On October 25 2016 00:31 Dante08 wrote: Technics, have you ever thought it might just be a coincidence that the top players right now happen to be Terran? If Flash didn't return to BW and JD was in his place and tearing Terrans apart left and right we wouldn't even be having this discussion right now.
Also discussing balance in the perspective of your own playing experience is totally irrelevant. I play Terran and struggle against Zergs who know how to defend their 3rd properly. Obviously that does not mean Zerg is imbalanced as I know I have a lot of areas to improve in. If everyone started talking about balance outside the Korean scene Protoss would be the most imbalanced race.
1 thing I do agree Terran has a lot more build options vs Zerg. But then again any good Zerg knows how to scout and deflect it relatively easily.
If you want to talk about balance why not focus on maps? Like how FS is Terran favoured, easy access to a 3rd, short rush distances between bases, map can be easily split in half without covering a lot of distance.
It's 2016, I think you've played this game long enough to know skill beats racial imbalance all day.
Dante08, I am discussing balance from the perspective of my overall BW experience which includes many years of playing, discussing, watching and reading about BW in various forms, not just my playing ZvT experience.
One thing I certainly disagree with in your post is in relation to zerg's scouting abilities in the ZvT matchup which I covered in my previous posts. Here's what I wrote:
Zergs scout initially well with a drone only 33% of the time and have information for not too much time afterwards. 33% of the time Z has overlord on T's exp when he scouted from the first time and this is not too much of a scout as discussed. The last 33% of the time IF overlord doesn't die on the way to the terran's natural, then the scoutting is still poor.
and
...many times when Z sees what build terran does judging by the attacking forces already out well in the map usually is too late for Z to react to survive.
Perhaps I can add that I don't consider "scouting" the moment when I see how many marines a terran has that are seconds away from the center of the map and then to determine maybe correctly or maybe not whether the T has 4 or 5 barracks.
I also wrote a little bit on the map aspect in the last post of page 6 in this thread. Perhaps you can take a look at it and tell me what you think about it.
Hi Technics. Disagree with your opinion T>>Z Z>P just by a race features. As far my experiece of playing Zerg since 2003 till 2008 all disadvantages of ZVT in favour of T comes from not good build or balanced maps. To be fair, i remember mainstream game in ZVT evolved from Hydra/Lurker T2 vs MMS TANKS to fast Lurker/Lings/Defilers. After that into nydus defence against adopted MMS VESSELS into ultra/ling/defilers. Well after terrans adoped more info late vult/tank. AS i mention now and mentioned before the only one reason i can give slightly advantage to a terran is a late vult/goliath/tank 3-3 blobs. They are supreme cost efficient and on most maps where zerg cannot maneuvre well this supreme cost efficience lead a terran to easy victory. May be now zergs are just needed to improve their style, dunno. But as for me seems late bult/tanks are slighly OP. Maps should be done to compensate this late disadvantage of ZVT. IF only terrans does not play into late mech transition i admit zerg chances vs him are pretty equal. Depends on micro moments etc.
The statistical evidence here is very weak on an overall scale. Feelings about perceived strengths and weaknesses of a race are pretty bad indicators of actual balance, especially when we're no longer considering Pro-level BW. The amateur BW scene is terrible to draw on because 90% or more of all games are played on Fighting Spirit and meanwhile CB, which means map balance is going to play a huge factor. Numerous ex-pros have already stated FS favours Terran in TvZ. Flash was/is the best player to play this game, is it surprising that someone who had that level of prowess and motivation in a pro environment is going to destroy weaker opponents in Terrans favourable matchup on a favourable map in an amateur environment? Unless we see Jaedong return in full form I doubt we'll see TvZ with him being a contentious issue.
For a better understanding of Terran dominance over the years check out this thread by LegalLord which is really good and overlooked.
Anyway Zerg players here should quit crying, Protoss have a much tougher lot in life in the pro scene.
As for foreigners.. Remember any good foreign Terrans in the past years that could dominate zergs? Yeah me neither.
