency ( with micro and said position ). I love how your post completely ignores all logic beyond supply and apm.
And that guy had terrible spire position, not my fault I took advantage of his huge mistake. He could have had it a million safe places. I don't put my tech lab researching stim unprotected and say muta are imba because I put it some where stupid, but seems like most Z's do.
Zerg entitlement is out of control... thanks idra.
Do you honestly think Zerg wouldn't complain about badly designed maps if Idra wasn't Zerg?
Do you see terrans complaining about taladar? Do you see terrans complaining about the almost unbeatable infestor + broodlord composition? Do you see terrans complaining that they have to micro excellent to be able to stand a chance while the zerg can just 1a? It's a fact that 90% of the zergs just complain whole the time. I got 6 zerg practice partners and 5 of them are very bm whiners who blame their losses on imbalance. I honestly think that this "zerg is so UP" trend is idra's fault.
thats not true. over on the bnet forums there is a huge ammount of QQ about infestors from both terran and toss. in game i get massive ammounts of QQ for using fungal even tho terrans have ghosts and emp to deal with infestors.
also its a fact that 98% of statistics on the internet is made up on the spot. like yours for example. well guess what bro, just because you have 6 zerg practice partners and 5 of them are BM whiners dont magically account them as 90% of zerg players that play this game.
and no its not idras fault. idra was a whiner in BW and he didnt play zerg.
also, infestor broodlord is not unbeatable. ghost for sniping and emp beats it and ravens hunter seeker missles utterly destroy broods. terrans just have yet to experiment with ravens and ghosts more effectively
People sometimes should really stay silent if they have no idea about high-level play of SC2. Ghosts are far from destroying Infestor/Broodlords combo and to try Hunter seeker missles against Broodlords while there is infestors with NP of range 9 ? lol.
How do you know what ravens and ghosts play like at high level play? The only person I've seen use ghosts as a main part of their army was BratOK in a match against Darkforce.
Also I've not seen ravens even used against this composition, so how do you know it wouldn't be good? PDD kills broodlings before they hit the ground. And hunter seeker missle might actually be good, but I've not seen it used.
So really your just as ignorant to these strategy's as everyone else, except your just giving one to why this wouldn't work. And if the only disadvantage this strategy has is NP is range 9, it isn't a very good reason. Considering EMP snipe and tanks.
I think the pros have tried using those units/spells in team practice already.
The problem with ghosts is that you need a shitton of them, because at best you can hit 3 infestors to drain them mana. And 1 shot drains 100 mana, so you have to hit like 20 emps, there's not much left for sniping action. Just pointing out the difficulties, not saying it's imbalanced or anything.
Yes, do you know how much Broodlords / Infestor cost ? Blizzard reduced Ghost gas price for a reason. Terran will eventually learn to play against such units.
BL/Infestor is very hard to get, it cost a ton of gas/money and you can't get them on camping 2 bases, you need 3/4 or more, and get a perfect transition (going straight to BL/Infestor will make you lose the game).
The problem with ghosts is that you need a shitton of them, because at best you can hit 3 infestors to drain them mana. And 1 shot drains 100 mana, so you have to hit like 20 emps, there's not much left for sniping action. Just pointing out the difficulties, not saying it's imbalanced or anything.
Yes, do you know how much Broodlords / Infestor cost ? Blizzard reduced Ghost gas price for a reason. Terran will eventually learn to play against such units.
BL/Infestor is very hard to get, it cost a ton of gas/money and you can't get them on camping 2 bases, you need 3/4 or more, and get a perfect transition (going straight to BL/Infestor will make you lose the game).
Balanced.
it was said many times already but the price change actually made ghosts less accesable than before
So? I have higher APM than white-ra and lzgamer but they would still beat the crap out of me. My Z apm is also 150, it has to do with the fact that everything moves at 100 mph you automatically will have higher APM.
Also it's extremely common for Terran to be down in supply, even at pro level. Terran can't possibly compete with Zerg macro, they are about position, abuse, and maximizing efficiency ( with micro and said position ). I love how your post completely ignores all logic beyond supply and apm.
And that guy had terrible spire position, not my fault I took advantage of his huge mistake. He could have had it a million safe places. I don't put my tech lab researching stim unprotected and say muta are imba because I put it some where stupid, but seems like most Z's do.
Zerg entitlement is out of control... thanks idra.
Do you honestly think Zerg wouldn't complain about badly designed maps if Idra wasn't Zerg?
Do you see terrans complaining about taladar? Do you see terrans complaining about the almost unbeatable infestor + broodlord composition? Do you see terrans complaining that they have to micro excellent to be able to stand a chance while the zerg can just 1a? It's a fact that 90% of the zergs just complain whole the time. I got 6 zerg practice partners and 5 of them are very bm whiners who blame their losses on imbalance. I honestly think that this "zerg is so UP" trend is idra's fault.
thats not true. over on the bnet forums there is a huge ammount of QQ about infestors from both terran and toss. in game i get massive ammounts of QQ for using fungal even tho terrans have ghosts and emp to deal with infestors.
The times have certainly changed. I played a game yesterday as random where the other guy asked me my race. I told him "The OP race" and he guessed zerg immediately 0.o
On July 16 2011 23:05 Elefanto wrote: The problem with ghosts is that you need a shitton of them, because at best you can hit 3 infestors to drain them mana. And 1 shot drains 100 mana, so you have to hit like 20 emps, there's not much left for sniping action. Just pointing out the difficulties, not saying it's imbalanced or anything.
Just tested this out. I managed to hit 11 infestors with 1 emp, which drains 1100 energy in total. Should test these things out before arguing about them =/
On July 16 2011 23:05 Elefanto wrote: The problem with ghosts is that you need a shitton of them, because at best you can hit 3 infestors to drain them mana. And 1 shot drains 100 mana, so you have to hit like 20 emps, there's not much left for sniping action. Just pointing out the difficulties, not saying it's imbalanced or anything.
Just tested this out. I managed to hit 11 infestors with 1 emp, which drains 1100 energy in total. Should test these things out before arguing about them =/
Well any decent player will be spreading them out...
The problem with ghosts is that you need a shitton of them, because at best you can hit 3 infestors to drain them mana. And 1 shot drains 100 mana, so you have to hit like 20 emps, there's not much left for sniping action. Just pointing out the difficulties, not saying it's imbalanced or anything.
Yes, do you know how much Broodlords / Infestor cost ? Blizzard reduced Ghost gas price for a reason. Terran will eventually learn to play against such units.
BL/Infestor is very hard to get, it cost a ton of gas/money and you can't get them on camping 2 bases, you need 3/4 or more, and get a perfect transition (going straight to BL/Infestor will make you lose the game).
On July 16 2011 23:05 Elefanto wrote: The problem with ghosts is that you need a shitton of them, because at best you can hit 3 infestors to drain them mana. And 1 shot drains 100 mana, so you have to hit like 20 emps, there's not much left for sniping action. Just pointing out the difficulties, not saying it's imbalanced or anything.
Just tested this out. I managed to hit 11 infestors with 1 emp, which drains 1100 energy in total. Should test these things out before arguing about them =/
Cant imagine how you would manage to hit 11. Tested it now 2 times with the absolute best outcome in term of zerg unit formation and emp hitting area. 9 were max, and those are fictive scenarios, in no real game would you manage to hit that many.
I decided to test out forge FE's on test map 4, because that is the "macro" map after finding that the ramp is much wider than shakuras in a PTR ladder game.......
Top right, 7 hexes from ramp to nexus. Very awkward to wall, idk what to do with this
Bottom right 5 hexes, one of a couple possible ways to do it.
Top left 5 hexes, again another way to do it.
Finally, bottom left, the only one that is extremely straightforward. 6 hexes from ramp to nexus.
For reference it takes 4 3x3 buildings AND 2 pylons to fully wall off the ramp...don't do it.
Your mineral line still seems so ridiculously exposed. Which I guess that's how it looks on Metalopolis too, but it seems like the angle of attack on Map 4 is much easier to get a runby than on Metal.
why is 7 hexes so hard to wall but 6 hexes is standard?
just plug the gap with a hold zealot :/
there's no need for perfect symmetry, there's plenty of luck involved in the game already - changing such a minor imperfection in the map design is like spoonfeeding the noobs.
On July 16 2011 23:05 Elefanto wrote: The problem with ghosts is that you need a shitton of them, because at best you can hit 3 infestors to drain them mana. And 1 shot drains 100 mana, so you have to hit like 20 emps, there's not much left for sniping action. Just pointing out the difficulties, not saying it's imbalanced or anything.
Just tested this out. I managed to hit 11 infestors with 1 emp, which drains 1100 energy in total. Should test these things out before arguing about them =/
Cant imagine how you would manage to hit 11. Tested it now 2 times with the absolute best outcome in term of zerg unit formation and emp hitting area. 9 were max, and those are fictive scenarios, in no real game would you manage to hit that many.
I got a single EMP to hit 14 infestors by just grouping them and moving them around a bit. Near-impossible situation in an actual game, but just saying, I don't see how you only got it to hit 9 max. + Show Spoiler +
On July 17 2011 06:07 shizna wrote: why is 7 hexes so hard to wall but 6 hexes is standard?
just plug the gap with a hold zealot :/
there's no need for perfect symmetry, there's plenty of luck involved in the game already - changing such a minor imperfection in the map design is like spoonfeeding the noobs.
Because on a map like that which is designed to be symmetrical (in this case rotationally symmetrical), why should spawning at one base have an inherent advantage or disadvantage over another, other than from the merits of being rotationally symmetrical? It would be like making one ramp on a map require 3 supply depots and a barracks while the others only need 2 supply depots and a barracks to wall off. It makes a huge difference, even though it seems insignificant.
On July 16 2011 23:05 Elefanto wrote: The problem with ghosts is that you need a shitton of them, because at best you can hit 3 infestors to drain them mana. And 1 shot drains 100 mana, so you have to hit like 20 emps, there's not much left for sniping action. Just pointing out the difficulties, not saying it's imbalanced or anything.
Just tested this out. I managed to hit 11 infestors with 1 emp, which drains 1100 energy in total. Should test these things out before arguing about them =/
Cant imagine how you would manage to hit 11. Tested it now 2 times with the absolute best outcome in term of zerg unit formation and emp hitting area. 9 were max, and those are fictive scenarios, in no real game would you manage to hit that many.
even if u got 9 infestors with one emp that is still ALOT of infestors. a 2nd emp will easily finish the rest of the infestors off that have energy left. it only takes 2 ghosts with 100 energy each or 1 ghosts with 200 energy. most zergs tend to clump up there infestors for easy emping anyway.
take destiny for example. a player that has a playstyle heavily centered around infestors yet they are always vulnerable to emps or snipes.
I remember when they were going to change infestor's fungal to not hit flying, and when they were going to make fungal an avoidable projectile. Then zerg players whined their way out of it, with little if any real world testing being done and the whining being the sole factor in not doing it. Now when an army gets fungaled all the person can do is sit there and hope the zerg player misses one of the following fungals so they can get away and not loose every unit. It's really bad like this. Not to mention infestors can burrow and move around like a cloaked ghost for 0 mana cost. All the people complaining about infestor broodlord, just wait till the zergs get smart and start dumping all their minerals on queens in the late game with this combo. It's completely absurd. Queens can tank a lot of damage, heal the infestors and broodlords, provide long range anti air support, and are pretty cheap, without costing larva. In the late game the creep will be all over the place anyway, giving the zerg a FREE speed bonus and sight of half the map. So the queens will be able to keep up with the army fairly well, considering how slow broodlords are anyway. My point is there are some serious things that need to be fixed and Blizzard won't stand up to the zerg whine storm that will follow. They've nerfed thors, medevacs, tanks, vikings, stim for terran and they adapted. They nerfed warp gate research, took away void speed and HT amulet, nerfed zealot and forge build time, nerfed pylon radius, nerfed motherships, and protoss adapted. I can only imagine what would happen if Blizzard proposed nerfing one of zerg's core mechanics like larva inject, or a core unit like lings or roaches, or took away, weakened, or nerfed some of zergs upgrades. Seriously, does anyone not see a serious issue with the mentality at work in all of this? Also, I can't even tell you all the times there has been zergs saying things like banelings are useless in pvz, or that the deathball is unstoppable (even without using infestors), or that void colossus was imbalanced. Zerg players collectively folded their arms and refused to innovate, until after balance changes were made. All of these things turned out to be completely false, but the game seems to have been balanced as if they were fact. TLDR: Sure, I may not be spot on with every fact or opinion in this thread, but again there is a serious issue with the mentality at work here. Nerf what ever you want for terran or toss and they will suck it up and work around it. If you even suggest a nerf for anything zerg and they will blast the forums with whine until it is changed or dismissed to their advantage. Stop playing the victim.
Having a PTR, with a week to test and pretty much no chance of map changes (even though all of the high level community has already decried many of the new maps for having the same problems as the old maps) seems pointless, and sort of rude actually.
On July 17 2011 11:10 Reborn8u wrote: I remember when they were going to change infestor's fungal to not hit flying, and when they were going to make fungal an avoidable projectile. Then zerg players whined their way out of it, with little if any real world testing being done and the whining being the sole factor in not doing it. Now when an army gets fungaled all the person can do is sit there and hope the zerg player misses one of the following fungals so they can get away and not loose every unit. It's really bad like this. Not to mention infestors can burrow and move around like a cloaked ghost for 0 mana cost. All the people complaining about infestor broodlord, just wait till the zergs get smart and start dumping all their minerals on queens in the late game with this combo. It's completely absurd. Queens can tank a lot of damage, heal the infestors and broodlords, provide long range anti air support, and are pretty cheap, without costing larva. In the late game the creep will be all over the place anyway, giving the zerg a FREE speed bonus and sight of half the map. So the queens will be able to keep up with the army fairly well, considering how slow broodlords are anyway. My point is there are some serious things that need to be fixed and Blizzard won't stand up to the zerg whine storm that will follow. They've nerfed thors, medevacs, tanks, vikings, stim for terran and they adapted. They nerfed warp gate research, took away void speed and HT amulet, nerfed zealot and forge build time, nerfed pylon radius, nerfed motherships, and protoss adapted. I can only imagine what would happen if Blizzard proposed nerfing one of zerg's core mechanics like larva inject, or a core unit like lings or roaches, or took away, weakened, or nerfed some of zergs upgrades. Seriously, does anyone not see a serious issue with the mentality at work in all of this? Also, I can't even tell you all the times there has been zergs saying things like banelings are useless in pvz, or that the deathball is unstoppable (even without using infestors), or that void colossus was imbalanced. Zerg players collectively folded their arms and refused to innovate, until after balance changes were made. All of these things turned out to be completely false, but the game seems to have been balanced as if they were fact. TLDR: Sure, I may not be spot on with every fact or opinion in this thread, but again there is a serious issue with the mentality at work here. Nerf what ever you want for terran or toss and they will suck it up and work around it. If you even suggest a nerf for anything zerg and they will blast the forums with whine until it is changed or dismissed to their advantage. Stop playing the victim.
On July 16 2011 23:05 Elefanto wrote: The problem with ghosts is that you need a shitton of them, because at best you can hit 3 infestors to drain them mana. And 1 shot drains 100 mana, so you have to hit like 20 emps, there's not much left for sniping action. Just pointing out the difficulties, not saying it's imbalanced or anything.
Just tested this out. I managed to hit 11 infestors with 1 emp, which drains 1100 energy in total. Should test these things out before arguing about them =/
Cant imagine how you would manage to hit 11. Tested it now 2 times with the absolute best outcome in term of zerg unit formation and emp hitting area. 9 were max, and those are fictive scenarios, in no real game would you manage to hit that many.
Dunno how you only hit 9 max, I just right clicked a location with a cluster of infestors, hit hold position and sent in a ghost to EMP once and I hit 11. + Show Spoiler +
Tried it a 2nd time and got 12.
Tried a 3rd time with the infestors on a move command and hit 11.
Obviously the effect is diminished if they micro to try and keep infestors split, but 11 seems perfectly reasonable.
I don't understand why Terrans are crying nerf for the infestor like it was the most powerful spell in the game. FF is by far the most powerful spell with it's ability to completely control how a battle will go down. Being able to cut an army in half and deny reinforcements is far more powerful than holding down a group of marines for 4 seconds and doing 36 damage. Siege Tanks do 35 damage in siege mode, Storm does 80 damage, but Zerg can't have a spell that does 36 to your marines?
Never mind the fact that Ghosts can nullify infestors with their EMP. Never mind that a group of 5 ghosts can snipe off 20 infestors, a little less while cloaked (2 snipes kill an infestor. Just shift+double click an infestor). In this hypothetical where infestor/broodlord is unstoppable, I am taken back to TSL3. Remember when Protoss could just turtle to VR/Stalker/Colossus max army and roll over anything the zerg could make? In fact, they still can. When Zergs were crying imbalanced, they were told to deal with it and find ways around it. The ultimate solution has been to just prevent Protoss players from being able to get that composition. There is still nothing a Zerg can do against that army if the protoss gets it. Not even the oh so squishy infestor can stop it, for they are still squishy. Infestors help, but it is the NP mainly that helps out.
Perhaps Terrans should do against Zerg what Zergs were forced to do against Protoss, and change up your strategy and game play. There is a lot of room to make different late game strategies, perhaps you should start with the unit that directly shuts down infestors, the Ghost(Blizzard even made them cheaper for you.).
I have a funny feeling that the real reason Terrans don't make Ghosts is the same reason they don't make Ravens. They don't have a Tech lab on any/enough barracks in the late game, and don't want to bother to do so.
On July 18 2011 02:59 DarkDolphin wrote: Map TEST 1 , is a SC2 version of "La Mancha" from Broodwar, ^___________^. I wouldn't be surprised if is called the same name.
http:
The other maps are just pure crap
That's pretty amazing, actually. I suppose it's not unprecedented (Crossfire is basically Sin Peaks of Beakdu), but it's still weird. And it makes a lot of the complaining slightly funny retroactively.
I doubt they'd call it La Mancha, though. That's a KeSPA map.
Edit: I also just noticed the rocks in your natural. ....Why? They're not blocking anything. Destroying them doesn't open a new path. They're just there. It is to make it easier to wall off?
On July 18 2011 02:59 DarkDolphin wrote: Map TEST 1 , is a SC2 version of "La Mancha" from Broodwar, ^___________^. I wouldn't be surprised if is called the same name.
http:
The other maps are just pure crap
I really love La Mancha :D
Tbh I think Blizz should just copy BW maps and make some changes and make it look different because the rest of their maps are just utter trash tbh...
On July 18 2011 02:59 DarkDolphin wrote: Map TEST 1 , is a SC2 version of "La Mancha" from Broodwar, ^___________^. I wouldn't be surprised if is called the same name.
http:
The other maps are just pure crap
I really love La Mancha :D
Tbh I think Blizz should just copy BW maps and make some changes and make it look different because the rest of their maps are just utter trash tbh...
On July 18 2011 02:59 DarkDolphin wrote: Map TEST 1 , is a SC2 version of "La Mancha" from Broodwar, ^___________^. I wouldn't be surprised if is called the same name.
http:
The other maps are just pure crap
That's pretty amazing, actually. I suppose it's not unprecedented (Crossfire is basically Sin Peaks of Beakdu), but it's still weird. And it makes a lot of the complaining slightly funny retroactively.
I doubt they'd call it La Mancha, though. That's a KeSPA map.
Edit: I also just noticed the rocks in your natural. ....Why? They're not blocking anything. Destroying them doesn't open a new path. They're just there. It is to make it easier to wall off?
Indeed, it reduces the number of 3x3 buildings required to wall off from 4 to 3. A little bit of an added bonus.
On July 17 2011 05:59 Amui wrote: I decided to test out forge FE's on test map 4, because that is the "macro" map after finding that the ramp is much wider than shakuras in a PTR ladder game.......
Top right, 7 hexes from ramp to nexus. Very awkward to wall, idk what to do with this
Well I noticed this too and here's how I've decided to deal with it... That pylon powering the two cannons is only necessary for the second cannon on the right side of the nexus; the first pylon is the bottom left one, and it powers both buildings plus the one cannon. It's not an ideal setup, but... it allows for a complete wall-off. There's also a modification you can make to this wall, which is personally the way I would do it: This one might seem like an unimportant difference, but i have it shown here because this one leaves the initial pylon less surface area to be attacked by lings or banelings.