WAT So THAT is what it takes to beat FlaSh in ZvT? 450apm madness. Multiple engagements allday erryday! Look at how Effort is panting after it's over. My favorite bits are when Effort prepares and instantly splits his mutas, and when he diffuses the mine at his 3rd USING A NYDUS
Edited the two perspectives together if anyone's interested:
On October 25 2016 09:09 DarkNetHunter wrote: The statistical evidence here is very weak on an overall scale. Feelings about perceived strengths and weaknesses of a race are pretty bad indicators of actual balance, especially when we're no longer considering Pro-level BW. The amateur BW scene is terrible to draw on because 90% or more of all games are played on Fighting Spirit and meanwhile CB, which means map balance is going to play a huge factor. Numerous ex-pros have already stated FS favours Terran in TvZ. Flash was/is the best player to play this game, is it surprising that someone who had that level of prowess and motivation in a pro environment is going to destroy weaker opponents in Terrans favourable matchup on a favourable map in an amateur environment? Unless we see Jaedong return in full form I doubt we'll see TvZ with him being a contentious issue.
For a better understanding of Terran dominance over the years check out this thread by LegalLord which is really good and overlooked.
Anyway Zerg players here should quit crying, Protoss have a much tougher lot in life in the pro scene.
As for foreigners.. Remember any good foreign Terrans in the past years that could dominate zergs? Yeah me neither.
There are no crying zergs here. You should read more carefully what has been written in this thread.
The article that you linked to pretty much confirms most of what has been said so far here that T>Z. Some map issues have also been discussed. Zerg's dominance in the foreigner scene in 2012-2013 has also been mentioned by me. Even though that the thread is mostly about T-Z, it has been mentioned that Z>P. That FlaSh can do the 14-0 challenge vs the top4 zergs on FS and CB and expect to win a good amount also.
LegalLord did a fine work there but quantitative data is not everything. When addressing issues like these, qualitative data is also important, if not even more important.
WAT So THAT is what it takes to beat FlaSh in ZvT? 450apm madness. Multiple engagements allday erryday! Look at how Effort is panting after it's over. My favorite bits are when Effort prepares and instantly splits his mutas, and when he diffuses the mine at his 3rd USING A NYDUS
Edited the two perspectives together if anyone's interested:
On October 25 2016 09:09 DarkNetHunter wrote: The statistical evidence here is very weak on an overall scale. Feelings about perceived strengths and weaknesses of a race are pretty bad indicators of actual balance, especially when we're no longer considering Pro-level BW. The amateur BW scene is terrible to draw on because 90% or more of all games are played on Fighting Spirit and meanwhile CB, which means map balance is going to play a huge factor. Numerous ex-pros have already stated FS favours Terran in TvZ. Flash was/is the best player to play this game, is it surprising that someone who had that level of prowess and motivation in a pro environment is going to destroy weaker opponents in Terrans favourable matchup on a favourable map in an amateur environment? Unless we see Jaedong return in full form I doubt we'll see TvZ with him being a contentious issue.
For a better understanding of Terran dominance over the years check out this thread by LegalLord which is really good and overlooked.
Anyway Zerg players here should quit crying, Protoss have a much tougher lot in life in the pro scene.
As for foreigners.. Remember any good foreign Terrans in the past years that could dominate zergs? Yeah me neither.
There are no crying zergs here. You should read more carefully what has been written in this thread.
The article that you linked to pretty much confirms most of what has been said so far here that T>Z. Some map issues have also been discussed. Zerg's dominance in the foreigner scene in 2012-2013 has also been mentioned by me. Even though that the thread is mostly about T-Z, it has been mentioned that Z>P. That FlaSh can do the 14-0 challenge vs the top4 zergs on FS and CB and expect to win a good amount also.
LegalLord did a fine work there but quantitative data is not everything. When addressing issues like these, qualitative data is also important, if not even more important.
Crying is maybe too strong a word, but I read complaints about not being able to 1 shot SCVs with less than 7 mutas or that scouting is imbalanced because scvs have 60hp (which they can't regenerate for free on their own). Every race in BW has a favourable matchup, including T>Z and no one has disputed that. However your posts in particular stand out in that you are pushing that T>>Z to a huge extent, when the evidence suggests that Z>>P has been a much bigger and major factor throughout BW history.
FlaSh being able to do 14-0 challenge is a hypothesis, and unless you can donate enough for him to test it, there is no reason to suggest that it's real or even likely based on some random ladder games. When you say you expect him to win a good amount also, should anyone expect anything different? Wouldn't it seem like a major fuckup if the best Terran that ever played this game playing his race' let alone his own favourable matchup on maps that favour TvZ doesn't win 'a good amount also' ?
Qualitative data is important, but what you're arguing isn't what I would qualify as data. If you were to look into individual Korean top level games and draw evidence from these for your arguments in TvZ, I'd understand that.
Instead you're arguing that TvZ is imba because 1 Base builds are viable in your head (can you list 10 Korean tournament games in the last 2years with 1base TvZ (excluding BBS)?) and 60hp scvs and stuff are imbalanced, does that seem like evidence to you?
I'll quote you here
I am not sure how to fully quantify and describe the supposed by my experience ZvT imbalance. These are all thoughts of mine on the matter that seemingly to me describe well the reality. Perhaps it's a combination of tiny influences from a vast range of factors that adds up to the feeling that ZvT is imbalanced.
The numbers leave me with the feeling that FlaSh is still maintaining his top shape, while others maybe have deteriorated. Nevertheless, the unsaid feeling of the ZvT imbalance, have been around for years before FlaSh started playing, at least in my eyes. And yes, saviOr and July really had their valueable contributions to the zerg race.
Your thoughts are valuable, but they only reflect your personal opinion. Not that there's anything wrong with that, we're all just nerds sharing BW thoughts on a forum anyway, but statistical analysis is definitely a stronger method of bringing a point across than anecdotal evidence.
I think you should consider evidence presented to you, such as that of Shalashaska_123 and view facts instead of feelings more strongly. I respect the fact that you've played at a very high level for some of the longest time, but I feel like does not make your arguments stronger but rather weaker since you're more likely to be influenced by past experiences (such as recently improved map making (since you still were mentioning LT)) than results from Tournaments.
WAT So THAT is what it takes to beat FlaSh in ZvT? 450apm madness. Multiple engagements allday erryday! Look at how Effort is panting after it's over. My favorite bits are when Effort prepares and instantly splits his mutas, and when he diffuses the mine at his 3rd USING A NYDUS
Edited the two perspectives together if anyone's interested:
Flash was up a base and +30 supply, huge turn around. He got hit with the mutas at his natural right during the factory switch which hurt a little but he seemed to recover. I noticed floating 2k minerals didn't help but still. Out-microed in engagements?
On October 25 2016 23:11 aedeph wrote: Btw, probability of 88.2% player making 14-0 in 14 games is 0.882 ^ 14 ~ 17%. That's 1 to 5, not the greatest chances.
17% chance to win 14-0 some of the top zergs to ever play the game is not great chances?
On October 25 2016 09:09 DarkNetHunter wrote: The statistical evidence here is very weak on an overall scale. Feelings about perceived strengths and weaknesses of a race are pretty bad indicators of actual balance, especially when we're no longer considering Pro-level BW. The amateur BW scene is terrible to draw on because 90% or more of all games are played on Fighting Spirit and meanwhile CB, which means map balance is going to play a huge factor. Numerous ex-pros have already stated FS favours Terran in TvZ. Flash was/is the best player to play this game, is it surprising that someone who had that level of prowess and motivation in a pro environment is going to destroy weaker opponents in Terrans favourable matchup on a favourable map in an amateur environment? Unless we see Jaedong return in full form I doubt we'll see TvZ with him being a contentious issue.
For a better understanding of Terran dominance over the years check out this thread by LegalLord which is really good and overlooked.
Anyway Zerg players here should quit crying, Protoss have a much tougher lot in life in the pro scene.
As for foreigners.. Remember any good foreign Terrans in the past years that could dominate zergs? Yeah me neither.
There are no crying zergs here. You should read more carefully what has been written in this thread.
The article that you linked to pretty much confirms most of what has been said so far here that T>Z. Some map issues have also been discussed. Zerg's dominance in the foreigner scene in 2012-2013 has also been mentioned by me. Even though that the thread is mostly about T-Z, it has been mentioned that Z>P. That FlaSh can do the 14-0 challenge vs the top4 zergs on FS and CB and expect to win a good amount also.
LegalLord did a fine work there but quantitative data is not everything. When addressing issues like these, qualitative data is also important, if not even more important.