Also, see the zealot in both pictures? This is not necessary for a complete wall-off, but I have one there to illustrate that, if need be, you can place a zealot here if the initial pylon is being focused down so that units could run through - the zealot blocks it off, and you can even place a pylon behind him later on which would act as a third layer of a wall, though that's completely optional.
What I have here is definitely not an ideal wall-in for a forge FE, but I really think it's the best you can do here...
Test Map 3 and 4 are okay. 3 is actually pretty good. Test Map 2 natural is so hard to hold it makes me want to kill myself. They can't be serious about putting this into the map pool. Overall the maps need to be bigger and have less ramps. It's ridiculous.
On July 18 2011 02:59 DarkDolphin wrote: Map TEST 1 , is a SC2 version of "La Mancha" from Broodwar, ^___________^. I wouldn't be surprised if is called the same name.
http:
The other maps are just pure crap
I really love La Mancha :D
Tbh I think Blizz should just copy BW maps and make some changes and make it look different because the rest of their maps are just utter trash tbh...
I don't think that BW maps translate all that well to SC2 (I think the reason there's no ICCUP Destination was that it was a disaster of a map in SC2).
I'd actually like it a lot better if it were like Terminus, Taldarim, Bel'Shir Beach, Dual Site, and then Kerrigan's Wrath, an Island map, etc. I want more experimentation on the Blizz ladder, and more people using NTBL for "real" laddering.
On July 18 2011 02:59 DarkDolphin wrote: Map TEST 1 , is a SC2 version of "La Mancha" from Broodwar, ^___________^. I wouldn't be surprised if is called the same name.
http:
The other maps are just pure crap
That's pretty amazing, actually. I suppose it's not unprecedented (Crossfire is basically Sin Peaks of Beakdu), but it's still weird. And it makes a lot of the complaining slightly funny retroactively.
I doubt they'd call it La Mancha, though. That's a KeSPA map.
Edit: I also just noticed the rocks in your natural. ....Why? They're not blocking anything. Destroying them doesn't open a new path. They're just there. It is to make it easier to wall off?
Indeed, it reduces the number of 3x3 buildings required to wall off from 4 to 3. A little bit of an added bonus.
Hm. I'm starting to think about walling off with evo chambers as Zerg. Get like two evos, a spine, and a queen and be really defended, especially against Hellions. I should try it later and see how it goes.
On July 17 2011 11:10 Reborn8u wrote: I remember when they were going to change infestor's fungal to not hit flying, and when they were going to make fungal an avoidable projectile. Then zerg players whined their way out of it, with little if any real world testing being done and the whining being the sole factor in not doing it. Now when an army gets fungaled all the person can do is sit there and hope the zerg player misses one of the following fungals so they can get away and not loose every unit. It's really bad like this. Not to mention infestors can burrow and move around like a cloaked ghost for 0 mana cost. All the people complaining about infestor broodlord, just wait till the zergs get smart and start dumping all their minerals on queens in the late game with this combo. It's completely absurd. Queens can tank a lot of damage, heal the infestors and broodlords, provide long range anti air support, and are pretty cheap, without costing larva. In the late game the creep will be all over the place anyway, giving the zerg a FREE speed bonus and sight of half the map. So the queens will be able to keep up with the army fairly well, considering how slow broodlords are anyway. My point is there are some serious things that need to be fixed and Blizzard won't stand up to the zerg whine storm that will follow. They've nerfed thors, medevacs, tanks, vikings, stim for terran and they adapted. They nerfed warp gate research, took away void speed and HT amulet, nerfed zealot and forge build time, nerfed pylon radius, nerfed motherships, and protoss adapted. I can only imagine what would happen if Blizzard proposed nerfing one of zerg's core mechanics like larva inject, or a core unit like lings or roaches, or took away, weakened, or nerfed some of zergs upgrades. Seriously, does anyone not see a serious issue with the mentality at work in all of this? Also, I can't even tell you all the times there has been zergs saying things like banelings are useless in pvz, or that the deathball is unstoppable (even without using infestors), or that void colossus was imbalanced. Zerg players collectively folded their arms and refused to innovate, until after balance changes were made. All of these things turned out to be completely false, but the game seems to have been balanced as if they were fact. TLDR: Sure, I may not be spot on with every fact or opinion in this thread, but again there is a serious issue with the mentality at work here. Nerf what ever you want for terran or toss and they will suck it up and work around it. If you even suggest a nerf for anything zerg and they will blast the forums with whine until it is changed or dismissed to their advantage. Stop playing the victim.
I must say that I somewhat agree with this. Obviously not all Zerg players are like this, but behind almost every stereotype there's some uncomfortable truth. Everyone is biased, including myself, and since I'm not a Zerg player my agreeing with this obviously looks pretty self-serving, but it's definitely an opinion that I've developed from lurking and posting on various forums since the very first GSL, so I just thought I'd tell you that you're not alone on this.
On July 17 2011 11:10 Reborn8u wrote: I remember when they were going to change infestor's fungal to not hit flying, and when they were going to make fungal an avoidable projectile. Then zerg players whined their way out of it, with little if any real world testing being done and the whining being the sole factor in not doing it. Now when an army gets fungaled all the person can do is sit there and hope the zerg player misses one of the following fungals so they can get away and not loose every unit. It's really bad like this. Not to mention infestors can burrow and move around like a cloaked ghost for 0 mana cost. All the people complaining about infestor broodlord, just wait till the zergs get smart and start dumping all their minerals on queens in the late game with this combo. It's completely absurd. Queens can tank a lot of damage, heal the infestors and broodlords, provide long range anti air support, and are pretty cheap, without costing larva. In the late game the creep will be all over the place anyway, giving the zerg a FREE speed bonus and sight of half the map. So the queens will be able to keep up with the army fairly well, considering how slow broodlords are anyway. My point is there are some serious things that need to be fixed and Blizzard won't stand up to the zerg whine storm that will follow. They've nerfed thors, medevacs, tanks, vikings, stim for terran and they adapted. They nerfed warp gate research, took away void speed and HT amulet, nerfed zealot and forge build time, nerfed pylon radius, nerfed motherships, and protoss adapted. I can only imagine what would happen if Blizzard proposed nerfing one of zerg's core mechanics like larva inject, or a core unit like lings or roaches, or took away, weakened, or nerfed some of zergs upgrades. Seriously, does anyone not see a serious issue with the mentality at work in all of this? Also, I can't even tell you all the times there has been zergs saying things like banelings are useless in pvz, or that the deathball is unstoppable (even without using infestors), or that void colossus was imbalanced. Zerg players collectively folded their arms and refused to innovate, until after balance changes were made. All of these things turned out to be completely false, but the game seems to have been balanced as if they were fact. TLDR: Sure, I may not be spot on with every fact or opinion in this thread, but again there is a serious issue with the mentality at work here. Nerf what ever you want for terran or toss and they will suck it up and work around it. If you even suggest a nerf for anything zerg and they will blast the forums with whine until it is changed or dismissed to their advantage. Stop playing the victim.
On July 17 2011 11:10 Reborn8u wrote: I remember when they were going to change infestor's fungal to not hit flying, and when they were going to make fungal an avoidable projectile. Then zerg players whined their way out of it, with little if any real world testing being done and the whining being the sole factor in not doing it. Now when an army gets fungaled all the person can do is sit there and hope the zerg player misses one of the following fungals so they can get away and not loose every unit. It's really bad like this. Not to mention infestors can burrow and move around like a cloaked ghost for 0 mana cost. All the people complaining about infestor broodlord, just wait till the zergs get smart and start dumping all their minerals on queens in the late game with this combo. It's completely absurd. Queens can tank a lot of damage, heal the infestors and broodlords, provide long range anti air support, and are pretty cheap, without costing larva. In the late game the creep will be all over the place anyway, giving the zerg a FREE speed bonus and sight of half the map. So the queens will be able to keep up with the army fairly well, considering how slow broodlords are anyway. My point is there are some serious things that need to be fixed and Blizzard won't stand up to the zerg whine storm that will follow. They've nerfed thors, medevacs, tanks, vikings, stim for terran and they adapted. They nerfed warp gate research, took away void speed and HT amulet, nerfed zealot and forge build time, nerfed pylon radius, nerfed motherships, and protoss adapted. I can only imagine what would happen if Blizzard proposed nerfing one of zerg's core mechanics like larva inject, or a core unit like lings or roaches, or took away, weakened, or nerfed some of zergs upgrades. Seriously, does anyone not see a serious issue with the mentality at work in all of this? Also, I can't even tell you all the times there has been zergs saying things like banelings are useless in pvz, or that the deathball is unstoppable (even without using infestors), or that void colossus was imbalanced. Zerg players collectively folded their arms and refused to innovate, until after balance changes were made. All of these things turned out to be completely false, but the game seems to have been balanced as if they were fact. TLDR: Sure, I may not be spot on with every fact or opinion in this thread, but again there is a serious issue with the mentality at work here. Nerf what ever you want for terran or toss and they will suck it up and work around it. If you even suggest a nerf for anything zerg and they will blast the forums with whine until it is changed or dismissed to their advantage. Stop playing the victim.
The "" face in your signature is quite fitting. Maybe you should whine less and find ways to work around the problems you're talking about.
Hey reborn maybe you should notice that Zerg hit with the nerf bat multiple times from the very beginning of beta (Roach supply + armor, Hydra HP, Infestor HP, Queen off-creep speed, Spine/Spore burrow). ZERGS HAVE BEEN SUCKING IT UP AND WORKING AROUND IT FOREVER. Selective hindsight makes your posts very ugly and stupid.
Oh, and Zerg players don't act as a hive mind regardless of what you'd like to think. Buzz off with your biased garbage.
On July 17 2011 11:10 Reborn8u wrote: I remember when they were going to change infestor's fungal to not hit flying, and when they were going to make fungal an avoidable projectile. Then zerg players whined their way out of it, with little if any real world testing being done and the whining being the sole factor in not doing it. Now when an army gets fungaled all the person can do is sit there and hope the zerg player misses one of the following fungals so they can get away and not loose every unit. It's really bad like this. Not to mention infestors can burrow and move around like a cloaked ghost for 0 mana cost. All the people complaining about infestor broodlord, just wait till the zergs get smart and start dumping all their minerals on queens in the late game with this combo. It's completely absurd. Queens can tank a lot of damage, heal the infestors and broodlords, provide long range anti air support, and are pretty cheap, without costing larva. In the late game the creep will be all over the place anyway, giving the zerg a FREE speed bonus and sight of half the map. So the queens will be able to keep up with the army fairly well, considering how slow broodlords are anyway. My point is there are some serious things that need to be fixed and Blizzard won't stand up to the zerg whine storm that will follow. They've nerfed thors, medevacs, tanks, vikings, stim for terran and they adapted. They nerfed warp gate research, took away void speed and HT amulet, nerfed zealot and forge build time, nerfed pylon radius, nerfed motherships, and protoss adapted. I can only imagine what would happen if Blizzard proposed nerfing one of zerg's core mechanics like larva inject, or a core unit like lings or roaches, or took away, weakened, or nerfed some of zergs upgrades. Seriously, does anyone not see a serious issue with the mentality at work in all of this? Also, I can't even tell you all the times there has been zergs saying things like banelings are useless in pvz, or that the deathball is unstoppable (even without using infestors), or that void colossus was imbalanced. Zerg players collectively folded their arms and refused to innovate, until after balance changes were made. All of these things turned out to be completely false, but the game seems to have been balanced as if they were fact. TLDR: Sure, I may not be spot on with every fact or opinion in this thread, but again there is a serious issue with the mentality at work here. Nerf what ever you want for terran or toss and they will suck it up and work around it. If you even suggest a nerf for anything zerg and they will blast the forums with whine until it is changed or dismissed to their advantage. Stop playing the victim.
Except absolutely nothing has happened to indicate Zerg needs a nerf. Zerg doesn't suddenly have a high tournament win rate, that's still Terran. There isn't a Zerg build that is unstoppable or anything close to it. Korean Terrans already know how to deal with infestor/brood lord with ghosts. Almost every ZvT being won with infestor/brood lord is just the logical conclusion of Zerg being ahead the entire game, trading lots of zerglings and few gas units for gas-heavy tanks and thors while being a base up, but having no possible way to attack Terran other than this combination of units. (You will never kill a Terran with anything else after the early game aside from totally money-starving him or overwhelming with pure muta count.) Infestor/Brood Lord can be easily whittled away with cheaper units if you're in the economic position to fight a war of attrition, and it opens Zerg to counter drops.
And the infestor nerfs in the PTR were absolutely stupid because it was literally impossible to deal with Protoss air units at any point in the game, or land a single fungal on a ball of units (not to mention the horribly slow projectile effectively reduced the range of the spell to almost nothing, so marine/tank totally destroyed infestors without even having to split up).
On July 17 2011 11:10 Reborn8u wrote: I remember when they were going to change infestor's fungal to not hit flying, and when they were going to make fungal an avoidable projectile. Then zerg players whined their way out of it, with little if any real world testing being done and the whining being the sole factor in not doing it. Now when an army gets fungaled all the person can do is sit there and hope the zerg player misses one of the following fungals so they can get away and not loose every unit. It's really bad like this. Not to mention infestors can burrow and move around like a cloaked ghost for 0 mana cost. All the people complaining about infestor broodlord, just wait till the zergs get smart and start dumping all their minerals on queens in the late game with this combo. It's completely absurd. Queens can tank a lot of damage, heal the infestors and broodlords, provide long range anti air support, and are pretty cheap, without costing larva. In the late game the creep will be all over the place anyway, giving the zerg a FREE speed bonus and sight of half the map. So the queens will be able to keep up with the army fairly well, considering how slow broodlords are anyway. My point is there are some serious things that need to be fixed and Blizzard won't stand up to the zerg whine storm that will follow. They've nerfed thors, medevacs, tanks, vikings, stim for terran and they adapted. They nerfed warp gate research, took away void speed and HT amulet, nerfed zealot and forge build time, nerfed pylon radius, nerfed motherships, and protoss adapted. I can only imagine what would happen if Blizzard proposed nerfing one of zerg's core mechanics like larva inject, or a core unit like lings or roaches, or took away, weakened, or nerfed some of zergs upgrades. Seriously, does anyone not see a serious issue with the mentality at work in all of this? Also, I can't even tell you all the times there has been zergs saying things like banelings are useless in pvz, or that the deathball is unstoppable (even without using infestors), or that void colossus was imbalanced. Zerg players collectively folded their arms and refused to innovate, until after balance changes were made. All of these things turned out to be completely false, but the game seems to have been balanced as if they were fact. TLDR: Sure, I may not be spot on with every fact or opinion in this thread, but again there is a serious issue with the mentality at work here. Nerf what ever you want for terran or toss and they will suck it up and work around it. If you even suggest a nerf for anything zerg and they will blast the forums with whine until it is changed or dismissed to their advantage. Stop playing the victim.
Except absolutely nothing has happened to indicate Zerg needs a nerf. Zerg doesn't suddenly have a high tournament win rate, that's still Terran. There isn't a Zerg build that is unstoppable or anything close to it. Korean Terrans already know how to deal with infestor/brood lord with ghosts. Almost every ZvT being won with infestor/brood lord is just the logical conclusion of Zerg being ahead the entire game, trading lots of zerglings and few gas units for gas-heavy tanks and thors while being a base up, but having no possible way to attack Terran other than this combination of units. (You will never kill a Terran with anything else after the early game aside from totally money-starving him or overwhelming with pure muta count.) Infestor/Brood Lord can be easily whittled away with cheaper units if you're in the economic position to fight a war of attrition, and it opens Zerg to counter drops.
And the infestor nerfs in the PTR were absolutely stupid because it was literally impossible to deal with Protoss air units at any point in the game, or land a single fungal on a ball of units (not to mention the horribly slow projectile effectively reduced the range of the spell to almost nothing, so marine/tank totally destroyed infestors without even having to split up).
You really could make a post like that to explain why Protoss/Terran don't need nerfs, and it would seem reasonable, because all you're doing is loosely theorycrafting. All I can say is that I've indeed seen plenty of things that contradict many of the claims you make. I'm really tired of seeing people going "Zerg will NEVER be able to win here" or "It's literally impossible to win here". That's the exact sort of mentality that the guy you're replying to is talking about. You only deal with absolutes, so sure of the supposed futility of various situations as a Zerg player - yet, when people see Zergs actually triumph in those supposedly futile situations, lots of Zerg players will just go, "Oh, the Zerg was way ahead of and/or a better player than his opponent, so that's why he did manage to win there" to handwave the contradictions in their lame theorycraft. I'd like to add that in multiple winrate statistic topics, Protoss seemed to have the lowest overall tournament performance, yet plenty of people were happy to dismiss them as being too small of a sample pool to really indicate anything, which I agree with, so please don't try to bring up tournament winrates as evidence of anything. It's just tiring to see that sort of mentality manifest over and over, and it's likely why the "Zerg QQ" stereotype exists.
On July 18 2011 07:49 Chubbaluphigous wrote: I don't understand why Terrans are crying nerf for the infestor like it was the most powerful spell in the game. FF is by far the most powerful spell with it's ability to completely control how a battle will go down. Being able to cut an army in half and deny reinforcements is far more powerful than holding down a group of marines for 4 seconds and doing 36 damage. Siege Tanks do 35 damage in siege mode, Storm does 80 damage, but Zerg can't have a spell that does 36 to your marines?
It's not just the total damage of the spell that people complain about. Fungal Growth completely shuts down any and all micro potential for the opposing army, and against anything that can't out range the spell (such as marines for example) a single fungal growth sets the units up to be repeatedly hit with the spell again and again until they die from the damage. Storm can be micro'd out of (so it's often 20-40 damage not 80) and force fields can be popped by massive units if you really need to get them out of the way (and only work on ground units, but still also allows the opposing units to micro to some extent).
Never mind the fact that Ghosts can nullify infestors with their EMP. Never mind that a group of 5 ghosts can snipe off 20 infestors, a little less while cloaked (2 snipes kill an infestor. Just shift+double click an infestor). In this hypothetical where infestor/broodlord is unstoppable, I am taken back to TSL3. Remember when Protoss could just turtle to VR/Stalker/Colossus max army and roll over anything the zerg could make? In fact, they still can. When Zergs were crying imbalanced, they were told to deal with it and find ways around it. The ultimate solution has been to just prevent Protoss players from being able to get that composition. There is still nothing a Zerg can do against that army if the protoss gets it. Not even the oh so squishy infestor can stop it, for they are still squishy. Infestors help, but it is the NP mainly that helps out.
Except Ghosts often take 3 snipes to kill an infester due to a bug* with Zerg Health Regeneration. While this by no means makes it impossible to use Ghosts to deal with infesters and Broodlords, it does make it quite APM intensive, and is certainly much more difficult to pull off then it is to play against (not that that is necessarily bad). I/BL is certainly powerful, but it is by no means unstoppable, just excruciatingly cost efficient.
*The cooldown on health regen for zerg units continues to tick while the unit is at full health so it recovers the first point of damage almost immediately when it takes its first portion of damage, as opposed to having to wait the duration of the cooldown to recover the first hitpoint. It is possible for two Ghosts to kill a single Infester in two snipes provided they are both told to snipe the same target and both do so within less than one tenth of a second of each other (to not allow the health point to regen), a single Ghost cannot kill an Infester in two Snipes because ZHR will kick in during the cooldown between the snipes leaving the Infester with 1hp after two snipes. It is this same bug that is the reason the 250mm Strike Cannon from the Thor will not kill an Ultralisk and why a Drone will always beat a Probe in a duel (with no micro).
I think even without the infestor unit, Zerg might have an advantage ZvT lategame. I mean, before the buff, it was still viewed as pretty hard for the Terran if he didn't go into the late game with an advantage due to the broodlord/ultralisk food cycling Zerg players would do. With infestor/broodlord, it feels more like Zerg players will just outright crush the Terran in one go, but Zerg players don't need infestors to crush a Terran lategame in two blows if they have any sort of advantage.