Crying is maybe too strong a word, but I read complaints about not being able to 1 shot SCVs with less than 7 mutas or that scouting is imbalanced because scvs have 60hp (which they can't regenerate for free on their own). Every race in BW has a favourable matchup, including T>Z and no one has disputed that. However your posts in particular stand out in that you are pushing that T>>Z to a huge extent, when the evidence suggests that Z>>P has been a much bigger and major factor throughout BW history.
FlaSh being able to do 14-0 challenge is a hypothesis, and unless you can donate enough for him to test it, there is no reason to suggest that it's real or even likely based on some random ladder games. When you say you expect him to win a good amount also, should anyone expect anything different? Wouldn't it seem like a major fuckup if the best Terran that ever played this game playing his race' let alone his own favourable matchup on maps that favour TvZ doesn't win 'a good amount also' ?
Qualitative data is important, but what you're arguing isn't what I would qualify as data. If you were to look into individual Korean top level games and draw evidence from these for your arguments in TvZ, I'd understand that.
Instead you're arguing that TvZ is imba because 1 Base builds are viable in your head (can you list 10 Korean tournament games in the last 2years with 1base TvZ (excluding BBS)?) and 60hp scvs and stuff are imbalanced, does that seem like evidence to you?
I am not sure how to fully quantify and describe the supposed by my experience ZvT imbalance. These are all thoughts of mine on the matter that seemingly to me describe well the reality. Perhaps it's a combination of tiny influences from a vast range of factors that adds up to the feeling that ZvT is imbalanced.
The numbers leave me with the feeling that FlaSh is still maintaining his top shape, while others maybe have deteriorated. Nevertheless, the unsaid feeling of the ZvT imbalance, have been around for years before FlaSh started playing, at least in my eyes. And yes, saviOr and July really had their valueable contributions to the zerg race.
Your thoughts are valuable, but they only reflect your personal opinion. Not that there's anything wrong with that, we're all just nerds sharing BW thoughts on a forum anyway, but statistical analysis is definitely a stronger method of bringing a point across than anecdotal evidence.
I think you should consider evidence presented to you, such as that of Shalashaska_123 and view facts instead of feelings more strongly. I respect the fact that you've played at a very high level for some of the longest time, but I feel like does not make your arguments stronger but rather weaker since you're more likely to be influenced by past experiences (such as recently improved map making (since you still were mentioning LT)) than results from Tournaments.
The quantitative data provided by LegalLord is very nice done IMO but do not account for much of the in-game stuff that is going on in TvZ. Zerg takes bigger and more frequent risks and is playing a bigger amount of the time "in the dark" compared to terran. The factors that influence the T>>Z imbalance perhaps are plenty, maybe even relatively tiny but they probably compound enough to make for the T>>Z imbalance. I metaphorically described that. Also the stated by you "recently improved map making" is not something that is occuring. I posted something about exactly that as well.
For the second time - I think you should re-read my posts, but this time more carefully, if you ever read them. If you are going to selectively pick a sentence out of a hundred from my posts, disregarding the whole logic, I won't be replying to you.
I don't have the time or interest to pick apart all of your posts individually, the only 'whole logic' stemming from them is that you're pulling statements out of nowhere and are not providing evidence besides your own experience to support your statements. There's again nothing wrong with this, but quit making it out like I've not read your stuff or that you have anything else to back it up that you've posted.
As for your comment on maps, you were the one referencing your own experience on air maps or LT as evidence, rather than considering a 'recent' map such as Fighting Spirit. I did read your little back and forth with Freakling and I strongly believe that map making can provide balance that the Koreans haven't touched yet. What I'm saying though is that recent maps such as CB or FS were already vast improvements over maps in old times.
Here's a few examples of your posts and some responses, just to prove I've read your stuff.
LRM)TechnicS wrote: Viable terran army AND buildings for attack vs Z that frequently used: marine, firebat, medic, vulture, tank, goliath, vessel, dropship, wraith, valkyrie, bunker (which alone is super imba). Imagine the combinations between them.
Viable zerg army vs T: lings, lurks, mutas, scourge. Maybe hydras when terran is mech. The amount of combinations is laughable.
Attack with a medic or dropship? I'll be impressed. You forgot some viable zerg units overlord (omg it's so imba it's mobile free detection and dropship for supply you need anyway), queens, guardians, ultras, defilers. Then immediately after that you dismiss Cryocs counter-argument and say you were only referring to early game, which you didn't say anywhere in your own post.