On July 17 2011 11:10 Reborn8u wrote: I remember when they were going to change infestor's fungal to not hit flying, and when they were going to make fungal an avoidable projectile. Then zerg players whined their way out of it, with little if any real world testing being done and the whining being the sole factor in not doing it. Now when an army gets fungaled all the person can do is sit there and hope the zerg player misses one of the following fungals so they can get away and not loose every unit. It's really bad like this. Not to mention infestors can burrow and move around like a cloaked ghost for 0 mana cost. All the people complaining about infestor broodlord, just wait till the zergs get smart and start dumping all their minerals on queens in the late game with this combo. It's completely absurd. Queens can tank a lot of damage, heal the infestors and broodlords, provide long range anti air support, and are pretty cheap, without costing larva. In the late game the creep will be all over the place anyway, giving the zerg a FREE speed bonus and sight of half the map. So the queens will be able to keep up with the army fairly well, considering how slow broodlords are anyway. My point is there are some serious things that need to be fixed and Blizzard won't stand up to the zerg whine storm that will follow. They've nerfed thors, medevacs, tanks, vikings, stim for terran and they adapted. They nerfed warp gate research, took away void speed and HT amulet, nerfed zealot and forge build time, nerfed pylon radius, nerfed motherships, and protoss adapted. I can only imagine what would happen if Blizzard proposed nerfing one of zerg's core mechanics like larva inject, or a core unit like lings or roaches, or took away, weakened, or nerfed some of zergs upgrades. Seriously, does anyone not see a serious issue with the mentality at work in all of this? Also, I can't even tell you all the times there has been zergs saying things like banelings are useless in pvz, or that the deathball is unstoppable (even without using infestors), or that void colossus was imbalanced. Zerg players collectively folded their arms and refused to innovate, until after balance changes were made. All of these things turned out to be completely false, but the game seems to have been balanced as if they were fact. TLDR: Sure, I may not be spot on with every fact or opinion in this thread, but again there is a serious issue with the mentality at work here. Nerf what ever you want for terran or toss and they will suck it up and work around it. If you even suggest a nerf for anything zerg and they will blast the forums with whine until it is changed or dismissed to their advantage. Stop playing the victim.
On July 17 2011 11:10 Reborn8u wrote: I remember when they were going to change infestor's fungal to not hit flying, and when they were going to make fungal an avoidable projectile. Then zerg players whined their way out of it, with little if any real world testing being done and the whining being the sole factor in not doing it. Now when an army gets fungaled all the person can do is sit there and hope the zerg player misses one of the following fungals so they can get away and not loose every unit. It's really bad like this. Not to mention infestors can burrow and move around like a cloaked ghost for 0 mana cost. All the people complaining about infestor broodlord, just wait till the zergs get smart and start dumping all their minerals on queens in the late game with this combo. It's completely absurd. Queens can tank a lot of damage, heal the infestors and broodlords, provide long range anti air support, and are pretty cheap, without costing larva. In the late game the creep will be all over the place anyway, giving the zerg a FREE speed bonus and sight of half the map. So the queens will be able to keep up with the army fairly well, considering how slow broodlords are anyway. My point is there are some serious things that need to be fixed and Blizzard won't stand up to the zerg whine storm that will follow. They've nerfed thors, medevacs, tanks, vikings, stim for terran and they adapted. They nerfed warp gate research, took away void speed and HT amulet, nerfed zealot and forge build time, nerfed pylon radius, nerfed motherships, and protoss adapted. I can only imagine what would happen if Blizzard proposed nerfing one of zerg's core mechanics like larva inject, or a core unit like lings or roaches, or took away, weakened, or nerfed some of zergs upgrades. Seriously, does anyone not see a serious issue with the mentality at work in all of this? Also, I can't even tell you all the times there has been zergs saying things like banelings are useless in pvz, or that the deathball is unstoppable (even without using infestors), or that void colossus was imbalanced. Zerg players collectively folded their arms and refused to innovate, until after balance changes were made. All of these things turned out to be completely false, but the game seems to have been balanced as if they were fact. TLDR: Sure, I may not be spot on with every fact or opinion in this thread, but again there is a serious issue with the mentality at work here. Nerf what ever you want for terran or toss and they will suck it up and work around it. If you even suggest a nerf for anything zerg and they will blast the forums with whine until it is changed or dismissed to their advantage. Stop playing the victim.
On July 17 2011 11:10 Reborn8u wrote: I remember when they were going to change infestor's fungal to not hit flying, and when they were going to make fungal an avoidable projectile. Then zerg players whined their way out of it, with little if any real world testing being done and the whining being the sole factor in not doing it. Now when an army gets fungaled all the person can do is sit there and hope the zerg player misses one of the following fungals so they can get away and not loose every unit. It's really bad like this. Not to mention infestors can burrow and move around like a cloaked ghost for 0 mana cost. All the people complaining about infestor broodlord, just wait till the zergs get smart and start dumping all their minerals on queens in the late game with this combo. It's completely absurd. Queens can tank a lot of damage, heal the infestors and broodlords, provide long range anti air support, and are pretty cheap, without costing larva. In the late game the creep will be all over the place anyway, giving the zerg a FREE speed bonus and sight of half the map. So the queens will be able to keep up with the army fairly well, considering how slow broodlords are anyway. My point is there are some serious things that need to be fixed and Blizzard won't stand up to the zerg whine storm that will follow. They've nerfed thors, medevacs, tanks, vikings, stim for terran and they adapted. They nerfed warp gate research, took away void speed and HT amulet, nerfed zealot and forge build time, nerfed pylon radius, nerfed motherships, and protoss adapted. I can only imagine what would happen if Blizzard proposed nerfing one of zerg's core mechanics like larva inject, or a core unit like lings or roaches, or took away, weakened, or nerfed some of zergs upgrades. Seriously, does anyone not see a serious issue with the mentality at work in all of this? Also, I can't even tell you all the times there has been zergs saying things like banelings are useless in pvz, or that the deathball is unstoppable (even without using infestors), or that void colossus was imbalanced. Zerg players collectively folded their arms and refused to innovate, until after balance changes were made. All of these things turned out to be completely false, but the game seems to have been balanced as if they were fact. TLDR: Sure, I may not be spot on with every fact or opinion in this thread, but again there is a serious issue with the mentality at work here. Nerf what ever you want for terran or toss and they will suck it up and work around it. If you even suggest a nerf for anything zerg and they will blast the forums with whine until it is changed or dismissed to their advantage. Stop playing the victim.
This. Perhaps the Zerg race as a whole needs a redesign, but it is also pathetic that they are the only race in the game capable of successfully using QQ politics to get the other races nerfed/theirs buffed. Despite this, when other races attempt to make the same sorts of complaints (and note, this is a joint effort between Terran and Protoss players, not just one race qq'ing), Zerg players now try to hush them for "qqing". Sad.
Edit: Shame on Blizzard for not testing any race changes in 1.3.5. Why not experiment with some potential changes along with the new maps to see how they would function in the coming season?
On July 17 2011 11:10 Reborn8u wrote: I remember when they were going to change infestor's fungal to not hit flying, and when they were going to make fungal an avoidable projectile. Then zerg players whined their way out of it, with little if any real world testing being done and the whining being the sole factor in not doing it. Now when an army gets fungaled all the person can do is sit there and hope the zerg player misses one of the following fungals so they can get away and not loose every unit. It's really bad like this. Not to mention infestors can burrow and move around like a cloaked ghost for 0 mana cost. All the people complaining about infestor broodlord, just wait till the zergs get smart and start dumping all their minerals on queens in the late game with this combo. It's completely absurd. Queens can tank a lot of damage, heal the infestors and broodlords, provide long range anti air support, and are pretty cheap, without costing larva. In the late game the creep will be all over the place anyway, giving the zerg a FREE speed bonus and sight of half the map. So the queens will be able to keep up with the army fairly well, considering how slow broodlords are anyway. My point is there are some serious things that need to be fixed and Blizzard won't stand up to the zerg whine storm that will follow. They've nerfed thors, medevacs, tanks, vikings, stim for terran and they adapted. They nerfed warp gate research, took away void speed and HT amulet, nerfed zealot and forge build time, nerfed pylon radius, nerfed motherships, and protoss adapted. I can only imagine what would happen if Blizzard proposed nerfing one of zerg's core mechanics like larva inject, or a core unit like lings or roaches, or took away, weakened, or nerfed some of zergs upgrades. Seriously, does anyone not see a serious issue with the mentality at work in all of this? Also, I can't even tell you all the times there has been zergs saying things like banelings are useless in pvz, or that the deathball is unstoppable (even without using infestors), or that void colossus was imbalanced. Zerg players collectively folded their arms and refused to innovate, until after balance changes were made. All of these things turned out to be completely false, but the game seems to have been balanced as if they were fact. TLDR: Sure, I may not be spot on with every fact or opinion in this thread, but again there is a serious issue with the mentality at work here. Nerf what ever you want for terran or toss and they will suck it up and work around it. If you even suggest a nerf for anything zerg and they will blast the forums with whine until it is changed or dismissed to their advantage. Stop playing the victim.
Very true post.
Ridiculous post. take your own advice and stop whining about everything. -EDIT: if you think that blizzard made any changes because of Zerg QQ you are dumb, they tried it themselves and saw it was ridiculous and changed it or changed it back because it needed to be changed, if there's one thing that is good about the sc2 blizzard design team is that they think for themselves and not jump for every idiot that think that something should be one way or the other, even if they are sometimes wrong.
anyone knows what will be the new map pool, notice I said new map POOL not new maps, blizzard said they made some changes in exciting maps and added new maps, I saw the new maps but what map did they change? what season 2 maps will carry on and what maps will be swapped?
On July 18 2011 12:10 koppik wrote: I think even without the infestor unit, Zerg might have an advantage ZvT lategame. I mean, before the buff, it was still viewed as pretty hard for the Terran if he didn't go into the late game with an advantage due to the broodlord/ultralisk food cycling Zerg players would do. With infestor/broodlord, it feels more like Zerg players will just outright crush the Terran in one go, but Zerg players don't need infestors to crush a Terran lategame in two blows if they have any sort of advantage.
I don't see how its possible for this situation to exist. Are there any games that have proceeded to late game without either player having an advantage?
On July 17 2011 11:10 Reborn8u wrote: I remember when they were going to change infestor's fungal to not hit flying, and when they were going to make fungal an avoidable projectile. Then zerg players whined their way out of it, with little if any real world testing being done and the whining being the sole factor in not doing it. Now when an army gets fungaled all the person can do is sit there and hope the zerg player misses one of the following fungals so they can get away and not loose every unit. It's really bad like this. Not to mention infestors can burrow and move around like a cloaked ghost for 0 mana cost. All the people complaining about infestor broodlord, just wait till the zergs get smart and start dumping all their minerals on queens in the late game with this combo. It's completely absurd. Queens can tank a lot of damage, heal the infestors and broodlords, provide long range anti air support, and are pretty cheap, without costing larva. In the late game the creep will be all over the place anyway, giving the zerg a FREE speed bonus and sight of half the map. So the queens will be able to keep up with the army fairly well, considering how slow broodlords are anyway. My point is there are some serious things that need to be fixed and Blizzard won't stand up to the zerg whine storm that will follow. They've nerfed thors, medevacs, tanks, vikings, stim for terran and they adapted. They nerfed warp gate research, took away void speed and HT amulet, nerfed zealot and forge build time, nerfed pylon radius, nerfed motherships, and protoss adapted. I can only imagine what would happen if Blizzard proposed nerfing one of zerg's core mechanics like larva inject, or a core unit like lings or roaches, or took away, weakened, or nerfed some of zergs upgrades. Seriously, does anyone not see a serious issue with the mentality at work in all of this? Also, I can't even tell you all the times there has been zergs saying things like banelings are useless in pvz, or that the deathball is unstoppable (even without using infestors), or that void colossus was imbalanced. Zerg players collectively folded their arms and refused to innovate, until after balance changes were made. All of these things turned out to be completely false, but the game seems to have been balanced as if they were fact. TLDR: Sure, I may not be spot on with every fact or opinion in this thread, but again there is a serious issue with the mentality at work here. Nerf what ever you want for terran or toss and they will suck it up and work around it. If you even suggest a nerf for anything zerg and they will blast the forums with whine until it is changed or dismissed to their advantage. Stop playing the victim.
uuuuh, right.
First of all, I don't recall any massive whining about the proposal to change Fungal to a missile attack. From what I remember most Zergs were ok with it, just because Blizz tests something in PTR doesn't mean they want that change for certain, they tried it out, decided they didn't like it, nuff said. People will whine about pretty much everything, hell, I saw plenty of Zergs complaining about the Fungal bufff simply because it lowered the overall duration time, so what? Not everyone who cried on the forums is going to get their way, Blizzard gonna do what Blizzard gonna do.
You're complaining about an Infestor/Broodlord/Queen combo? Have you even ever experienced such a thing? How do you even know it's OP or not? You're complaining about the Creep speed bonus and acting like it's a free thing, sure it doesn't cost minerals but it still takes time and effort to spread and can be cleared at least as easily as it can be spread not to mention it isn't any sort of huge buff considering how Zerg basically need it to survive in the first place.
How would Zerg feel if Larva Inject was nerfed? What's the point in asking this? Has Chrono or Orbital Commands or Planetary Fortresses ever been nerfed? You complain that Terran and Protoss have been nerfed endlessly and Zerg go untouched but I can't agree with this at all. Do you remember how strong Roaches used to be? If not let me remind you they used to be half the supply that they are now and had insane regeneration, people complained about it, so it got changed. Neural Parasite used to last a lot longer, Hydras used to attack faster, Ultras did more damage, Infestors also now move slower, blah blah blah. The only real recent buffs we've had are +1 Roach range and the Fungal buff.
You actually think Zerg "collectively folded their arms and refused to innovate" when in the face of the Protoss deathball? This is probably the single most ignorant statement out of them all and it's wrong in every possible way. A LOT of Zerg worked very hard on innovation, and in my opinion the single biggest result of that innovation was the strategy of using baneling drops to defeat the ball. Zerg have always tried to fix their problems, don't act like every single person who cries on the forums because they can't overcome a hurdle speaks for the entire community. What are YOU doing? Zerg get one major buff, the Fungal buff, and I have seen countless Terran and Protoss crying about it instead of trying to innovate their way out of it. I don't assume every Terran and Protoss thinks so ignorantly but I sure do know a lot of them aren't even putting in the effort to try. You say every Protoss and Terran know how to suck it up and deal with it, I really wish that was true.
It's not just refuse to innovate, it's refuse to innovate compared to Terran and Protoss. I've seen much more creativity out of P and T than Z's. Day9 said it best when I'd say 90% of the SCII time Zergs were literally just picking a random number to drone to and then building their army... that's not innovation. Recently things have started to change with Zergs, and only recently has Zerg actually been doing well at high level... coincidence?
I honestly just kinda hate people that play zerg at this point.
Zerg is the race of crying about things to get their way. It's just sad to see something like a zerg say "lol you noob marine spammer, go 1a t some more" when all they do is 1a their units, and dont even need to time stims correctly. Also, massive ling spam. Seriously, how can a zerg player complain about somebody "spamming a unit" when I've seen zerg players with over 100 lings in production at once.
The zerg race as a whole needs to straight up stop bitching and start learning how to play. I blame IdrA for the most part....if he just shut his face up and didn't whine and complain on every medium he could find none of this insanity would have begun.
On July 17 2011 11:10 Reborn8u wrote: I remember when they were going to change infestor's fungal to not hit flying, and when they were going to make fungal an avoidable projectile. Then zerg players whined their way out of it, with little if any real world testing being done and the whining being the sole factor in not doing it. Now when an army gets fungaled all the person can do is sit there and hope the zerg player misses one of the following fungals so they can get away and not loose every unit. It's really bad like this. Not to mention infestors can burrow and move around like a cloaked ghost for 0 mana cost. All the people complaining about infestor broodlord, just wait till the zergs get smart and start dumping all their minerals on queens in the late game with this combo. It's completely absurd. Queens can tank a lot of damage, heal the infestors and broodlords, provide long range anti air support, and are pretty cheap, without costing larva. In the late game the creep will be all over the place anyway, giving the zerg a FREE speed bonus and sight of half the map. So the queens will be able to keep up with the army fairly well, considering how slow broodlords are anyway. My point is there are some serious things that need to be fixed and Blizzard won't stand up to the zerg whine storm that will follow. They've nerfed thors, medevacs, tanks, vikings, stim for terran and they adapted. They nerfed warp gate research, took away void speed and HT amulet, nerfed zealot and forge build time, nerfed pylon radius, nerfed motherships, and protoss adapted. I can only imagine what would happen if Blizzard proposed nerfing one of zerg's core mechanics like larva inject, or a core unit like lings or roaches, or took away, weakened, or nerfed some of zergs upgrades. Seriously, does anyone not see a serious issue with the mentality at work in all of this? Also, I can't even tell you all the times there has been zergs saying things like banelings are useless in pvz, or that the deathball is unstoppable (even without using infestors), or that void colossus was imbalanced. Zerg players collectively folded their arms and refused to innovate, until after balance changes were made. All of these things turned out to be completely false, but the game seems to have been balanced as if they were fact. TLDR: Sure, I may not be spot on with every fact or opinion in this thread, but again there is a serious issue with the mentality at work here. Nerf what ever you want for terran or toss and they will suck it up and work around it. If you even suggest a nerf for anything zerg and they will blast the forums with whine until it is changed or dismissed to their advantage. Stop playing the victim.
we don't whine son, we have weaker units so if blizzard nerfs us they know they might screw up that's why there is a ptr. The fact is Protoss and Terran won't complain because their units, in most cases are stronger than ours. Luckily those deathballs weren't as popular before the infestor patch or zergs would most likely be able to win any games. Us zergs need to thank people like Spanishiwa, Blizzard, Destiny and Catz for bringing up new styles for us to play.
you'll notice that zerg will hit there skill cap alot quicker than terran/protoss, for the fact that there aren't that many options for a zerg to do because of their lack of units, and there are alot of creative zergs figuring out new stuff with our limited units e.g. CatZ,Spanishiwa, Destiny (his infestor play) , in CatZ's stream he even said that there are so many options for terran/protoss to have, but they don't use them, so in a year maybe all terran armies will have a raven in them ALWAYS. or protoss always have a Warp prism in a game and get the warp prism speed upgrade for engagements
It's as simple as that, don't try to fob off that zerg whines, it's that we have less options and we can reach our skill cap faster because our pro's are creative and dont just use a normal build like marine,tank or collo,sentry,stalker,zealot. we use a bunch of different units like the infestor,ling,queen,broodlord,ultra,banelings, overlords,roaches,hydras,mutas and basically we should use all units in a proper macro game (maybe not more than 1 tier 3) because we don't have that much unit flexibility. Put that in your head son
its funny all the T/P bitching about Zergs.. bitching... Ironic, eh?
Fact is Zerg is balanced in the sense it can win, imbalanced in the sense its much more difficult and fragile. T and P are so much more forgiving its a joke. Zergs are playing starcraft, T/P are playing connect 4 on their iphones.
On July 17 2011 11:10 Reborn8u wrote: I remember when they were going to change infestor's fungal to not hit flying, and when they were going to make fungal an avoidable projectile. Then zerg players whined their way out of it, with little if any real world testing being done and the whining being the sole factor in not doing it. Now when an army gets fungaled all the person can do is sit there and hope the zerg player misses one of the following fungals so they can get away and not loose every unit. It's really bad like this. Not to mention infestors can burrow and move around like a cloaked ghost for 0 mana cost. All the people complaining about infestor broodlord, just wait till the zergs get smart and start dumping all their minerals on queens in the late game with this combo. It's completely absurd. Queens can tank a lot of damage, heal the infestors and broodlords, provide long range anti air support, and are pretty cheap, without costing larva. In the late game the creep will be all over the place anyway, giving the zerg a FREE speed bonus and sight of half the map. So the queens will be able to keep up with the army fairly well, considering how slow broodlords are anyway. My point is there are some serious things that need to be fixed and Blizzard won't stand up to the zerg whine storm that will follow. They've nerfed thors, medevacs, tanks, vikings, stim for terran and they adapted. They nerfed warp gate research, took away void speed and HT amulet, nerfed zealot and forge build time, nerfed pylon radius, nerfed motherships, and protoss adapted. I can only imagine what would happen if Blizzard proposed nerfing one of zerg's core mechanics like larva inject, or a core unit like lings or roaches, or took away, weakened, or nerfed some of zergs upgrades. Seriously, does anyone not see a serious issue with the mentality at work in all of this? Also, I can't even tell you all the times there has been zergs saying things like banelings are useless in pvz, or that the deathball is unstoppable (even without using infestors), or that void colossus was imbalanced. Zerg players collectively folded their arms and refused to innovate, until after balance changes were made. All of these things turned out to be completely false, but the game seems to have been balanced as if they were fact. TLDR: Sure, I may not be spot on with every fact or opinion in this thread, but again there is a serious issue with the mentality at work here. Nerf what ever you want for terran or toss and they will suck it up and work around it. If you even suggest a nerf for anything zerg and they will blast the forums with whine until it is changed or dismissed to their advantage. Stop playing the victim.