LRM)TechnicS wrote:
I mean, do you honestly expect a zerg to do any damage to you until 10th minute of the game with a unit that is not a mutalisk or a lurker?
Yes, zerglings. Ever watched Kwanro play? Mutas and Lurkers require different responses from T by 6minute mark, by 10min you should have Hive already.
LRM)TechnicS wrote: I remember the days that T 1 base mnm play was the standard and terrans were still doing pretty good. These are openings/early game stuff, not late game. The combination of units that terrans can attack and defend relatively early with are just about any unit from any building T has.
The combination of units a Zerg needs to defend anything a terran can throw at him early game is..zerglings and sunken colonies. If you count Siege into early game, then zerg can expand possibilities to hydra/muta to counter anything. If 1 base builds were good you'd see pro players playing them in tournies.
Your response to Cryoc suggesting you place Hydra Den and Spire
LRM)TechnicS wrote: Because the investment is relatively big - it is done very rarely by zerg users. You spent resources and time because you have to wait for terran's scan to build your units while you could have built them earlier. Maybe it's a mistake, but if Jaedong, EffOrt, Hero don't do it 70% of the time, my guess is that it's not worth it.
Well I guess by this logic if Flash, Last etc. don't do 1base builds 95% of the time, my guess is that it's not worth it.
... and you would end up being beaten severely by a good T almost every game cuz 7 mutas barely kill an scv and 2 hydras are well just 2 hydras. and late 7 lurkers, caused by the spire investment and the sunks u will need to survive the mnms, will barely get you out of your base and maybe kill the initial bunker T lays... just for the sake of unpredictability
7 Mutas kill an scv, using the a + m-click method you're almost always going to kill one. Either way the Terran doesn't know if you have 7mutas or 9, he has to build full complement of turrets and keep mnm to defend. You can add more muta with the next larva if you want to harass harder or not. 2 Hydras can be used for lurkers, which you want anyway.
LRM)TechnicS wrote: Overall, I view the ZvT matchup when we account for decent Z and decent T, from the Z perspective as suffering to survive for a good amount of time to then maybe win, excessive worries for proper defending most of the time, mixed with very few "easier and relatively quick " wins (that are not all-ins). While from T perspective as pressuring all game to then maybe win, little worries for proper defending most of the time, mixed with frequent amount of "easier and relatively quick" wins (that are not all-ins).
Imagine I replaced ZvT with TvP here, read this, sounds pretty normal for most Terran players. Overall, I view the TvP matchup when we account for decent T and decent P, from the T perspective as suffering to survive for a good amount of time to then maybe win, excessive worries for proper defending most of the time, mixed with very few "easier and relatively quick " wins (that are not all-ins). While from P perspective as pressuring all game to then maybe win, little worries for proper defending most of the time, mixed with frequent amount of "easier and relatively quick" wins (that are not all-ins).
which leads me to what Jealous wrote and your response where you just go off on tangents about your own experience, how foreigner terrans are not a problem to begin with and Scan shouldn't have been allowed to play in TL tourneys (relevant to the topic, how?) What Jealous wrote is 100% true, anyone can come up with a convincing narrative, you didn't make up numbers because you don't have any numbers or vods to backup any of your statements to begin with.
On October 23 2016 00:46 Jealous wrote: Honestly Technics, if Terran was so overwhelmingly imbalanced all this time, then why would anyone play Zerg? At some point it would become obvious that playing Zerg is not viable, and proteams would structure accordingly - Protoss and Terran players only. Why pay Zergs money and house them when Terran is the better race, so in theory if you're raising a player from scratch then making them play Terran is the way to go?
As you know, this was not the case. I do believe there is a slight T>Z>P>T circle going around, which is corroborated by statistics, but the number of posts you made and the amount of reasons you're trying to present as facts (when really they are mostly made-up numbers and interpretations of what you perceive the game to be) is just coming off as blatant balance whine and not very substantiated whine at that.
I could write a narrative in the same manner about any match-up, even the reverse (TvZ being hard for T) if I selectively pull information that supports my biased agenda. You're a Zerg, you struggle with ZvT, so you look for reasons in the game as opposed to solutions in yourself. I'm sorry to say this but there have been many great Zerg champions over the years. To become a champion you have to win consistently against the best of the best Terrans (unless you're July on his 3rd OSL). Zergs have been winning the most recent Korean SLs. The foreign scene was/is(?) completely dominated by Zergs for the past few years. And even during the KeSPA era, Zerg representation in both tournaments and teams in general was always healthy - and I trust the coaching staff + progamers' decision-making far more than I trust yours. If they didn't think Zerg was too weak against Terran, then it probably wasn't the case.
Tell me one number that I made up please. edit: And what % of the total amount of numbers I gave these made up numbers are?
I could not write a narrative on every match up. I'm z user and won't dare to write extensively on TvP or PvT imbalances. I like playing PvT but dislike playing TvP. I don't know the game minute by minute there with all the viable variations and combinations as in ZvP, ZvT and TvZ and PvZ. While you sir? What race have you played competitively?
I don't think I struggle vs foreigner Terrans. I feel fine in my abilities in all the MUs. If you are interested, my main struggle in competitive BW so far was to show the skills and abilities that I present in practice games to resemble well what I do in tournament games. I play much better in practice games than in tournament games. This distinction of two player types - one that performs significantly better in practice and another - significantly better in tournaments - was also made by Grrrr... in some interview, if that's anyhow valid.
To the question - why people invested time, resources and efforts to play and sponsor/house zergs? As I said T>>Z, but Z>P IMO. But notice how I placed two times ">" for the T-Z imbalance, while only one ">" in the Z-P one. Besides that I don't know? Because they liked doing so? I played competitively for many years without even questioning this kind of stuff and now I realize how much I suffered when playing vs T for reasons like weird maps, air maps, lag on bnet, terran being made stronger by Blizz until they started work on WC3 and now the latest 2base modern variations of builds.
And yes, if you are raising a player from scratch - whatever that even means - playing Terran should yield better results atm. If indeed the most pros in Korea are terrans, that itself alone speak enough, at least for me.
edit2: and for the long posts and their number, it's just me when I try to defend an argument I think corresponds to the reality somewhat well. Now seems obvious that Scan shouldn't have been allowed in the last TL events right? He is a Korean offracing vs a top foreigner for a 14-0 challenge, barely pays attention to the games and wins 11-3. Claims he is tied with or better than many known top korean BW streamers atm. However, at the time, I had to post a number of lengthy posts to persuade a number of people that Scan not playig in these is the most sensible thing to do for the described for foreigners TL events.
On October 24 2016 04:31 ortseam wrote: Wow can't believe this is still going on, I actually gathered stats from the most important tournaments in 2015-2016 (i started from SSL 10, including all TLPD leagues): TvZ: 198-180 (52.4%) ZvP: 168-108 (60.9%) PvT: 197-210 (48.4%)
Top places per race (1st-2nd): T: 9-10 Z:11-7 P:3-6
Throughout the years, in my eyes, most tournaments were consisted of mostly terrans and zergs with very few protoss players. Also, to my knowledge, historically protosses are the least successful in obtaining major tournament top 1 titles. They don't even have a bonjwa. But it is somewhat comforting to have 2 protosses next to only 1 z and 1 t in the TaekBangLeeSsang.
But I can't defend protosses for their weaknesess as heartedly as zergs for the supposed ZvT imbalance. Most probably that is because I haven't been playing so much PvZ throughout the years. I've had plenty of ZvT (and it's never enough) though. And I really like to offrace PvZ. I used to offrace PvZ vs the bulgarian terran LameR a lot before and he was genuinely advicing me to switch to P. Perhaps i should have listened.
Again all you're saying is that your personal experience is that ZvT is imbalanced, when tournament results and statistics suggest that ZvP is more imbalanced.
I don't have the time right now, but I just wanted to add that there have been some useful numbers. The best 3 zergs in the world have win rates barely breaking 50-60% against average pro terrans (People are probably going to object but here it goes: sea, mong, sharp, piano, sSak). Hero had a sub 50% win rate one particular month and seeing Effort's, hero's and zero's win rates these past few months against terran has been quite depressing (around the 55% mark).
This win rate is against all the pro terrans, so not exclusively against Flash and Last who are the best of the best currently.
On the other hand you have Bisu, who manages to get a 70% win rate against the top 3 Zergs albeit it did include a 16-0 series against larva (lol).