On July 18 2011 14:09 crms wrote: its funny all the T/P bitching about Zergs.. bitching... Ironic, eh?
Fact is Zerg is balanced in the sense it can win, imbalanced in the sense its much more difficult and fragile. T and P are so much more forgiving its a joke. Zergs are playing starcraft, T/P are playing connect 4 on their iphones.
Most people feel the opposite. Isn't that what morrow was complaining about recently? That Z has a low skill cap compared to T and P? This is the kind of attitude that is holding Z's back, some form of thinking they are harder, when in reality a lot of people think they are easier. Morrow wants more units that reward high skill, so you can say that being easier but with less skill ceiling is actually a bad thing for Zergs especially at pro level.
Also considering Terran literally can do almost nothing to replace its army fast enough once its gone, I would say Terran is absolutely the least forgiving.
On July 17 2011 11:10 Reborn8u wrote: I remember when they were going to change infestor's fungal to not hit flying, and when they were going to make fungal an avoidable projectile. Then zerg players whined their way out of it, with little if any real world testing being done and the whining being the sole factor in not doing it. Now when an army gets fungaled all the person can do is sit there and hope the zerg player misses one of the following fungals so they can get away and not loose every unit. It's really bad like this. Not to mention infestors can burrow and move around like a cloaked ghost for 0 mana cost. All the people complaining about infestor broodlord, just wait till the zergs get smart and start dumping all their minerals on queens in the late game with this combo. It's completely absurd. Queens can tank a lot of damage, heal the infestors and broodlords, provide long range anti air support, and are pretty cheap, without costing larva. In the late game the creep will be all over the place anyway, giving the zerg a FREE speed bonus and sight of half the map. So the queens will be able to keep up with the army fairly well, considering how slow broodlords are anyway. My point is there are some serious things that need to be fixed and Blizzard won't stand up to the zerg whine storm that will follow. They've nerfed thors, medevacs, tanks, vikings, stim for terran and they adapted. They nerfed warp gate research, took away void speed and HT amulet, nerfed zealot and forge build time, nerfed pylon radius, nerfed motherships, and protoss adapted. I can only imagine what would happen if Blizzard proposed nerfing one of zerg's core mechanics like larva inject, or a core unit like lings or roaches, or took away, weakened, or nerfed some of zergs upgrades. Seriously, does anyone not see a serious issue with the mentality at work in all of this? Also, I can't even tell you all the times there has been zergs saying things like banelings are useless in pvz, or that the deathball is unstoppable (even without using infestors), or that void colossus was imbalanced. Zerg players collectively folded their arms and refused to innovate, until after balance changes were made. All of these things turned out to be completely false, but the game seems to have been balanced as if they were fact. TLDR: Sure, I may not be spot on with every fact or opinion in this thread, but again there is a serious issue with the mentality at work here. Nerf what ever you want for terran or toss and they will suck it up and work around it. If you even suggest a nerf for anything zerg and they will blast the forums with whine until it is changed or dismissed to their advantage. Stop playing the victim.
Yeah, it's telling David Kim in the HoTS interview (the infamous brood lord/infestor being thought more OP comments) said they can easily fix timing attacks, but take a wait and see approach to the late game, and anyhow, how many games go to the late game?
With that approach Blizz has systematically nerfed a lot of early/mid game pushes and left late game balancing issues to be dealt with down the road. Almost by definition that's going to benefit the macro race, because pushes that are strong against them are nerfed so they have more time to macro, and Blizz remains conservative about fixing any macro/unit comp imbalances in the late game, where Zerg shines.
I'm not sure what TL posters have been saying about the infestor situation around here, but the unit strikes me as a little too cost-efficient for the macro race. Zerg is supposed to be about throwing a bunch of units at their opponents, trading cost efficiency for better map control. But infestors can steal all the cost efficient DPS dealers from the enemy army and trash everything with its nasty bag of spells. Every time I see Destiny use a bunch of infestors where the other player doesn't have 100% vision of those infestors at all times, the battle turns into an absolute blood bath.
Even things like infested Terrans are underrated. Those suckers with missile upgrades are equivalent to 50 HP, +5 marines!
I think it might be the infestor is just doing too much. It's the combination DT/HT/sentry of the Zerg army, with its own version of cloak/cloak-move, base harass/destroy, FF (fungal), psi storm (fungal) and NP is just wow. It's the Swiss army knife of spellcasters, and since it's got so much going on, doesn't suffer from the specialization of other types of units.
Blizz seemed to hint the overseer might not be long for this world in HoTS. Scrapping that failed unit concept and splitting off some of the infestor spells into a new spellcaster with new abilities might be the way to go.
On July 18 2011 02:59 DarkDolphin wrote: Map TEST 1 , is a SC2 version of "La Mancha" from Broodwar, ^___________^. I wouldn't be surprised if is called the same name.
The other maps are just pure crap
The only thing is that La Mancha has a reasonable third while this SC2 map doesn't.
On July 17 2011 11:10 Reborn8u wrote: I remember when they were going to change infestor's fungal to not hit flying, and when they were going to make fungal an avoidable projectile. Then zerg players whined their way out of it, with little if any real world testing being done and the whining being the sole factor in not doing it. Now when an army gets fungaled all the person can do is sit there and hope the zerg player misses one of the following fungals so they can get away and not loose every unit. It's really bad like this. Not to mention infestors can burrow and move around like a cloaked ghost for 0 mana cost.
I actually don't remember Fungal not hitting flying units in a PTR. Fungal as an avoidable projectile would be pretty good, but when they were going to make that change, Fungal didn't have the +armored damage to it. So it would be too weak if it were a projectile. Now that it is buffed and being used, I would like it to be a projectile and balanced on how fast they want the projectile to be. I agree and dislike the current fungal just because it prevents micro instead of creating it. But that is not just Zerg. You can apply the logic to EMP and Forcefield.. Although EMP isn't a "sit there" spell, draining the mana of Protoss and Zerg casters can tip the fight in Terran's favor easily. The Infestor cloak comment is pretty silly. You cannot cast Fungal burrowed, and with detection, it is pretty easy to dodge/kill burrowed Infestors.
All the people complaining about infestor broodlord, just wait till the zergs get smart and start dumping all their minerals on queens in the late game with this combo. It's completely absurd. Queens can tank a lot of damage, heal the infestors and broodlords, provide long range anti air support, and are pretty cheap, without costing larva. In the late game the creep will be all over the place anyway, giving the zerg a FREE speed bonus and sight of half the map. So the queens will be able to keep up with the army fairly well, considering how slow broodlords are anyway.
That is a pretty silly comment. Queens do garbage DPS. You cannot push a Terran's base (which is already pretty difficult) with Queens because they're so slow. If you have creep literally right outside your base, then invest in a Raven. Transfuse is costly. Infestors die too quickly to heal, and the goal is to generally not let the Broodlords take damage. Costing no larva isn't a terrible issue because Zerg like to stockpile larva anyway...and they cost supply too, so you'd be cutting into your army for a pretty silly unit.
My point is there are some serious things that need to be fixed and Blizzard won't stand up to the zerg whine storm that will follow. They've nerfed thors, medevacs, tanks, vikings, stim for terran and they adapted. They nerfed warp gate research, took away void speed and HT amulet, nerfed zealot and forge build time, nerfed pylon radius, nerfed motherships, and protoss adapted. I can only imagine what would happen if Blizzard proposed nerfing one of zerg's core mechanics like larva inject, or a core unit like lings or roaches, or took away, weakened, or nerfed some of zergs upgrades. Seriously, does anyone not see a serious issue with the mentality at work in all of this?
The only nerf they did to Medivacs were increasing acceleration at the cost of speed. Thors were buffed more than nerf. Siege tanks were hardly nerfed. They had absurd damage vs all races pre-nerf. The doing +armored damage at the cost of damage vs everything else isn't a TvZ nerf. They still one shot lings and melt Hydras. It was a TvP nerf. No significant nerfs to Vikings. I really won't go on. You are making up too much stuff.
Also, I can't even tell you all the times there has been zergs saying things like banelings are useless in pvz, or that the deathball is unstoppable (even without using infestors), or that void colossus was imbalanced. Zerg players collectively folded their arms and refused to innovate, until after balance changes were made. All of these things turned out to be completely false, but the game seems to have been balanced as if they were fact.
Protoss and Terran also complain there fair share. Sure, Zergs complain more, but you post as if Terrans and Protoss do not whine at all. Get real. And are you really qualified to say the bold part? I would really like to know how you get insider information on Zerg practice. Do you think the Korean pros/dedicated foreigner pros just imba whine all day? People seem to underestimate how hard/much Koreans/dedicated foreigners practice. It seems completely unreasonable to think that they do not try new stuff. People say that Zergs need to innovate as if pros don't practice 8 hours a day. Although this might not be the most biased source, IdrA has said that he tried a bunch of new stuff (back before a good deal of early rushes were nerfed), and none of it worked in practice. IdrA even said that during early GSLs, that Fruitdealer asked him how to ZvT because he was clueless. After all of the tweaks in the game, now we're seeing Zerg "innovate" stuff.
Whether you like the IdrA reference or not, he is more qualified then all of us to say whether Zergs are innovating or not.
TLDR: Sure, I may not be spot on with every fact or opinion in this thread, but again there is a serious issue with the mentality at work here. Nerf what ever you want for terran or toss and they will suck it up and work around it. If you even suggest a nerf for anything zerg and they will blast the forums with whine until it is changed or dismissed to their advantage. Stop playing the victim.
You act as if Terran and Protoss don't complain. \
edit: (random opinion and thought about the micro involved in EMP/Fungal) + Show Spoiler +
Even though I dislike how FF, EMP, and Fungal all pretty much discourage micro in a way, I kind of want to see people start spreading their army to minimize its damage and make it. But then it might not be that cool in the longrun because fights will just be about who spreads their army better. While it would certainly be hard, the BW positioning micro (Dark Swarm, Mines, Psi Storm) was much cooler and had a mind game toward it. But the expansions may add/tweak some revolutionary unit, so it is really too early to tell.
On July 18 2011 14:09 crms wrote: its funny all the T/P bitching about Zergs.. bitching... Ironic, eh?
Fact is Zerg is balanced in the sense it can win, imbalanced in the sense its much more difficult and fragile. T and P are so much more forgiving its a joke. Zergs are playing starcraft, T/P are playing connect 4 on their iphones.
Most people feel the opposite. Isn't that what morrow was complaining about recently? That Z has a low skill cap compared to T and P? This is the kind of attitude that is holding Z's back, some form of thinking they are harder, when in reality a lot of people think they are easier. Morrow wants more units that reward high skill, so you can say that being easier but with less skill ceiling is actually a bad thing for Zergs especially at pro level.
Also considering Terran literally can do almost nothing to replace its army fast enough once its gone, I would say Terran is absolutely the least forgiving.
Judging from all of the pro's take on Zerg's balance, it seems that it is the most difficult because you need to have really good scouting and really good reactions just to survive. But as far as their actual units go, the only micro is microing Infestors...which isn't even hard. I guess it would be "hard to learn, easy to master."
On July 18 2011 14:09 crms wrote: its funny all the T/P bitching about Zergs.. bitching... Ironic, eh?
Fact is Zerg is balanced in the sense it can win, imbalanced in the sense its much more difficult and fragile. T and P are so much more forgiving its a joke. Zergs are playing starcraft, T/P are playing connect 4 on their iphones.
Really? Because i thought that if zerg have at least small advantage its almost impossible to stop them.
i.e larva and how fast they can saturate bases.
oo and yes, lets go MASS LING + Infestor all game long.
On July 18 2011 02:59 DarkDolphin wrote: Map TEST 1 , is a SC2 version of "La Mancha" from Broodwar, ^___________^. I wouldn't be surprised if is called the same name.
The other maps are just pure crap
The only thing is that La Mancha has a reasonable third while this SC2 map doesn't.
In the latest version of map 1 on the PTR, the third is no longer a gold expansion, and the rocks have been removed.
On July 18 2011 02:59 DarkDolphin wrote: Map TEST 1 , is a SC2 version of "La Mancha" from Broodwar, ^___________^. I wouldn't be surprised if is called the same name.
The other maps are just pure crap
The only thing is that La Mancha has a reasonable third while this SC2 map doesn't.
In the latest version of map 1 on the PTR, the third is no longer a gold expansion, and the rocks have been removed.
It's so hillarious that people are whining about Zerg OPness atm, when Zergs have been struggling so much since the release and late beta. And people act like P/T NEVER whines at all, and that everything is dandy and fine with those races. Want to nerf infestors? Alright, but then nerf ghost, high templars and sentries too. Never mind that most games go to early and mid game so the lategame has not been explored to the same extent. If you want the nerf the mid/lategame of the supposedly macro race, then Zergs early game needs a huge buff.
On July 18 2011 02:59 DarkDolphin wrote: Map TEST 1 , is a SC2 version of "La Mancha" from Broodwar, ^___________^. I wouldn't be surprised if is called the same name.
The other maps are just pure crap
The only thing is that La Mancha has a reasonable third while this SC2 map doesn't.
In the latest version of map 1 on the PTR, the third is no longer a gold expansion, and the rocks have been removed.
thats good for getting a third faster, but it is still hard to defend. Mainly, I'm concerned with the little piece of land above the mineral line.
Imagine the purple circles are the Zerg bases and the Red is either a Protoss, Terran, or hell, even another Zerg could abuse it. The red has an easy time just walking to use the ledge (red dotted line), or they can just blink/drop back and forth with little risk. The other gold base is pretty far off, so defending it would be a nightmare. You would have to risk getting your army caught extremely out of position running between long 3rd and natural. Too much risk for a 3rd early in the game.
If they'd just take out that ledge of land (best solution) or make a bigger gap between main and the ledge above the 3rd so you can at least put some type of preliminary defense there.
On July 18 2011 15:31 Whole wrote: thats good for getting a third faster, but it is still hard to defend. Mainly, I'm concerned with the little piece of land above the mineral line.
Imagine the purple circles are the Zerg bases and the Red is either a Protoss, Terran, or hell, even another Zerg could abuse it. The red has an easy time just walking to use the ledge (red dotted line), or they can just blink/drop back and forth with little risk. The other gold base is pretty far off, so defending it would be a nightmare. You would have to risk getting your army caught extremely out of position running between long 3rd and natural. Too much risk for a 3rd early in the game.
If they'd just take out that ledge of land (best solution) or make a bigger gap between main and the ledge above the 3rd so you can at least put some type of preliminary defense there.
Or Zerg could just... I don't know, expand the other way?
On July 18 2011 15:31 Whole wrote: thats good for getting a third faster, but it is still hard to defend. Mainly, I'm concerned with the little piece of land above the mineral line.
Imagine the purple circles are the Zerg bases and the Red is either a Protoss, Terran, or hell, even another Zerg could abuse it. The red has an easy time just walking to use the ledge (red dotted line), or they can just blink/drop back and forth with little risk. The other gold base is pretty far off, so defending it would be a nightmare. You would have to risk getting your army caught extremely out of position running between long 3rd and natural. Too much risk for a 3rd early in the game.
If they'd just take out that ledge of land (best solution) or make a bigger gap between main and the ledge above the 3rd so you can at least put some type of preliminary defense there.
Or Zerg could just... I don't know, expand the other way?
Yeah. That's a slightly more annoying direction, but I think I can deal. The map is good Vertical and Cross spots, and it's still WAY better on horizontal spots than, say, Metal. I don't see MLG Test Map 1 replacing MLG Metalopolis, but "I have to take a slightly awkward third one out of three games" is a problem I as a Zerg can live with. This map is now way better then, say, Backwater.
And it's great to see Blizz actually changing the maps in the PTR, and even making the change a lot of people were asking for. I'm starting to think Test Map 1 is the best of the new maps. Probably because it's a BW map
Edit: My first impression of this map was "Oh, it's a crappy version of metal", but I'm starting to think I'd prefer this to Metal as a ladder map. Metal is a great map 2/3rds of the time and a horrible one 1/3rd. Test1 looks like it'll be a really good map cross and vertical, and a decent/okay one horizontal. We'll see how it plays, of course, but changing the rock-blocked golds to unblocked blues made this map jump up two or three points for me. It's still easier to expand horizontally than vertically, but that's something I can live with.
On July 18 2011 15:31 Whole wrote: thats good for getting a third faster, but it is still hard to defend. Mainly, I'm concerned with the little piece of land above the mineral line.
Imagine the purple circles are the Zerg bases and the Red is either a Protoss, Terran, or hell, even another Zerg could abuse it. The red has an easy time just walking to use the ledge (red dotted line), or they can just blink/drop back and forth with little risk. The other gold base is pretty far off, so defending it would be a nightmare. You would have to risk getting your army caught extremely out of position running between long 3rd and natural. Too much risk for a 3rd early in the game.
If they'd just take out that ledge of land (best solution) or make a bigger gap between main and the ledge above the 3rd so you can at least put some type of preliminary defense there.
Or Zerg could just... I don't know, expand the other way?
That is the other way to look at it. Although Zerg can't take the closest third in close spawn, neither can the other player expand there, since it'd be so difficult to defend. So both players are basically forced to expand away from each other.
Still, that annoying little alcove on the side of each main base is a really bad map feature. If you were a general, would you seriously site your main camp within range of a narrow choke point like that? It could be worse - it could be an elevated platform. But I don't see why the main should be so easy to siege.
That spot does double duty with siege for both the main and for what would otherwise be the most defensible third.
On July 18 2011 14:09 crms wrote: its funny all the T/P bitching about Zergs.. bitching... Ironic, eh?
Fact is Zerg is balanced in the sense it can win, imbalanced in the sense its much more difficult and fragile. T and P are so much more forgiving its a joke. Zergs are playing starcraft, T/P are playing connect 4 on their iphones.
Most people feel the opposite. Isn't that what morrow was complaining about recently? That Z has a low skill cap compared to T and P? This is the kind of attitude that is holding Z's back, some form of thinking they are harder, when in reality a lot of people think they are easier. Morrow wants more units that reward high skill, so you can say that being easier but with less skill ceiling is actually a bad thing for Zergs especially at pro level.
Also considering Terran literally can do almost nothing to replace its army fast enough once its gone, I would say Terran is absolutely the least forgiving.
The problem for many zerg players is just, you make a single mistake especially in the early game and you are dead, such as one round of drones to much or a bit to late bane nest. Terran and Protoss can make mistakes and they will be behind but not immeadetly out of the game. The most obvious one is a marine scv all in because even if it fails Terran is quite a bit behind but still in it and can just go again. If T or P almost die they can play very defensive and try to make a comeback becaue Z cant break their defences, Z cant come back. In my opinion zerg is not forgiving at all while t and p is a lot more.
For sure at lower levels you need more micro as terran for example vs muta ling bling but once you got it down you will rip every z apart if you got good timings until the zerg overthinks his strat and gets above his current skilleve. Because there are so many things Zerg can utilize and has to do it benefits from a better player with more multitasking while protoss doesnt need that at non tip top level to utilize all what their race offers.
The problem for many zerg players is just, you make a single mistake especially in the early game and you are dead, such as one round of drones to much or a bit to late bane nest. Terran and Protoss can make mistakes and they will be behind but not immeadetly out of the game. The most obvious one is a marine scv all in because even if it fails Terran is quite a bit behind but still in it and can just go again. If T or P almost die they can play very defensive and try to make a comeback becaue Z cant break their defences, Z cant come back. In my opinion zerg is not forgiving at all while t and p is a lot more.