Whenever I watch PvZ I see tons of mistakes by the protoss players that I often don't see being made by Bisu (overstaying with the remainders of an attacking force, not doing enough storm drops or other forms of harassment, bad corsair control,...).
On October 26 2016 03:23 DarkNetHunter wrote: I don't have the time or interest to pick apart all of your posts individually, the only 'whole logic' stemming from them is that you're pulling statements out of nowhere and are not providing evidence besides your own experience to support your statements. There's again nothing wrong with this, but quit making it out like I've not read your stuff or that you have anything else to back it up that you've posted.
As for your comment on maps, you were the one referencing your own experience on air maps or LT as evidence, rather than considering a 'recent' map such as Fighting Spirit. I did read your little back and forth with Freakling and I strongly believe that map making can provide balance that the Koreans haven't touched yet. What I'm saying though is that recent maps such as CB or FS were already vast improvements over maps in old times.
Here's a few examples of your posts and some responses, just to prove I've read your stuff.
LRM)TechnicS wrote: Viable terran army AND buildings for attack vs Z that frequently used: marine, firebat, medic, vulture, tank, goliath, vessel, dropship, wraith, valkyrie, bunker (which alone is super imba). Imagine the combinations between them.
Viable zerg army vs T: lings, lurks, mutas, scourge. Maybe hydras when terran is mech. The amount of combinations is laughable.
Attack with a medic or dropship? I'll be impressed. You forgot some viable zerg units overlord (omg it's so imba it's mobile free detection and dropship for supply you need anyway), queens, guardians, ultras, defilers. Then immediately after that you dismiss Cryocs counter-argument and say you were only referring to early game, which you didn't say anywhere in your own post.
LRM)TechnicS wrote: I remember the days that T 1 base mnm play was the standard and terrans were still doing pretty good. These are openings/early game stuff, not late game. The combination of units that terrans can attack and defend relatively early with are just about any unit from any building T has.
The combination of units a Zerg needs to defend anything a terran can throw at him early game is..zerglings and sunken colonies. If you count Siege into early game, then zerg can expand possibilities to hydra/muta to counter anything. If 1 base builds were good you'd see pro players playing them in tournies.
Your response to Cryoc suggesting you place Hydra Den and Spire
LRM)TechnicS wrote: Because the investment is relatively big - it is done very rarely by zerg users. You spent resources and time because you have to wait for terran's scan to build your units while you could have built them earlier. Maybe it's a mistake, but if Jaedong, EffOrt, Hero don't do it 70% of the time, my guess is that it's not worth it.
Well I guess by this logic if Flash, Last etc. don't do 1base builds 95% of the time, my guess is that it's not worth it.
... and you would end up being beaten severely by a good T almost every game cuz 7 mutas barely kill an scv and 2 hydras are well just 2 hydras. and late 7 lurkers, caused by the spire investment and the sunks u will need to survive the mnms, will barely get you out of your base and maybe kill the initial bunker T lays... just for the sake of unpredictability
7 Mutas kill an scv, using the a + m-click method you're almost always going to kill one. Either way the Terran doesn't know if you have 7mutas or 9, he has to build full complement of turrets and keep mnm to defend. You can add more muta with the next larva if you want to harass harder or not. 2 Hydras can be used for lurkers, which you want anyway.
LRM)TechnicS wrote: Overall, I view the ZvT matchup when we account for decent Z and decent T, from the Z perspective as suffering to survive for a good amount of time to then maybe win, excessive worries for proper defending most of the time, mixed with very few "easier and relatively quick " wins (that are not all-ins). While from T perspective as pressuring all game to then maybe win, little worries for proper defending most of the time, mixed with frequent amount of "easier and relatively quick" wins (that are not all-ins).
Imagine I replaced ZvT with TvP here, read this, sounds pretty normal for most Terran players. Overall, I view the TvP matchup when we account for decent T and decent P, from the T perspective as suffering to survive for a good amount of time to then maybe win, excessive worries for proper defending most of the time, mixed with very few "easier and relatively quick " wins (that are not all-ins). While from P perspective as pressuring all game to then maybe win, little worries for proper defending most of the time, mixed with frequent amount of "easier and relatively quick" wins (that are not all-ins).
which leads me to what Jealous wrote and your response where you just go off on tangents about your own experience, how foreigner terrans are not a problem to begin with and Scan shouldn't have been allowed to play in TL tourneys (relevant to the topic, how?) What Jealous wrote is 100% true, anyone can come up with a convincing narrative, you didn't make up numbers because you don't have any numbers or vods to backup any of your statements to begin with.