Zerg has one of the best harass units and if you remember a game between Moon and Kiwikaki, from NASL I believe, after an insane push from the protoss, the zerg was able to come back after a fantastic muta harass. This is the mentality that people above you were talking about. Just because some pro player is whining about balance constantly, it doesn't mean the race is necessarily the weakest. Also what is with this sense of superiority that zergs have over other players. I mean, I play protoss and almost every time I win vs zerg it is because I am a noob with an OP race, but if the zerg wins it's because he is haivng 2000 apm and has the ''Starcraft 2 6th sense''. Annoying to say the least.
Anyway now that the ladder reset has been postponed, I guess there will be more time to test the maps and give us a better map pool. Typhon Peaks and Scrapyard are such an uncomfortable maps to play on, backwater being the only decent one. I only hope they'll say which maps will be removed from the pool soon.
On July 18 2011 14:09 crms wrote: its funny all the T/P bitching about Zergs.. bitching... Ironic, eh?
Fact is Zerg is balanced in the sense it can win, imbalanced in the sense its much more difficult and fragile. T and P are so much more forgiving its a joke. Zergs are playing starcraft, T/P are playing connect 4 on their iphones.
Most people feel the opposite. Isn't that what morrow was complaining about recently? That Z has a low skill cap compared to T and P? This is the kind of attitude that is holding Z's back, some form of thinking they are harder, when in reality a lot of people think they are easier. Morrow wants more units that reward high skill, so you can say that being easier but with less skill ceiling is actually a bad thing for Zergs especially at pro level.
Also considering Terran literally can do almost nothing to replace its army fast enough once its gone, I would say Terran is absolutely the least forgiving.
The problem for many zerg players is just, you make a single mistake especially in the early game and you are dead, such as one round of drones to much or a bit to late bane nest. Terran and Protoss can make mistakes and they will be behind but not immeadetly out of the game. The most obvious one is a marine scv all in because even if it fails Terran is quite a bit behind but still in it and can just go again. If T or P almost die they can play very defensive and try to make a comeback becaue Z cant break their defences, Z cant come back. In my opinion zerg is not forgiving at all while t and p is a lot more.
For sure at lower levels you need more micro as terran for example vs muta ling bling but once you got it down you will rip every z apart if you got good timings until the zerg overthinks his strat and gets above his current skilleve. Because there are so many things Zerg can utilize and has to do it benefits from a better player with more multitasking while protoss doesnt need that at non tip top level to utilize all what their race offers.
I've seen Terrans immediately out because they pulled SCVs slightly too late to keep a bunker alive, or Protosses out due to messing up a single forcefield at a crucial moment. Protoss and Terran can indeed die from a single mistake.
On July 18 2011 02:59 DarkDolphin wrote: Map TEST 1 , is a SC2 version of "La Mancha" from Broodwar, ^___________^. I wouldn't be surprised if is called the same name.
The other maps are just pure crap
The only thing is that La Mancha has a reasonable third while this SC2 map doesn't.
In the latest version of map 1 on the PTR, the third is no longer a gold expansion, and the rocks have been removed.
thats good for getting a third faster, but it is still hard to defend. Mainly, I'm concerned with the little piece of land above the mineral line.
Imagine the purple circles are the Zerg bases and the Red is either a Protoss, Terran, or hell, even another Zerg could abuse it. The red has an easy time just walking to use the ledge (red dotted line), or they can just blink/drop back and forth with little risk. The other gold base is pretty far off, so defending it would be a nightmare. You would have to risk getting your army caught extremely out of position running between long 3rd and natural. Too much risk for a 3rd early in the game.
If they'd just take out that ledge of land (best solution) or make a bigger gap between main and the ledge above the 3rd so you can at least put some type of preliminary defense there.
I think you are missing what that plot of land would really be good for. It seems like the perfect spot to put tanks with marines on both sides while u elevator the main. Think the attack the natural has to deal with as zerg on TDA except instead of attacking the natural you are attacking the main.
The problem for many zerg players is just, you make a single mistake especially in the early game and you are dead, such as one round of drones to much or a bit to late bane nest. Terran and Protoss can make mistakes and they will be behind but not immeadetly out of the game. The most obvious one is a marine scv all in because even if it fails Terran is quite a bit behind but still in it and can just go again. If T or P almost die they can play very defensive and try to make a comeback becaue Z cant break their defences, Z cant come back. In my opinion zerg is not forgiving at all while t and p is a lot more.
Zerg has one of the best harass units and if you remember a game between Moon and Kiwikaki, from NASL I believe, after an insane push from the protoss, the zerg was able to come back after a fantastic muta harass. This is the mentality that people above you were talking about. Just because some pro player is whining about balance constantly, it doesn't mean the race is necessarily the weakest. Also what is with this sense of superiority that zergs have over other players. I mean, I play protoss and almost every time I win vs zerg it is because I am a noob with an OP race, but if the zerg wins it's because he is haivng 2000 apm and has the ''Starcraft 2 6th sense''. Annoying to say the least.
Anyway now that the ladder reset has been postponed, I guess there will be more time to test the maps and give us a better map pool. Typhon Peaks and Scrapyard are such an uncomfortable maps to play on, backwater being the only decent one. I only hope they'll say which maps will be removed from the pool soon.
I was going to make a comment on that annoying sense of superiority that some Zergs have over other players, but you beat me to it so I'll just say that I agree with you on that. There's this idea that Zerg making one single mistake = being dead, while Protoss and Terran are somehow so much more forgiving. Like I said earlier, missing a forcefield, a bit of Zealot mismicro (zealots behind Stalkers), failing to split marines well against Banelings, not raising a Depot in time - all single mistakes that can pretty much end a game. There's also this mentality that Zerg just takes more skill to play, or something. I remember a topic which discussed something along the lines of which race felt most satisfying to play as, and some people said "Zerg, because when you win, you know you outplayed your opponent". Take a step back and think about what that implies.
On July 18 2011 14:09 crms wrote: its funny all the T/P bitching about Zergs.. bitching... Ironic, eh?
Fact is Zerg is balanced in the sense it can win, imbalanced in the sense its much more difficult and fragile. T and P are so much more forgiving its a joke. Zergs are playing starcraft, T/P are playing connect 4 on their iphones.
Most people feel the opposite. Isn't that what morrow was complaining about recently? That Z has a low skill cap compared to T and P? This is the kind of attitude that is holding Z's back, some form of thinking they are harder, when in reality a lot of people think they are easier. Morrow wants more units that reward high skill, so you can say that being easier but with less skill ceiling is actually a bad thing for Zergs especially at pro level.
Also considering Terran literally can do almost nothing to replace its army fast enough once its gone, I would say Terran is absolutely the least forgiving.
The problem for many zerg players is just, you make a single mistake especially in the early game and you are dead, such as one round of drones to much or a bit to late bane nest. Terran and Protoss can make mistakes and they will be behind but not immeadetly out of the game. The most obvious one is a marine scv all in because even if it fails Terran is quite a bit behind but still in it and can just go again. If T or P almost die they can play very defensive and try to make a comeback becaue Z cant break their defences, Z cant come back. In my opinion zerg is not forgiving at all while t and p is a lot more.
For sure at lower levels you need more micro as terran for example vs muta ling bling but once you got it down you will rip every z apart if you got good timings until the zerg overthinks his strat and gets above his current skilleve. Because there are so many things Zerg can utilize and has to do it benefits from a better player with more multitasking while protoss doesnt need that at non tip top level to utilize all what their race offers.
I've seen Terrans immediately out because they pulled SCVs slightly too late to keep a bunker alive, or Protosses out due to messing up a single forcefield at a crucial moment. Protoss and Terran can indeed die from a single mistake.
I think the problem is that Zerg is much harder to get into. Meaning, at low levels, Zerg is harder to play because (at the low, mechanics level) it is less forgiving. Missing larva injects can outright kill you, while missing a MULE or a chronoboost is not such a big deal (again, at the low level). Most players aren't Masters or pros, so the complaints come from that background. I have no idea about the skill ceiling for Zerg (I'm a silver league player) so I won't try to argue about it, but from my own experience I feel that Zerg is harder to play than Protoss/Terran (at my level). At the high points you have things like when to drone/when to build units figured out, at the low level you die a lot to making these basics mistakes. And it's easier as Zerg to make basic mistakes than for T/P. Also, of course every race can lose due to a single mistake, that's not the point, the point is who has more "opportunities" to make those mistakes.
On July 18 2011 02:59 DarkDolphin wrote: Map TEST 1 , is a SC2 version of "La Mancha" from Broodwar, ^___________^. I wouldn't be surprised if is called the same name.
The other maps are just pure crap
The only thing is that La Mancha has a reasonable third while this SC2 map doesn't.
In the latest version of map 1 on the PTR, the third is no longer a gold expansion, and the rocks have been removed.
thats good for getting a third faster, but it is still hard to defend. Mainly, I'm concerned with the little piece of land above the mineral line.
Imagine the purple circles are the Zerg bases and the Red is either a Protoss, Terran, or hell, even another Zerg could abuse it. The red has an easy time just walking to use the ledge (red dotted line), or they can just blink/drop back and forth with little risk. The other gold base is pretty far off, so defending it would be a nightmare. You would have to risk getting your army caught extremely out of position running between long 3rd and natural. Too much risk for a 3rd early in the game.
If they'd just take out that ledge of land (best solution) or make a bigger gap between main and the ledge above the 3rd so you can at least put some type of preliminary defense there.
I think you are missing what that plot of land would really be good for. It seems like the perfect spot to put tanks with marines on both sides while u elevator the main. Think the attack the natural has to deal with as zerg on TDA except instead of attacking the natural you are attacking the main.
Not to mention that you have a rather narrow path there, so melee units will get funneled. Seems like the elevator will plague this map, even cross pos, I could see it being worth it to take 2 medivacs, 8 rines + 2 siege tanks and drop there. Heck I can't see how many pixels you have there, but a bunker could probably be dropped there to strengthen that kind of play immensly.
Edit: I'm T, I just have doubts about this map. It seems like a really elevator centric one.
On July 18 2011 14:09 crms wrote: its funny all the T/P bitching about Zergs.. bitching... Ironic, eh?
Fact is Zerg is balanced in the sense it can win, imbalanced in the sense its much more difficult and fragile. T and P are so much more forgiving its a joke. Zergs are playing starcraft, T/P are playing connect 4 on their iphones.
Most people feel the opposite. Isn't that what morrow was complaining about recently? That Z has a low skill cap compared to T and P? This is the kind of attitude that is holding Z's back, some form of thinking they are harder, when in reality a lot of people think they are easier. Morrow wants more units that reward high skill, so you can say that being easier but with less skill ceiling is actually a bad thing for Zergs especially at pro level.
Also considering Terran literally can do almost nothing to replace its army fast enough once its gone, I would say Terran is absolutely the least forgiving.
The problem for many zerg players is just, you make a single mistake especially in the early game and you are dead, such as one round of drones to much or a bit to late bane nest. Terran and Protoss can make mistakes and they will be behind but not immeadetly out of the game. The most obvious one is a marine scv all in because even if it fails Terran is quite a bit behind but still in it and can just go again. If T or P almost die they can play very defensive and try to make a comeback becaue Z cant break their defences, Z cant come back. In my opinion zerg is not forgiving at all while t and p is a lot more.
For sure at lower levels you need more micro as terran for example vs muta ling bling but once you got it down you will rip every z apart if you got good timings until the zerg overthinks his strat and gets above his current skilleve. Because there are so many things Zerg can utilize and has to do it benefits from a better player with more multitasking while protoss doesnt need that at non tip top level to utilize all what their race offers.
I've seen Terrans immediately out because they pulled SCVs slightly too late to keep a bunker alive, or Protosses out due to messing up a single forcefield at a crucial moment. Protoss and Terran can indeed die from a single mistake.
I think the problem is that Zerg is much harder to get into. Meaning, at low levels, Zerg is harder to play because (at the low, mechanics level) it is less forgiving. Missing larva injects can outright kill you, while missing a MULE or a chronoboost is not such a big deal (again, at the low level). Most players aren't Masters or pros, so the complaints come from that background. I have no idea about the skill ceiling for Zerg (I'm a silver league player) so I won't try to argue about it, but from my own experience I feel that Zerg is harder to play than Protoss/Terran (at my level). At the high points you have things like when to drone/when to build units figured out, at the low level you die a lot to making these basics mistakes. And it's easier as Zerg to make basic mistakes than for T/P. Also, of course every race can lose due to a single mistake, that's not the point, the point is who has more "opportunities" to make those mistakes.
A problem is that when people talk about balance, we're assuming that we're talking about high-level play where Pros aren't messing up from forgetting larva injects. Yet, as you say, if complaints come from the background where someone's mechanics aren't on par with the pros, then that means that the problems with mechanics, and the complaints of losing from a single mistake brought on by that lack of good mechanics, have no place in this discussion.
On July 18 2011 14:09 crms wrote: its funny all the T/P bitching about Zergs.. bitching... Ironic, eh?
Fact is Zerg is balanced in the sense it can win, imbalanced in the sense its much more difficult and fragile. T and P are so much more forgiving its a joke. Zergs are playing starcraft, T/P are playing connect 4 on their iphones.
Most people feel the opposite. Isn't that what morrow was complaining about recently? That Z has a low skill cap compared to T and P? This is the kind of attitude that is holding Z's back, some form of thinking they are harder, when in reality a lot of people think they are easier. Morrow wants more units that reward high skill, so you can say that being easier but with less skill ceiling is actually a bad thing for Zergs especially at pro level.
Also considering Terran literally can do almost nothing to replace its army fast enough once its gone, I would say Terran is absolutely the least forgiving.
The problem for many zerg players is just, you make a single mistake especially in the early game and you are dead, such as one round of drones to much or a bit to late bane nest. Terran and Protoss can make mistakes and they will be behind but not immeadetly out of the game. The most obvious one is a marine scv all in because even if it fails Terran is quite a bit behind but still in it and can just go again. If T or P almost die they can play very defensive and try to make a comeback becaue Z cant break their defences, Z cant come back. In my opinion zerg is not forgiving at all while t and p is a lot more.
For sure at lower levels you need more micro as terran for example vs muta ling bling but once you got it down you will rip every z apart if you got good timings until the zerg overthinks his strat and gets above his current skilleve. Because there are so many things Zerg can utilize and has to do it benefits from a better player with more multitasking while protoss doesnt need that at non tip top level to utilize all what their race offers.
I've seen Terrans immediately out because they pulled SCVs slightly too late to keep a bunker alive, or Protosses out due to messing up a single forcefield at a crucial moment. Protoss and Terran can indeed die from a single mistake.
I think the problem is that Zerg is much harder to get into. Meaning, at low levels, Zerg is harder to play because (at the low, mechanics level) it is less forgiving. Missing larva injects can outright kill you, while missing a MULE or a chronoboost is not such a big deal (again, at the low level). Most players aren't Masters or pros, so the complaints come from that background. I have no idea about the skill ceiling for Zerg (I'm a silver league player) so I won't try to argue about it, but from my own experience I feel that Zerg is harder to play than Protoss/Terran (at my level). At the high points you have things like when to drone/when to build units figured out, at the low level you die a lot to making these basics mistakes. And it's easier as Zerg to make basic mistakes than for T/P. Also, of course every race can lose due to a single mistake, that's not the point, the point is who has more "opportunities" to make those mistakes.
A problem is that when people talk about balance, we're assuming that we're talking about high-level play where Pros aren't messing up from forgetting larva injects. Yet, as you say, if complaints come from the background where someone's mechanics aren't on par with the pros, then that means that the problems with mechanics, and the complaints of losing from a single mistake brought on by that lack of good mechanics, have no place in this discussion.
I agree, I just wanted to make the point that a lot of people probably speak from a background of bad mechanics and therefore they don't realize that their points are invalid. This gives a warped discussion.
On July 18 2011 14:09 crms wrote: its funny all the T/P bitching about Zergs.. bitching... Ironic, eh?
Fact is Zerg is balanced in the sense it can win, imbalanced in the sense its much more difficult and fragile. T and P are so much more forgiving its a joke. Zergs are playing starcraft, T/P are playing connect 4 on their iphones.
Most people feel the opposite. Isn't that what morrow was complaining about recently? That Z has a low skill cap compared to T and P? This is the kind of attitude that is holding Z's back, some form of thinking they are harder, when in reality a lot of people think they are easier. Morrow wants more units that reward high skill, so you can say that being easier but with less skill ceiling is actually a bad thing for Zergs especially at pro level.
Also considering Terran literally can do almost nothing to replace its army fast enough once its gone, I would say Terran is absolutely the least forgiving.
The problem for many zerg players is just, you make a single mistake especially in the early game and you are dead, such as one round of drones to much or a bit to late bane nest. Terran and Protoss can make mistakes and they will be behind but not immeadetly out of the game. The most obvious one is a marine scv all in because even if it fails Terran is quite a bit behind but still in it and can just go again. If T or P almost die they can play very defensive and try to make a comeback becaue Z cant break their defences, Z cant come back. In my opinion zerg is not forgiving at all while t and p is a lot more.
For sure at lower levels you need more micro as terran for example vs muta ling bling but once you got it down you will rip every z apart if you got good timings until the zerg overthinks his strat and gets above his current skilleve. Because there are so many things Zerg can utilize and has to do it benefits from a better player with more multitasking while protoss doesnt need that at non tip top level to utilize all what their race offers.
I've seen Terrans immediately out because they pulled SCVs slightly too late to keep a bunker alive, or Protosses out due to messing up a single forcefield at a crucial moment. Protoss and Terran can indeed die from a single mistake.
I think the problem is that Zerg is much harder to get into. Meaning, at low levels, Zerg is harder to play because (at the low, mechanics level) it is less forgiving. Missing larva injects can outright kill you, while missing a MULE or a chronoboost is not such a big deal (again, at the low level). Most players aren't Masters or pros, so the complaints come from that background. I have no idea about the skill ceiling for Zerg (I'm a silver league player) so I won't try to argue about it, but from my own experience I feel that Zerg is harder to play than Protoss/Terran (at my level). At the high points you have things like when to drone/when to build units figured out, at the low level you die a lot to making these basics mistakes. And it's easier as Zerg to make basic mistakes than for T/P. Also, of course every race can lose due to a single mistake, that's not the point, the point is who has more "opportunities" to make those mistakes.
A problem is that when people talk about balance, we're assuming that we're talking about high-level play where Pros aren't messing up from forgetting larva injects. Yet, as you say, if complaints come from the background where someone's mechanics aren't on par with the pros, then that means that the problems with mechanics, and the complaints of losing from a single mistake brought on by that lack of good mechanics, have no place in this discussion.
I agree, I just wanted to make the point that a lot of people probably speak from a background of bad mechanics and therefore they don't realize that their points are invalid. This gives a warped discussion.
Yeah. I do agree that Zerg for beginners is overall harder than Protoss or Terran, but even so, that doesn't give people the right to be stuck up and superior about it.
As an engineering major who hears lots of his peers make fun of humanities majors, it's the same thing - engineering probably is overall harder than humanities to most people, but that doesn't give me the right to just act stuck-up and superior around humanities majors. It would just make me look like a dick.
On July 18 2011 14:09 crms wrote: its funny all the T/P bitching about Zergs.. bitching... Ironic, eh?
Fact is Zerg is balanced in the sense it can win, imbalanced in the sense its much more difficult and fragile. T and P are so much more forgiving its a joke. Zergs are playing starcraft, T/P are playing connect 4 on their iphones.
Most people feel the opposite. Isn't that what morrow was complaining about recently? That Z has a low skill cap compared to T and P? This is the kind of attitude that is holding Z's back, some form of thinking they are harder, when in reality a lot of people think they are easier. Morrow wants more units that reward high skill, so you can say that being easier but with less skill ceiling is actually a bad thing for Zergs especially at pro level.
Also considering Terran literally can do almost nothing to replace its army fast enough once its gone, I would say Terran is absolutely the least forgiving.
The problem for many zerg players is just, you make a single mistake especially in the early game and you are dead, such as one round of drones to much or a bit to late bane nest. Terran and Protoss can make mistakes and they will be behind but not immeadetly out of the game. The most obvious one is a marine scv all in because even if it fails Terran is quite a bit behind but still in it and can just go again. If T or P almost die they can play very defensive and try to make a comeback becaue Z cant break their defences, Z cant come back. In my opinion zerg is not forgiving at all while t and p is a lot more.
For sure at lower levels you need more micro as terran for example vs muta ling bling but once you got it down you will rip every z apart if you got good timings until the zerg overthinks his strat and gets above his current skilleve. Because there are so many things Zerg can utilize and has to do it benefits from a better player with more multitasking while protoss doesnt need that at non tip top level to utilize all what their race offers.
I've seen Terrans immediately out because they pulled SCVs slightly too late to keep a bunker alive, or Protosses out due to messing up a single forcefield at a crucial moment. Protoss and Terran can indeed die from a single mistake.
I think the problem is that Zerg is much harder to get into. Meaning, at low levels, Zerg is harder to play because (at the low, mechanics level) it is less forgiving. Missing larva injects can outright kill you, while missing a MULE or a chronoboost is not such a big deal (again, at the low level). Most players aren't Masters or pros, so the complaints come from that background. I have no idea about the skill ceiling for Zerg (I'm a silver league player) so I won't try to argue about it, but from my own experience I feel that Zerg is harder to play than Protoss/Terran (at my level). At the high points you have things like when to drone/when to build units figured out, at the low level you die a lot to making these basics mistakes. And it's easier as Zerg to make basic mistakes than for T/P. Also, of course every race can lose due to a single mistake, that's not the point, the point is who has more "opportunities" to make those mistakes.
A problem is that when people talk about balance, we're assuming that we're talking about high-level play where Pros aren't messing up from forgetting larva injects. Yet, as you say, if complaints come from the background where someone's mechanics aren't on par with the pros, then that means that the problems with mechanics, and the complaints of losing from a single mistake brought on by that lack of good mechanics, have no place in this discussion.
I agree, I just wanted to make the point that a lot of people probably speak from a background of bad mechanics and therefore they don't realize that their points are invalid. This gives a warped discussion.
I think another problem is that although the community, as observers and students of the game, love to see it balanced around the pro level, the same community, as players of the game, find it hard to accept when something is not balanced at their level.
For example, let's look at a simplified marines vs banelings battle on 3 different levels (remember, simplified) of the game play. I don't mean lowest as bronze, middle as gold, and highest as Grandmasters, I mean on the scale of perfecting the game so highest level being the 'skill cap'.
Lowest level: Banelings blow up on clumped marines. Banelings are cost effective for 3 times their worth. Neither player micros, but banelings are better in this ball vs ball battle.
Middle level: Banelings head towards marines, marines are split with near perfection, banelings are less than cost effective as they head in a pack towards small groups of marines, and die while traveling between the groups ie MKP vs Kyrix. One player, the Terran, figures out splits, while the other, the Zerg, still rolls his banelings in the same way as he always did, like in the lowest level of gameplay.
Highest level: Banelings are split along with marines, both players play perfectly, getting maximum effectiveness out of their units, akin to Micro programs playing. Also, we'll assume balance at this level. I'm not saying it is or isn't balanced, but for this situation we assume balance at the highest level.
Now, here is my point. If the game is balanced perfectly at highest level, even in this rather simplistic single unit comp vs single unit comp, the lower levels aren't balanced. Let's say that bronze-gold plays at the lowest level of gameplay. Banelings are unfair vs marines, zerg is OP. Gold-Master plays at the middle level of gameplay. Marines are unfair vs banelings, terran is OP. Only at GM is it balanced.
Now, if you knew that zerg, or any other race, is simply better or easier to play at your level, would that not be frustrating? We can assume this is the case in many situations, and while, yes, if either player simply learned to macro better, they would win easily, especially at lower levels, it IS frustrating to know that you are losing to opponents that are, simply put, worse than you.
With the design of an RTS, and the way SC is made of 3 distinct races, it is impossible to fix this solution, at least from what I can tell. If your opponent is equal in MMR, and is playing an easier race, then it follows that he is worse than you at the game, which can and will be extremely frustrating to low level players. You can tell them all they want that all they need to learn to do is macro and they'll win versus an inferior player, but that will just leave them angry and confused as to why they need to improve at all in order to win against that inferior player.
On July 18 2011 14:09 crms wrote: its funny all the T/P bitching about Zergs.. bitching... Ironic, eh?
Fact is Zerg is balanced in the sense it can win, imbalanced in the sense its much more difficult and fragile. T and P are so much more forgiving its a joke. Zergs are playing starcraft, T/P are playing connect 4 on their iphones.
Most people feel the opposite. Isn't that what morrow was complaining about recently? That Z has a low skill cap compared to T and P? This is the kind of attitude that is holding Z's back, some form of thinking they are harder, when in reality a lot of people think they are easier. Morrow wants more units that reward high skill, so you can say that being easier but with less skill ceiling is actually a bad thing for Zergs especially at pro level.
Also considering Terran literally can do almost nothing to replace its army fast enough once its gone, I would say Terran is absolutely the least forgiving.
The problem for many zerg players is just, you make a single mistake especially in the early game and you are dead, such as one round of drones to much or a bit to late bane nest. Terran and Protoss can make mistakes and they will be behind but not immeadetly out of the game. The most obvious one is a marine scv all in because even if it fails Terran is quite a bit behind but still in it and can just go again. If T or P almost die they can play very defensive and try to make a comeback becaue Z cant break their defences, Z cant come back. In my opinion zerg is not forgiving at all while t and p is a lot more.
For sure at lower levels you need more micro as terran for example vs muta ling bling but once you got it down you will rip every z apart if you got good timings until the zerg overthinks his strat and gets above his current skilleve. Because there are so many things Zerg can utilize and has to do it benefits from a better player with more multitasking while protoss doesnt need that at non tip top level to utilize all what their race offers.
I've seen Terrans immediately out because they pulled SCVs slightly too late to keep a bunker alive, or Protosses out due to messing up a single forcefield at a crucial moment. Protoss and Terran can indeed die from a single mistake.
Yes you are absolutely right, for every race there are these situations, but there are so many situations were Zerg just dies and Protoss and Terran still got a chance to come back.
On July 18 2011 14:09 crms wrote: its funny all the T/P bitching about Zergs.. bitching... Ironic, eh?
Fact is Zerg is balanced in the sense it can win, imbalanced in the sense its much more difficult and fragile. T and P are so much more forgiving its a joke. Zergs are playing starcraft, T/P are playing connect 4 on their iphones.
Most people feel the opposite. Isn't that what morrow was complaining about recently? That Z has a low skill cap compared to T and P? This is the kind of attitude that is holding Z's back, some form of thinking they are harder, when in reality a lot of people think they are easier. Morrow wants more units that reward high skill, so you can say that being easier but with less skill ceiling is actually a bad thing for Zergs especially at pro level.
Also considering Terran literally can do almost nothing to replace its army fast enough once its gone, I would say Terran is absolutely the least forgiving.
The problem for many zerg players is just, you make a single mistake especially in the early game and you are dead, such as one round of drones to much or a bit to late bane nest. Terran and Protoss can make mistakes and they will be behind but not immeadetly out of the game. The most obvious one is a marine scv all in because even if it fails Terran is quite a bit behind but still in it and can just go again. If T or P almost die they can play very defensive and try to make a comeback becaue Z cant break their defences, Z cant come back. In my opinion zerg is not forgiving at all while t and p is a lot more.
For sure at lower levels you need more micro as terran for example vs muta ling bling but once you got it down you will rip every z apart if you got good timings until the zerg overthinks his strat and gets above his current skilleve. Because there are so many things Zerg can utilize and has to do it benefits from a better player with more multitasking while protoss doesnt need that at non tip top level to utilize all what their race offers.
I've seen Terrans immediately out because they pulled SCVs slightly too late to keep a bunker alive, or Protosses out due to messing up a single forcefield at a crucial moment. Protoss and Terran can indeed die from a single mistake.
Yes you are absolutely right, for every race there are these situations, but there are so many situations were Zerg just dies and Protoss and Terran still got a chance to come back.
I disagree. Protoss has units like the DT to come back, Terran has banshees, Zerg doesn't have a unit like this, but it has droning up. You can be behind and just drone up EXTREMELY hard, and come back into a game. You might say, 'Well if the other player scouts and attacks, zerg will lose.' Well, yeah, but you're behind, you're 'supposed' to lose, and if protoss or terran gets scouted teching to their 'comeback' units, they lose too, especially if they're behind.
On July 18 2011 14:09 crms wrote: its funny all the T/P bitching about Zergs.. bitching... Ironic, eh?
Fact is Zerg is balanced in the sense it can win, imbalanced in the sense its much more difficult and fragile. T and P are so much more forgiving its a joke. Zergs are playing starcraft, T/P are playing connect 4 on their iphones.
Most people feel the opposite. Isn't that what morrow was complaining about recently? That Z has a low skill cap compared to T and P? This is the kind of attitude that is holding Z's back, some form of thinking they are harder, when in reality a lot of people think they are easier. Morrow wants more units that reward high skill, so you can say that being easier but with less skill ceiling is actually a bad thing for Zergs especially at pro level.
Also considering Terran literally can do almost nothing to replace its army fast enough once its gone, I would say Terran is absolutely the least forgiving.
The problem for many zerg players is just, you make a single mistake especially in the early game and you are dead, such as one round of drones to much or a bit to late bane nest. Terran and Protoss can make mistakes and they will be behind but not immeadetly out of the game. The most obvious one is a marine scv all in because even if it fails Terran is quite a bit behind but still in it and can just go again. If T or P almost die they can play very defensive and try to make a comeback becaue Z cant break their defences, Z cant come back. In my opinion zerg is not forgiving at all while t and p is a lot more.
For sure at lower levels you need more micro as terran for example vs muta ling bling but once you got it down you will rip every z apart if you got good timings until the zerg overthinks his strat and gets above his current skilleve. Because there are so many things Zerg can utilize and has to do it benefits from a better player with more multitasking while protoss doesnt need that at non tip top level to utilize all what their race offers.
I've seen Terrans immediately out because they pulled SCVs slightly too late to keep a bunker alive, or Protosses out due to messing up a single forcefield at a crucial moment. Protoss and Terran can indeed die from a single mistake.
I think the problem is that Zerg is much harder to get into. Meaning, at low levels, Zerg is harder to play because (at the low, mechanics level) it is less forgiving. Missing larva injects can outright kill you, while missing a MULE or a chronoboost is not such a big deal (again, at the low level). Most players aren't Masters or pros, so the complaints come from that background. I have no idea about the skill ceiling for Zerg (I'm a silver league player) so I won't try to argue about it, but from my own experience I feel that Zerg is harder to play than Protoss/Terran (at my level). At the high points you have things like when to drone/when to build units figured out, at the low level you die a lot to making these basics mistakes. And it's easier as Zerg to make basic mistakes than for T/P. Also, of course every race can lose due to a single mistake, that's not the point, the point is who has more "opportunities" to make those mistakes.
A problem is that when people talk about balance, we're assuming that we're talking about high-level play where Pros aren't messing up from forgetting larva injects. Yet, as you say, if complaints come from the background where someone's mechanics aren't on par with the pros, then that means that the problems with mechanics, and the complaints of losing from a single mistake brought on by that lack of good mechanics, have no place in this discussion.
I agree, I just wanted to make the point that a lot of people probably speak from a background of bad mechanics and therefore they don't realize that their points are invalid. This gives a warped discussion.
Yeah. I do agree that Zerg for beginners is overall harder than Protoss or Terran, but even so, that doesn't give people the right to be stuck up and superior about it.
As an engineering major who hears lots of his peers make fun of humanities majors, it's the same thing - engineering probably is overall harder than humanities to most people, but that doesn't give me the right to just act stuck-up and superior around humanities majors. It would just make me look like a dick.
It's frustration which leads to what you consider superiority. In gold/plat EU, what will a terran generally do against a zerg? A 1 or 2 base timing attack. How hard is that to pull off? Not at all. How hard is it to defend as a zerg? Hard. Which means the zerg player has to outplay the terran.
This is of course true the other way around as well. A protoss going forge expand will have to outplay a zerg going roach/ling all-in which is easier to do than defend.
The reasons why Zergs are frustrated is because Zerg doesn't have all that many viable 1-2 base timing attacks, where as they are very vulnurable to a ton of them, which makes it seem like you have to outplay your opponents every single game because they can beat you with inferior play.
After losing to simple timing attacks enough times, you're going to become overly baised and think every single terran/protoss is a 2base timing scrub, even though it isn't true.
On July 18 2011 14:09 crms wrote: its funny all the T/P bitching about Zergs.. bitching... Ironic, eh?
Fact is Zerg is balanced in the sense it can win, imbalanced in the sense its much more difficult and fragile. T and P are so much more forgiving its a joke. Zergs are playing starcraft, T/P are playing connect 4 on their iphones.
Most people feel the opposite. Isn't that what morrow was complaining about recently? That Z has a low skill cap compared to T and P? This is the kind of attitude that is holding Z's back, some form of thinking they are harder, when in reality a lot of people think they are easier. Morrow wants more units that reward high skill, so you can say that being easier but with less skill ceiling is actually a bad thing for Zergs especially at pro level.
Also considering Terran literally can do almost nothing to replace its army fast enough once its gone, I would say Terran is absolutely the least forgiving.
The problem for many zerg players is just, you make a single mistake especially in the early game and you are dead, such as one round of drones to much or a bit to late bane nest. Terran and Protoss can make mistakes and they will be behind but not immeadetly out of the game. The most obvious one is a marine scv all in because even if it fails Terran is quite a bit behind but still in it and can just go again. If T or P almost die they can play very defensive and try to make a comeback becaue Z cant break their defences, Z cant come back. In my opinion zerg is not forgiving at all while t and p is a lot more.
For sure at lower levels you need more micro as terran for example vs muta ling bling but once you got it down you will rip every z apart if you got good timings until the zerg overthinks his strat and gets above his current skilleve. Because there are so many things Zerg can utilize and has to do it benefits from a better player with more multitasking while protoss doesnt need that at non tip top level to utilize all what their race offers.
I've seen Terrans immediately out because they pulled SCVs slightly too late to keep a bunker alive, or Protosses out due to messing up a single forcefield at a crucial moment. Protoss and Terran can indeed die from a single mistake.
Yes you are absolutely right, for every race there are these situations, but there are so many situations were Zerg just dies and Protoss and Terran still got a chance to come back.
I disagree. Protoss has units like the DT to come back, Terran has banshees, Zerg doesn't have a unit like this, but it has droning up. You can be behind and just drone up EXTREMELY hard, and come back into a game. You might say, 'Well if the other player scouts and attacks, zerg will lose.' Well, yeah, but you're behind, you're 'supposed' to lose, and if protoss or terran gets scouted teching to their 'comeback' units, they lose too, especially if they're behind.
Depends on the timing. In the late game, burrowed infestors can devestate mineral lines to get back into the game.. but yeah, depends on having infestors ready.
On July 18 2011 14:09 crms wrote: its funny all the T/P bitching about Zergs.. bitching... Ironic, eh?
Fact is Zerg is balanced in the sense it can win, imbalanced in the sense its much more difficult and fragile. T and P are so much more forgiving its a joke. Zergs are playing starcraft, T/P are playing connect 4 on their iphones.
Most people feel the opposite. Isn't that what morrow was complaining about recently? That Z has a low skill cap compared to T and P? This is the kind of attitude that is holding Z's back, some form of thinking they are harder, when in reality a lot of people think they are easier. Morrow wants more units that reward high skill, so you can say that being easier but with less skill ceiling is actually a bad thing for Zergs especially at pro level.
Also considering Terran literally can do almost nothing to replace its army fast enough once its gone, I would say Terran is absolutely the least forgiving.
The problem for many zerg players is just, you make a single mistake especially in the early game and you are dead, such as one round of drones to much or a bit to late bane nest. Terran and Protoss can make mistakes and they will be behind but not immeadetly out of the game. The most obvious one is a marine scv all in because even if it fails Terran is quite a bit behind but still in it and can just go again. If T or P almost die they can play very defensive and try to make a comeback becaue Z cant break their defences, Z cant come back. In my opinion zerg is not forgiving at all while t and p is a lot more.
For sure at lower levels you need more micro as terran for example vs muta ling bling but once you got it down you will rip every z apart if you got good timings until the zerg overthinks his strat and gets above his current skilleve. Because there are so many things Zerg can utilize and has to do it benefits from a better player with more multitasking while protoss doesnt need that at non tip top level to utilize all what their race offers.
I've seen Terrans immediately out because they pulled SCVs slightly too late to keep a bunker alive, or Protosses out due to messing up a single forcefield at a crucial moment. Protoss and Terran can indeed die from a single mistake.
Yes you are absolutely right, for every race there are these situations, but there are so many situations were Zerg just dies and Protoss and Terran still got a chance to come back.
I disagree. Protoss has units like the DT to come back, Terran has banshees, Zerg doesn't have a unit like this, but it has droning up. You can be behind and just drone up EXTREMELY hard, and come back into a game. You might say, 'Well if the other player scouts and attacks, zerg will lose.' Well, yeah, but you're behind, you're 'supposed' to lose, and if protoss or terran gets scouted teching to their 'comeback' units, they lose too, especially if they're behind.
I think a nydus worm belongs to the same category as Banshees or DTs in terms of high-risk/high-reward tactics that can bring a Zerg player back into a lost game. Depending on the opponent's tech choices, burrow-movement roaches or a really hard tech switch into mutas can have a similar effect. Those are the things I immediately start keeping an eye out for when I'm in an advantageous position PvZ, same as I get detection if I've got my opponent on the ropes PvP and cannon up my mineral lines against Banshee harass and drops PvT.
For that matter, something as simple as a well-timed Zergling runby can get a zerg player back into a lost game. The idea that once Zerg makes a single mistake, they're irretrievably lost, is just silly.
On July 18 2011 14:09 crms wrote: its funny all the T/P bitching about Zergs.. bitching... Ironic, eh?
Fact is Zerg is balanced in the sense it can win, imbalanced in the sense its much more difficult and fragile. T and P are so much more forgiving its a joke. Zergs are playing starcraft, T/P are playing connect 4 on their iphones.
Most people feel the opposite. Isn't that what morrow was complaining about recently? That Z has a low skill cap compared to T and P? This is the kind of attitude that is holding Z's back, some form of thinking they are harder, when in reality a lot of people think they are easier. Morrow wants more units that reward high skill, so you can say that being easier but with less skill ceiling is actually a bad thing for Zergs especially at pro level.
Also considering Terran literally can do almost nothing to replace its army fast enough once its gone, I would say Terran is absolutely the least forgiving.
The problem for many zerg players is just, you make a single mistake especially in the early game and you are dead, such as one round of drones to much or a bit to late bane nest. Terran and Protoss can make mistakes and they will be behind but not immeadetly out of the game. The most obvious one is a marine scv all in because even if it fails Terran is quite a bit behind but still in it and can just go again. If T or P almost die they can play very defensive and try to make a comeback becaue Z cant break their defences, Z cant come back. In my opinion zerg is not forgiving at all while t and p is a lot more.
For sure at lower levels you need more micro as terran for example vs muta ling bling but once you got it down you will rip every z apart if you got good timings until the zerg overthinks his strat and gets above his current skilleve. Because there are so many things Zerg can utilize and has to do it benefits from a better player with more multitasking while protoss doesnt need that at non tip top level to utilize all what their race offers.
I've seen Terrans immediately out because they pulled SCVs slightly too late to keep a bunker alive, or Protosses out due to messing up a single forcefield at a crucial moment. Protoss and Terran can indeed die from a single mistake.
Yes you are absolutely right, for every race there are these situations, but there are so many situations were Zerg just dies and Protoss and Terran still got a chance to come back.
I disagree. Protoss has units like the DT to come back, Terran has banshees, Zerg doesn't have a unit like this, but it has droning up. You can be behind and just drone up EXTREMELY hard, and come back into a game. You might say, 'Well if the other player scouts and attacks, zerg will lose.' Well, yeah, but you're behind, you're 'supposed' to lose, and if protoss or terran gets scouted teching to their 'comeback' units, they lose too, especially if they're behind.
I think a nydus worm belongs to the same category as Banshees or DTs in terms of high-risk/high-reward tactics that can bring a Zerg player back into a lost game. Depending on the opponent's tech choices, burrow-movement roaches or a really hard tech switch into mutas can have a similar effect. Those are the things I immediately start keeping an eye out for when I'm in an advantageous position PvZ, same as I get detection if I've got my opponent on the ropes PvP and cannon up my mineral lines against Banshee harass and drops PvT.
For that matter, something as simple as a well-timed Zergling runby can get a zerg player back into a lost game. The idea that once Zerg makes a single mistake, they're irretrievably lost, is just silly.
Yeah, of course. And that's just talking about a game where you SHOULD NOT win and you win anyways. Everyone has had games like that. In a situation where you're only at a playable disadvantage, zerg can come back just like the other races.
While I see why people are annoyed at the "zerg whining", the idea that zerg can make less mistakes is a fact in my opinion.
One reason is that the race is more weak to timing pushes due to its production nature, and the fact that it (usually) trades a weaker defense for more mobility. One bad call and you're gone.
Another reason is that many of its units are low hp, micro units (unlike what the "zerg needs no micro" crowd seems to imply), and it's very easy to lose everything because of a slightly delayed reaction time even at a high level. Losing all your marines to banelings is nothing compared to losing high gas units like mutas or infestors in exchange for nothing.
Finally it's true that it doesn't really have a come-back unit, except maybe the broodlord and infestor against terran in some situations.
I'll add that it depends on the scenario. If you look at the reality of ZvT, Zerg has to be more defensive in the early game, so naturally it's going to be harder to scout and defend the push than it is to execute it. In other scenarios, for instance a roach ling against protoss, it's easy to execute and the protoss has to be the better player to repel it, and mistakes are less punitive for the zerg than the protoss (bad FF for instance).
It's not just the total damage of the spell that people complain about. Fungal Growth completely shuts down any and all micro potential for the opposing army, and against anything that can't out range the spell (such as marines for example) a single fungal growth sets the units up to be repeatedly hit with the spell again and again until they die from the damage. Storm can be micro'd out of (so it's often 20-40 damage not 80) and force fields can be popped by massive units if you really need to get them out of the way (and only work on ground units, but still also allows the opposing units to micro to some extent).
Except Ghosts often take 3 snipes to kill an infester due to a bug* with Zerg Health Regeneration. While this by no means makes it impossible to use Ghosts to deal with infesters and Broodlords, it does make it quite APM intensive, and is certainly much more difficult to pull off then it is to play against (not that that is necessarily bad). I/BL is certainly powerful, but it is by no means unstoppable, just excruciatingly cost efficient.
*The cooldown on health regen for zerg units continues to tick while the unit is at full health so it recovers the first point of damage almost immediately when it takes its first portion of damage, as opposed to having to wait the duration of the cooldown to recover the first hitpoint. It is possible for two Ghosts to kill a single Infester in two snipes provided they are both told to snipe the same target and both do so within less than one tenth of a second of each other (to not allow the health point to regen), a single Ghost cannot kill an Infester in two Snipes because ZHR will kick in during the cooldown between the snipes leaving the Infester with 1hp after two snipes. It is this same bug that is the reason the 250mm Strike Cannon from the Thor will not kill an Ultralisk and why a Drone will always beat a Probe in a duel (with no micro).
You are right about the infestor regen leaving them with 1 health, and that needs to be fixed. 2 snipes from 2 ghosts cast in immediate succession should kill an infestor. However that only becomes noticeable if you put the ghosts on hold fire. Cloaking a group of ghosts and moving them to a group of infestors and sniping them will still take them all out really quickly. While the infestor is left with 1 health another regular shot from another ghost kills it when the snipes go off. I could still get 6 cloaked ghosts to take out over 20 infestors with snipe and standard fire. While this is APM intensive, standard BW play was more APM intensive.
The reason that I bring up the damage that FG does is because, that is what the main change was. It has a higher DPS than before. The old FG held down units twice as long, and nobody had a problem with it back then. It was strong, but people weren't crying about it.
When comparing the strength of FG and FF you have to look at all aspects of it. Sentries are cheaper, come out earlier, and FF requires less energy. They are much more prevalent than FG with more possibilities. Yes FG can be cast immediately after one ends, but that has actually been reduced by the change to FG. It is easier to micro your army, hit injects, and recast FG when you only have to do it every 8 seconds. The massive thing also kinda irrelevant in ZvP. Our ground massive unit, is terrible. Combat viability aside, tell an ultra to go forward to break a FF and it will instead turn around in circles and piss itself.
Part that makes this frustrating is that it is like watching somebody fail to take a nut off a bolt with a hammer and refuse to use the wrench right next to them. Terrans have all the tools for the job, but they just don't want to use them. Ghosts still get used in TvP, why is it that much harder to use them in TvZ. The only thing that I can see is that Terrans already have the tech labs on the barracks for the marauders in TvP, but in TvZ they have reactors.
I really don't like the current mentality going around of, "everything good the other guy has is imba because it works."
On July 18 2011 02:59 DarkDolphin wrote: Map TEST 1 , is a SC2 version of "La Mancha" from Broodwar, ^___________^. I wouldn't be surprised if is called the same name.
http:
The other maps are just pure crap
I really love La Mancha :D
Tbh I think Blizz should just copy BW maps and make some changes and make it look different because the rest of their maps are just utter trash tbh...
it would had been funny if maptest 1 was a desert map too lol
On July 19 2011 02:08 hehe wrote: lol heres blizzard for the new maps
1.COPY BROODWAR MAPS
2.ADD WATCH TOWERS IN MIDDLE AND DESTRUCTIBLE ROCKS AND BACK DOORS FOR CREATIVE PLAY which actually makes the game 100 times worse
Test Map 1 doesn't have back doors, and the only rocks in the current version are the ones that help you wall, which is actually kind of interesting (and thank god blizz is getting creative with these things).
The only issues with test map 1 right now are
1. In horizontal spawns, thirds are a little awkward. 2. The elevator siege of your main.
I don't know how bad the elevatoring will be. Getting your expansion sieged on TA is almost as bad, but it's easier to counter-attack/cut of reinforcements. You might have to get a spine or two in your main though, and that kind of sucks. I guess we'll see how it plays. If you run banelings into that choke, there's no where for marines to run; it's a dead-end.
On July 18 2011 14:00 DooMDash wrote: It's not just refuse to innovate, it's refuse to innovate compared to Terran and Protoss. I've seen much more creativity out of P and T than Z's. Day9 said it best when I'd say 90% of the SCII time Zergs were literally just picking a random number to drone to and then building their army... that's not innovation. Recently things have started to change with Zergs, and only recently has Zerg actually been doing well at high level... coincidence?
The problem is not innovation. Z's try to innovate all the time, the problem is that the ZvT/P matchups are so incredibly fragile that it is very difficult to find something that actually work. On top of that Zerg has the fewest combat units of all the races, at least one of which is almost useless in most situations *cough* hydra *cough*. It is a mathematical fact that Zerg has fewer potential options than T/P, which makes innovating a lot more difficult.
There have been many pro games where every zerg units gets built over the course of the game. How often do you see pro games that see the use of Ravens, Carriers, Warp Prisms, reapers, Battle cruisers, etc.. Zerg players are already using all of their units in games, there isn't much left to be innovative with other than timings.
Which is why this statement is very important:
Day9 said it best when I'd say 90% of the SCII time Zergs were literally just picking a random number to drone to and then building their army... that's not innovation.
That is about all the innovation you can do as zerg. Drone timing is a very very important part of playing zerg. The decision to build drones or units at a given time is like walking the razor's edge. The wrong choice between drones/units can mean the difference between winning and losing the game at all levels of play. Too many units and you are behind on econ, too many drones and you just die. The game is far too complicated to come up with an analytic solution to optimal drone timing, therefore the only alternative is the monte-carlo method. Eventually you figure out exactly how many units you need to make to live based on information obtained through scouting. Figuring out that balance is the hard part.
P/T have plenty of wiggle room to be creative with. Strong defenses, efficient units, and relatively forgiving mechanics make it much easier to be 'creative' without dying. Zerg players don't have that option. Zerg can't wall, all the tech times are significantly longer, and Zerg is extremely vulnerable to air.
The fact that game balance for ZvX is so map dependent is another design flaw. A large dependence on melee / short range units makes zerg incredibly vulnerable to terrain abuse. This is something that really needs to be fixed in HOTS.
On July 18 2011 14:09 crms wrote: its funny all the T/P bitching about Zergs.. bitching... Ironic, eh?
Fact is Zerg is balanced in the sense it can win, imbalanced in the sense its much more difficult and fragile. T and P are so much more forgiving its a joke. Zergs are playing starcraft, T/P are playing connect 4 on their iphones.
Most people feel the opposite. Isn't that what morrow was complaining about recently? That Z has a low skill cap compared to T and P? This is the kind of attitude that is holding Z's back, some form of thinking they are harder, when in reality a lot of people think they are easier. Morrow wants more units that reward high skill, so you can say that being easier but with less skill ceiling is actually a bad thing for Zergs especially at pro level.
Also considering Terran literally can do almost nothing to replace its army fast enough once its gone, I would say Terran is absolutely the least forgiving.
The problem for many zerg players is just, you make a single mistake especially in the early game and you are dead, such as one round of drones to much or a bit to late bane nest. Terran and Protoss can make mistakes and they will be behind but not immeadetly out of the game. The most obvious one is a marine scv all in because even if it fails Terran is quite a bit behind but still in it and can just go again. If T or P almost die they can play very defensive and try to make a comeback becaue Z cant break their defences, Z cant come back. In my opinion zerg is not forgiving at all while t and p is a lot more.
For sure at lower levels you need more micro as terran for example vs muta ling bling but once you got it down you will rip every z apart if you got good timings until the zerg overthinks his strat and gets above his current skilleve. Because there are so many things Zerg can utilize and has to do it benefits from a better player with more multitasking while protoss doesnt need that at non tip top level to utilize all what their race offers.
I've seen Terrans immediately out because they pulled SCVs slightly too late to keep a bunker alive, or Protosses out due to messing up a single forcefield at a crucial moment. Protoss and Terran can indeed die from a single mistake.
I think the problem is that Zerg is much harder to get into. Meaning, at low levels, Zerg is harder to play because (at the low, mechanics level) it is less forgiving. Missing larva injects can outright kill you, while missing a MULE or a chronoboost is not such a big deal (again, at the low level). Most players aren't Masters or pros, so the complaints come from that background. I have no idea about the skill ceiling for Zerg (I'm a silver league player) so I won't try to argue about it, but from my own experience I feel that Zerg is harder to play than Protoss/Terran (at my level). At the high points you have things like when to drone/when to build units figured out, at the low level you die a lot to making these basics mistakes. And it's easier as Zerg to make basic mistakes than for T/P. Also, of course every race can lose due to a single mistake, that's not the point, the point is who has more "opportunities" to make those mistakes.
A problem is that when people talk about balance, we're assuming that we're talking about high-level play where Pros aren't messing up from forgetting larva injects. Yet, as you say, if complaints come from the background where someone's mechanics aren't on par with the pros, then that means that the problems with mechanics, and the complaints of losing from a single mistake brought on by that lack of good mechanics, have no place in this discussion.
I agree, I just wanted to make the point that a lot of people probably speak from a background of bad mechanics and therefore they don't realize that their points are invalid. This gives a warped discussion.
Yeah. I do agree that Zerg for beginners is overall harder than Protoss or Terran, but even so, that doesn't give people the right to be stuck up and superior about it.
As an engineering major who hears lots of his peers make fun of humanities majors, it's the same thing - engineering probably is overall harder than humanities to most people, but that doesn't give me the right to just act stuck-up and superior around humanities majors. It would just make me look like a dick.
It's frustration which leads to what you consider superiority. In gold/plat EU, what will a terran generally do against a zerg? A 1 or 2 base timing attack. How hard is that to pull off? Not at all. How hard is it to defend as a zerg? Hard. Which means the zerg player has to outplay the terran.
This is of course true the other way around as well. A protoss going forge expand will have to outplay a zerg going roach/ling all-in which is easier to do than defend.
The reasons why Zergs are frustrated is because Zerg doesn't have all that many viable 1-2 base timing attacks, where as they are very vulnurable to a ton of them, which makes it seem like you have to outplay your opponents every single game because they can beat you with inferior play.
After losing to simple timing attacks enough times, you're going to become overly baised and think every single terran/protoss is a 2base timing scrub, even though it isn't true.
On July 19 2011 13:17 L3gendary wrote: Sorry if this has been answered already but i didn't wanna read 38 pages. Do we know wat maps are being taken out?
I don't think we'll know until the season is up, the entire PTR pool was the new maps.
The most frustrating thing about playing zerg is the lack of offensive capabilities in early game. There really isn't a very strong build like 2rax or 4 gate that will utterly destroy T/P if they're not prepared for it. 6pool was the only thing close to this, but it's not easy to transition out of. And since larva limitation does not allow drones and army units at once, doing any sort of attack will guarantee that you will lose to T/P due to walloffs. It's not really imbalance, but more like stupid game design that makes zerg always the defensive race for the first 7 minutes of every game. I wish zergs can walloff easier...maybe that would change everything.
On July 19 2011 16:06 neoghaleon55 wrote: The most frustrating thing about playing zerg is the lack of offensive capabilities in early game. There really isn't a very strong build like 2rax or 4 gate that will utterly destroy T/P if they're not prepared for it. 6pool was the only thing close to this, but it's not easy to transition out of. And since larva limitation does not allow drones and army units at once, doing any sort of attack will guarantee that you will lose to T/P due to walloffs. It's not really imbalance, but more like stupid game design that makes zerg always the defensive race for the first 7 minutes of every game. I wish zergs can walloff easier...maybe that would change everything.
Well there is the 5/7 Roach Rush, even though the build is pretty bad. But you have to keep one thing in mind. Zerg can expand super early AND defend against early aggression. Image a protoss going for a nexus first on say XelNagaCaverns.. instant gg. Would be pretty sick, if zerg could expand at 14 AND apply pressure against toss/terran...
Well there is the 5/7 Roach Rush, even though the build is pretty bad. But you have to keep one thing in mind. Zerg can expand super early AND defend against early aggression. Image a protoss going for a nexus first on say XelNagaCaverns.. instant gg. Would be pretty sick, if zerg could expand at 14 AND apply pressure against toss/terran...
why expand AND apply pressure. I think most zergs would be happier if the could saty on 1 base for a period of time (like P/T), apply agression and THEN get their expansion. But that doesnt work. You HAVE to hatch early. And for protoss... thats a pretty bad example. In fact you can nexus first on some maps AND apply pressure to the zerg (forge) or forge -> nexus and then even pressure a zerg/delay his hatch when he went pool first
On July 18 2011 14:09 crms wrote: its funny all the T/P bitching about Zergs.. bitching... Ironic, eh?
Fact is Zerg is balanced in the sense it can win, imbalanced in the sense its much more difficult and fragile. T and P are so much more forgiving its a joke. Zergs are playing starcraft, T/P are playing connect 4 on their iphones.
Most people feel the opposite. Isn't that what morrow was complaining about recently? That Z has a low skill cap compared to T and P? This is the kind of attitude that is holding Z's back, some form of thinking they are harder, when in reality a lot of people think they are easier. Morrow wants more units that reward high skill, so you can say that being easier but with less skill ceiling is actually a bad thing for Zergs especially at pro level.
Also considering Terran literally can do almost nothing to replace its army fast enough once its gone, I would say Terran is absolutely the least forgiving.
The problem for many zerg players is just, you make a single mistake especially in the early game and you are dead, such as one round of drones to much or a bit to late bane nest. Terran and Protoss can make mistakes and they will be behind but not immeadetly out of the game. The most obvious one is a marine scv all in because even if it fails Terran is quite a bit behind but still in it and can just go again. If T or P almost die they can play very defensive and try to make a comeback becaue Z cant break their defences, Z cant come back. In my opinion zerg is not forgiving at all while t and p is a lot more.
For sure at lower levels you need more micro as terran for example vs muta ling bling but once you got it down you will rip every z apart if you got good timings until the zerg overthinks his strat and gets above his current skilleve. Because there are so many things Zerg can utilize and has to do it benefits from a better player with more multitasking while protoss doesnt need that at non tip top level to utilize all what their race offers.
I've seen Terrans immediately out because they pulled SCVs slightly too late to keep a bunker alive, or Protosses out due to messing up a single forcefield at a crucial moment. Protoss and Terran can indeed die from a single mistake.
I think the problem is that Zerg is much harder to get into. Meaning, at low levels, Zerg is harder to play because (at the low, mechanics level) it is less forgiving. Missing larva injects can outright kill you, while missing a MULE or a chronoboost is not such a big deal (again, at the low level). Most players aren't Masters or pros, so the complaints come from that background. I have no idea about the skill ceiling for Zerg (I'm a silver league player) so I won't try to argue about it, but from my own experience I feel that Zerg is harder to play than Protoss/Terran (at my level). At the high points you have things like when to drone/when to build units figured out, at the low level you die a lot to making these basics mistakes. And it's easier as Zerg to make basic mistakes than for T/P. Also, of course every race can lose due to a single mistake, that's not the point, the point is who has more "opportunities" to make those mistakes.
the problem is scouting. without scouting you will make like 30 drones and then stop because you're scared because you know the opponent has a big army... so you make army and then don't get a chance to make drones.
on the other hand, if you have a drone/ling outside opponent base and on the towers, and overlord spotting for drops etc, then you can make far more workers than your opponent which translates to playing the game on easy mode.
get the required tech and expand, but not too quickly, then as soon as you see the opponent move out of their base, you can power a huge army to completely overwhelm.
to put it simply, if all players had map hack, then zerg would be rediculously overpowered.
or to put it another way, good zerg players are impossible to beat unless they make a mistake.
On July 18 2011 21:53 MilesTeg wrote: While I see why people are annoyed at the "zerg whining", the idea that zerg can make less mistakes is a fact in my opinion.
One reason is that the race is more weak to timing pushes due to its production nature, and the fact that it (usually) trades a weaker defense for more mobility. One bad call and you're gone.
Another reason is that many of its units are low hp, micro units (unlike what the "zerg needs no micro" crowd seems to imply), and it's very easy to lose everything because of a slightly delayed reaction time even at a high level. Losing all your marines to banelings is nothing compared to losing high gas units like mutas or infestors in exchange for nothing.
Finally it's true that it doesn't really have a come-back unit, except maybe the broodlord and infestor against terran in some situations.
I'll add that it depends on the scenario. If you look at the reality of ZvT, Zerg has to be more defensive in the early game, so naturally it's going to be harder to scout and defend the push than it is to execute it. In other scenarios, for instance a roach ling against protoss, it's easy to execute and the protoss has to be the better player to repel it, and mistakes are less punitive for the zerg than the protoss (bad FF for instance).
While I see why people are annoyed at the "Protoss whining", the idea that Protoss can make less mistakes is a fact in my opinion.
One reason is that the race is more dependant on timing pushes due to Zerg's production nature, and the fact that it (usually) trades a weaker mobility for more offense. One missed timing and you're behind forever.
Another reason is that many of its units are low speed, power units (unlike what the "Zerg units suck because they can be microed" crowd seems to imply), and it's very easy to lose everything because of a slightly mispositioned army even at a high level. Losing all your Roaches to Blink Stalkers is nothing compared to getting countered and losing 30 probes in exchange for nothing.
Finally it's true that it doesn't really have a come-back unit, except maybe the DT and drops against Zerg in some situations where they don't put up adequate defense at their expos.
I'll add that it depends on the scenario. If you look at the reality of PvZ, Protoss has to be more offensive in the early game, so naturally it's going to be harder to tech and expand than it is to put up a couple of spine crawlers and pump roaches. In other scenarios, for instance a roach ling against protoss, it's even easier to execute and the protoss has to be the better player to repel it, and mistakes are less punitive for the zerg than the protoss (bad FF for instance).
On July 18 2011 21:53 MilesTeg wrote: While I see why people are annoyed at the "zerg whining", the idea that zerg can make less mistakes is a fact in my opinion.
One reason is that the race is more weak to timing pushes due to its production nature, and the fact that it (usually) trades a weaker defense for more mobility. One bad call and you're gone.
Another reason is that many of its units are low hp, micro units (unlike what the "zerg needs no micro" crowd seems to imply), and it's very easy to lose everything because of a slightly delayed reaction time even at a high level. Losing all your marines to banelings is nothing compared to losing high gas units like mutas or infestors in exchange for nothing.
Finally it's true that it doesn't really have a come-back unit, except maybe the broodlord and infestor against terran in some situations.
I'll add that it depends on the scenario. If you look at the reality of ZvT, Zerg has to be more defensive in the early game, so naturally it's going to be harder to scout and defend the push than it is to execute it. In other scenarios, for instance a roach ling against protoss, it's easy to execute and the protoss has to be the better player to repel it, and mistakes are less punitive for the zerg than the protoss (bad FF for instance).
While I see why people are annoyed at the "Protoss whining", the idea that Protoss can make less mistakes is a fact in my opinion.
One reason is that the race is more dependant on timing pushes due to Zerg's production nature, and the fact that it (usually) trades a weaker mobility for more offense. One missed timing and you're behind forever.
Another reason is that many of its units are low speed, power units (unlike what the "Zerg units suck because they can be microed" crowd seems to imply), and it's very easy to lose everything because of a slightly mispositioned army even at a high level. Losing all your Roaches to Blink Stalkers is nothing compared to getting countered and losing 30 probes in exchange for nothing.
Finally it's true that it doesn't really have a come-back unit, except maybe the DT and drops against Zerg in some situations where they don't put up adequate defense at their expos.
I'll add that it depends on the scenario. If you look at the reality of PvZ, Protoss has to be more offensive in the early game, so naturally it's going to be harder to tech and expand than it is to put up a couple of spine crawlers and pump roaches. In other scenarios, for instance a roach ling against protoss, it's even easier to execute and the protoss has to be the better player to repel it, and mistakes are less punitive for the zerg than the protoss (bad FF for instance).
Any Terran players want to do their version?
Except.... your post didn't make any sense at all. People like you are why it's impossible to have a discussion on this subject. If you can't have a non biased and emotional reaction to what I think are valid points, please refrain from posting.
On July 19 2011 16:06 neoghaleon55 wrote: The most frustrating thing about playing zerg is the lack of offensive capabilities in early game. There really isn't a very strong build like 2rax or 4 gate that will utterly destroy T/P if they're not prepared for it. 6pool was the only thing close to this, but it's not easy to transition out of. And since larva limitation does not allow drones and army units at once, doing any sort of attack will guarantee that you will lose to T/P due to walloffs. It's not really imbalance, but more like stupid game design that makes zerg always the defensive race for the first 7 minutes of every game. I wish zergs can walloff easier...maybe that would change everything.
If zerg early game vulnerability was made the same as T/P the game would not be as dynamic and exciting as it is now. Each race has different strengths/weaknesses based on the stage in the game, and because some races are vulnerable at particular times (zerg early game for instance) this encourages more engagements. If these timing windows of vulnerability did not exist games would become more turtley and SC2 would not be the awesome game that it is.
A simple example is Terran vs Zerg in the mid game. Zerg can get a good number of muta before Terran easily defend 2 base (and esp 3 base) from them. Eventually terran can get enough defense (Thors/Turrets/Marines) to put an end to muta harass, but because a timing window existed for the muta the zerg is incented to harass for a while, which leads to a more interesting game.
Constant engagements is what makes the game great. Zerg fending off attacks/pressure for the first 7 minutes as you say... is a good thing... as the alternative is that both sides build up for 10 - 15 minutes before any attacks can take place, which can be a real snoozer to play/watch.
On July 18 2011 21:53 MilesTeg wrote: While I see why people are annoyed at the "zerg whining", the idea that zerg can make less mistakes is a fact in my opinion.
One reason is that the race is more weak to timing pushes due to its production nature, and the fact that it (usually) trades a weaker defense for more mobility. One bad call and you're gone.
Another reason is that many of its units are low hp, micro units (unlike what the "zerg needs no micro" crowd seems to imply), and it's very easy to lose everything because of a slightly delayed reaction time even at a high level. Losing all your marines to banelings is nothing compared to losing high gas units like mutas or infestors in exchange for nothing.
Finally it's true that it doesn't really have a come-back unit, except maybe the broodlord and infestor against terran in some situations.
I'll add that it depends on the scenario. If you look at the reality of ZvT, Zerg has to be more defensive in the early game, so naturally it's going to be harder to scout and defend the push than it is to execute it. In other scenarios, for instance a roach ling against protoss, it's easy to execute and the protoss has to be the better player to repel it, and mistakes are less punitive for the zerg than the protoss (bad FF for instance).
While I see why people are annoyed at the "Protoss whining", the idea that Protoss can make less mistakes is a fact in my opinion.
One reason is that the race is more dependant on timing pushes due to Zerg's production nature, and the fact that it (usually) trades a weaker mobility for more offense. One missed timing and you're behind forever.
Another reason is that many of its units are low speed, power units (unlike what the "Zerg units suck because they can be microed" crowd seems to imply), and it's very easy to lose everything because of a slightly mispositioned army even at a high level. Losing all your Roaches to Blink Stalkers is nothing compared to getting countered and losing 30 probes in exchange for nothing.
Finally it's true that it doesn't really have a come-back unit, except maybe the DT and drops against Zerg in some situations where they don't put up adequate defense at their expos.
I'll add that it depends on the scenario. If you look at the reality of PvZ, Protoss has to be more offensive in the early game, so naturally it's going to be harder to tech and expand than it is to put up a couple of spine crawlers and pump roaches. In other scenarios, for instance a roach ling against protoss, it's even easier to execute and the protoss has to be the better player to repel it, and mistakes are less punitive for the zerg than the protoss (bad FF for instance).
Any Terran players want to do their version?
Except.... your post didn't make any sense at all. People like you are why it's impossible to have a discussion on this subject. If you can't have a non biased and emotional reaction to what I think are valid points, please refrain from posting.
His post made just as much sense as yours did. If you can't see that, then I'm afraid it's people like you who should refrain from posting.
If you tell zerg player pre-igniter is changed they probably will jump off their chair in an act of happyness, they will be so disappointed if you tell them it's just the icon T_T
On July 19 2011 16:06 neoghaleon55 wrote: The most frustrating thing about playing zerg is the lack of offensive capabilities in early game. There really isn't a very strong build like 2rax or 4 gate that will utterly destroy T/P if they're not prepared for it. 6pool was the only thing close to this, but it's not easy to transition out of. And since larva limitation does not allow drones and army units at once, doing any sort of attack will guarantee that you will lose to T/P due to walloffs. It's not really imbalance, but more like stupid game design that makes zerg always the defensive race for the first 7 minutes of every game. I wish zergs can walloff easier...maybe that would change everything.
If zerg early game vulnerability was made the same as T/P the game would not be as dynamic and exciting as it is now. Each race has different strengths/weaknesses based on the stage in the game, and because some races are vulnerable at particular times (zerg early game for instance) this encourages more engagements. If these timing windows of vulnerability did not exist games would become more turtley and SC2 would not be the awesome game that it is.
A simple example is Terran vs Zerg in the mid game. Zerg can get a good number of muta before Terran easily defend 2 base (and esp 3 base) from them. Eventually terran can get enough defense (Thors/Turrets/Marines) to put an end to muta harass, but because a timing window existed for the muta the zerg is incented to harass for a while, which leads to a more interesting game.
Constant engagements is what makes the game great. Zerg fending off attacks/pressure for the first 7 minutes as you say... is a good thing... as the alternative is that both sides build up for 10 - 15 minutes before any attacks can take place, which can be a real snoozer to play/watch.
The only thing that frustrates me is how as a zerg I usually only win in 20 minute macro games, but lose to a variety of 6-12 minute pushes, which can range from 2 rax to 6 gate. I know that the other races need to do these things to temper the economy of the zerg (which in my opinion is the greatest strength and something to fear), but it just gets really tiring to play such long games on ladder and lose such short ones, although losing in a 25 min macrofest can be really depressing as well, given the sheer investment of time and energy.
I can't get past the update it always gives me "base\Mods\Liberty.SC2Mod\Base.SC2Assets\Assets\Textures\btn-upgrade-terran-infernalpreigniter.dds" could not be applied. Did yours patch correctly?
On July 18 2011 21:53 MilesTeg wrote: While I see why people are annoyed at the "zerg whining", the idea that zerg can make less mistakes is a fact in my opinion.
One reason is that the race is more weak to timing pushes due to its production nature, and the fact that it (usually) trades a weaker defense for more mobility. One bad call and you're gone.
Another reason is that many of its units are low hp, micro units (unlike what the "zerg needs no micro" crowd seems to imply), and it's very easy to lose everything because of a slightly delayed reaction time even at a high level. Losing all your marines to banelings is nothing compared to losing high gas units like mutas or infestors in exchange for nothing.
Finally it's true that it doesn't really have a come-back unit, except maybe the broodlord and infestor against terran in some situations.
I'll add that it depends on the scenario. If you look at the reality of ZvT, Zerg has to be more defensive in the early game, so naturally it's going to be harder to scout and defend the push than it is to execute it. In other scenarios, for instance a roach ling against protoss, it's easy to execute and the protoss has to be the better player to repel it, and mistakes are less punitive for the zerg than the protoss (bad FF for instance).
While I see why people are annoyed at the "Protoss whining", the idea that Protoss can make less mistakes is a fact in my opinion.
One reason is that the race is more dependant on timing pushes due to Zerg's production nature, and the fact that it (usually) trades a weaker mobility for more offense. One missed timing and you're behind forever.
Another reason is that many of its units are low speed, power units (unlike what the "Zerg units suck because they can be microed" crowd seems to imply), and it's very easy to lose everything because of a slightly mispositioned army even at a high level. Losing all your Roaches to Blink Stalkers is nothing compared to getting countered and losing 30 probes in exchange for nothing.
Finally it's true that it doesn't really have a come-back unit, except maybe the DT and drops against Zerg in some situations where they don't put up adequate defense at their expos.
I'll add that it depends on the scenario. If you look at the reality of PvZ, Protoss has to be more offensive in the early game, so naturally it's going to be harder to tech and expand than it is to put up a couple of spine crawlers and pump roaches. In other scenarios, for instance a roach ling against protoss, it's even easier to execute and the protoss has to be the better player to repel it, and mistakes are less punitive for the zerg than the protoss (bad FF for instance).
Any Terran players want to do their version?
Except.... your post didn't make any sense at all. People like you are why it's impossible to have a discussion on this subject. If you can't have a non biased and emotional reaction to what I think are valid points, please refrain from posting.
His post made just as much sense as yours did. If you can't see that, then I'm afraid it's people like you who should refrain from posting.
"Any Terran players want to do their version?"
While I see why people are annoyed at the "Terran whining", the idea that Terran can make less mistakes is a fact in my opinion.
One reason is that the race is more dependant on timing pushes due to Zerg's production nature. The ability to have 50 drones in the first 8 minutes of game forces the terrans to be pro-active despite Terran's defensive orientation. A time consuming and deliberate approach to gathering an army, choosing units wisely, and strategically approaching the battlefield is a perilous endeavour for Terran. One minute your marching towards the zergs quickly growing base, you hear you need supply depots you plant a couple down, look back.. and where once stood your army is just a mess a green acid and rampaging zerg units that will get across the map and into your base quicker than you can build 1 round of units from your production facilities.
Terran doesn't have a "come-back unit", or should I say, an army sitting at home ready to pop out once morning tea was over. Terran needs to rely on unit retention, never wasting a soul or else the zerg swarm will just overwhelm you with the good old a-move.
On July 20 2011 00:42 OneStepAbove wrote: His post made just as much sense as yours did. If you can't see that, then I'm afraid it's people like you who should refrain from posting.
Really? Let's see...
One reason is that the race is more dependant on timing pushes due to Zerg's production nature, and the fact that it (usually) trades a weaker mobility for more offense. One missed timing and you're behind forever.
My whole point was that it's easier to execute these pushes than it is to scout and defend them... he completely failed to adress that point and instead just reversed my sentence because he thought it would make him look smart.
Finally it's true that it doesn't really have a come-back unit, except maybe the DT and drops against Zerg in some situations where they don't put up adequate defense at their expos.
He can't seriously imply that Protoss doesn't have much better options to come back from behind...
unlike what the "Zerg units suck because they can be microed"
I don't even know what it means. It's pure trolling.
I'll add that it depends on the scenario. If you look at the reality of PvZ, Protoss has to be more offensive in the early game, so naturally it's going to be harder to tech and expand than it is to put up a couple of spine crawlers and pump roaches.
Assuming pumping roaches and spine crawlers will get you through the myriad of openings Protoss can do is just intellectual dishonesty.
And I love how the only part he kept is when I said it's hard for a Protoss to play against Roach/Ling timings ... which kinda proves my point that it's easier to execute a timing push than it is to repel it.
No, after reading it again I can confirm that his answer was nothing more than trolling. Not saying my post is 100% accurate but I think my points were valid and argumented. Maybe you should let go of your bias, or read the posts better.
I get off work, looking forward to a few hours of starcraft. I get patch 1.3.5 with no problems, hell all it really changed was an icon.
4 hours later I still can't play as the servers are down, and to make it worse the battle.net forums are down so we can get no official word on when this gaming exile will end.
Feels pretty lame, especially since region linking isn't happening until the season change, right? Why all this down time for 1 otherwise pointless patch...?
Or is region linking starting now...?
Either way, bed for this third shifter. Bed without a good game. I feel sad inside lol
On July 20 2011 01:28 Ironsights wrote: I get off work, looking forward to a few hours of starcraft. I get patch 1.3.5 with no problems, hell all it really changed was an icon.
4 hours later I still can't play as the servers are down, and to make it worse the battle.net forums are down so we can get no official word on when this gaming exile will end.
Feels pretty lame, especially since region linking isn't happening until the season change, right? Why all this down time for 1 otherwise pointless patch...?
Or is region linking starting now...?
Either way, bed for this third shifter. Bed without a good game. I feel sad inside lol
I feel your pain bro,
I play on EU, bought an NA account lastnight and got placed into diamond just before i went to bed.
I wake up ready to pwn some noobs to find the server offline. :/
on the plus side EU is still up. (I believe they do it 1 region at a time)
Ether way, im just thankfull that blizzard are so proactive with there updates. its a good thing in the long run!
On July 20 2011 01:37 KillerPlague wrote: cool so it's not just me. does seem weird to patch something that isn't due for another week..
I believe there doing it like this so that the transition over to season 3 will be allot faster and more importantly smoother.
There is also ofter allot of behind the scenes changes that go on in each patch apart from just a few unit changes. they just dont feel the need to give us all the techy details in the notes.
Looking forward to season 3! Bring on the rediculous new maps! xD
This patch makes replays older than 1.3.5 so you have to log out. I HATE that. I have to log in every single time i wanna watch a replay now? And all you did was change a portrait...? G_G blizz
On July 20 2011 02:41 ander wrote: This patch makes replays older than 1.3.5 so you have to log out. I HATE that. I have to log in every single time i wanna watch a replay now? And all you did was change a portrait...? G_G blizz
Really? That's fucked up if that's the case. That shit is really bugging me..
... Well but the side effect is now it says I have to update to the newest patch before I can play any form of multiplayer... Something that I've already done...
Yeah, I can't say enough about how big of an improvement the input limit fix makes when browsing profiles. After a year of waiting 30 seconds for a profile to load, I can now go through 10 in the same time frame. Amazing.
On July 20 2011 04:36 ImmortalTofu wrote: ... Well but the side effect is now it says I have to update to the newest patch before I can play any form of multiplayer... Something that I've already done...
Hey me either! Every patch. I give up trying to find how to fix it, I just hope it fixes itself.
/Sigh. Blizzard "replaced" (not added alongside) the old blue flame icon. (This only affects map makers who used the red flame icon because it fits).
Fortunately I backed up the old icon but still if Blizzard randomly replaces icons like that without keeping the old icons, does that mean we have to backup everything?
Also this is only the patch that mentioned an icon change, in the previous patches (including 1.1 which introduced most of the new colored icons) they never mentioned them but fortunately never replaced any old icons.
Blizzard rant off
P.S. someone tell Blizzard not to replace their icons but just add it alongside but with a different name.
On July 20 2011 09:55 soul5 wrote: When is the next balance patch we haven't had one in a long time.
That's great. Having too many balance patches won't allow the metagame to develop.
Not if the game isn't balanced.
Pretty well balanced right now bud.
None of you can say a word about balance. That belongs to pros And just sidenote: bw was being balanced for 10 years. SC2 is here for year, i would say that explains everything
On July 20 2011 09:55 soul5 wrote: When is the next balance patch we haven't had one in a long time.
That's great. Having too many balance patches won't allow the metagame to develop.
Not if the game isn't balanced.
Pretty well balanced right now bud.
None of you can say a word about balance. That belongs to pros And just sidenote: bw was being balanced for 10 years. SC2 is here for year, i would say that explains everything
BW's last balance patch was 2001, and was patched less times than SC2 has already.
On July 20 2011 09:55 soul5 wrote: When is the next balance patch we haven't had one in a long time.
That's great. Having too many balance patches won't allow the metagame to develop.
Not if the game isn't balanced.
Pretty well balanced right now bud.
None of you can say a word about balance. That belongs to pros And just sidenote: bw was being balanced for 10 years. SC2 is here for year, i would say that explains everything
BW's last balance patch was 2001, and was patched less times than SC2 has already.
Yeah, last balance patch was 1.08 and it came out 2001. It's kind of crazy really. The devs managed to create a balanced game accidentally on the first few tries (I'm not sure how they did it but they got it right before the pro scene even developed).
Though to be fair the community made maps play a big role in balancing.
Game balance isnt just up the pros, it really needs to be looked all across, and yeah i would say game is fairly balanced right now, nothing it glaringly OP, and its good... its good
Anyone else notice that if someone leaves a custom game lobby that is in a countdown, the countdown will stop instead of the game just starting one person short?
Profile loading might be a little faster for me but it certainly isn't instant.
On July 20 2011 01:23 MilesTeg wrote: My whole point was that it's easier to execute these pushes than it is to scout and defend them... he completely failed to adress that point and instead just reversed my sentence because he thought it would make him look smart.
Well, not exactly. By comparison maybe. I was more focusing on you.
You were whining about your race. That's neither original nor interesting nor cogent to the discussion at hand. Early-game timing pushes are all easier to execute than they are to defend, until you learn the correct responses, and my point was that you can make minor changes to your bitching and complaining and end up with an equally pointless and silly rant about any matchup from any race's perspective.
On July 20 2011 01:23 MilesTeg wrote: My whole point was that it's easier to execute these pushes than it is to scout and defend them... he completely failed to adress that point and instead just reversed my sentence because he thought it would make him look smart.
Well, not exactly. By comparison maybe. I was more focusing on you.
You were whining about your race. That's neither original nor interesting nor cogent to the discussion at hand. Early-game timing pushes are all easier to execute than they are to defend, until you learn the correct responses, and my point was that you can make minor changes to your bitching and complaining and end up with an equally pointless and silly rant about any matchup from any race's perspective.
On July 20 2011 09:55 soul5 wrote: When is the next balance patch we haven't had one in a long time.
That's great. Having too many balance patches won't allow the metagame to develop.
Not if the game isn't balanced.
Pretty well balanced right now bud.
None of you can say a word about balance. That belongs to pros And just sidenote: bw was being balanced for 10 years. SC2 is here for year, i would say that explains everything
BW's last balance patch was 2001, and was patched less times than SC2 has already.
Yeah, last balance patch was 1.08 and it came out 2001. It's kind of crazy really. The devs managed to create a balanced game accidentally on the first few tries (I'm not sure how they did it but they got it right before the pro scene even developed).
Though to be fair the community made maps play a big role in balancing.
BW wasn't balanced at the end of it's patch cycle. It was balanced through the work of map makers, particularly the ones made by KeSPA/Korean proscene.