On October 23 2016 00:46 Jealous wrote: Honestly Technics, if Terran was so overwhelmingly imbalanced all this time, then why would anyone play Zerg? At some point it would become obvious that playing Zerg is not viable, and proteams would structure accordingly - Protoss and Terran players only. Why pay Zergs money and house them when Terran is the better race, so in theory if you're raising a player from scratch then making them play Terran is the way to go?
As you know, this was not the case. I do believe there is a slight T>Z>P>T circle going around, which is corroborated by statistics, but the number of posts you made and the amount of reasons you're trying to present as facts (when really they are mostly made-up numbers and interpretations of what you perceive the game to be) is just coming off as blatant balance whine and not very substantiated whine at that.
I could write a narrative in the same manner about any match-up, even the reverse (TvZ being hard for T) if I selectively pull information that supports my biased agenda. You're a Zerg, you struggle with ZvT, so you look for reasons in the game as opposed to solutions in yourself. I'm sorry to say this but there have been many great Zerg champions over the years. To become a champion you have to win consistently against the best of the best Terrans (unless you're July on his 3rd OSL). Zergs have been winning the most recent Korean SLs. The foreign scene was/is(?) completely dominated by Zergs for the past few years. And even during the KeSPA era, Zerg representation in both tournaments and teams in general was always healthy - and I trust the coaching staff + progamers' decision-making far more than I trust yours. If they didn't think Zerg was too weak against Terran, then it probably wasn't the case.
Tell me one number that I made up please. edit: And what % of the total amount of numbers I gave these made up numbers are?
I could not write a narrative on every match up. I'm z user and won't dare to write extensively on TvP or PvT imbalances. I like playing PvT but dislike playing TvP. I don't know the game minute by minute there with all the viable variations and combinations as in ZvP, ZvT and TvZ and PvZ. While you sir? What race have you played competitively?
I don't think I struggle vs foreigner Terrans. I feel fine in my abilities in all the MUs. If you are interested, my main struggle in competitive BW so far was to show the skills and abilities that I present in practice games to resemble well what I do in tournament games. I play much better in practice games than in tournament games. This distinction of two player types - one that performs significantly better in practice and another - significantly better in tournaments - was also made by Grrrr... in some interview, if that's anyhow valid.
To the question - why people invested time, resources and efforts to play and sponsor/house zergs? As I said T>>Z, but Z>P IMO. But notice how I placed two times ">" for the T-Z imbalance, while only one ">" in the Z-P one. Besides that I don't know? Because they liked doing so? I played competitively for many years without even questioning this kind of stuff and now I realize how much I suffered when playing vs T for reasons like weird maps, air maps, lag on bnet, terran being made stronger by Blizz until they started work on WC3 and now the latest 2base modern variations of builds.
And yes, if you are raising a player from scratch - whatever that even means - playing Terran should yield better results atm. If indeed the most pros in Korea are terrans, that itself alone speak enough, at least for me.
edit2: and for the long posts and their number, it's just me when I try to defend an argument I think corresponds to the reality somewhat well. Now seems obvious that Scan shouldn't have been allowed in the last TL events right? He is a Korean offracing vs a top foreigner for a 14-0 challenge, barely pays attention to the games and wins 11-3. Claims he is tied with or better than many known top korean BW streamers atm. However, at the time, I had to post a number of lengthy posts to persuade a number of people that Scan not playig in these is the most sensible thing to do for the described for foreigners TL events.
On October 24 2016 04:31 ortseam wrote: Wow can't believe this is still going on, I actually gathered stats from the most important tournaments in 2015-2016 (i started from SSL 10, including all TLPD leagues): TvZ: 198-180 (52.4%) ZvP: 168-108 (60.9%) PvT: 197-210 (48.4%)
Top places per race (1st-2nd): T: 9-10 Z:11-7 P:3-6
Throughout the years, in my eyes, most tournaments were consisted of mostly terrans and zergs with very few protoss players. Also, to my knowledge, historically protosses are the least successful in obtaining major tournament top 1 titles. They don't even have a bonjwa. But it is somewhat comforting to have 2 protosses next to only 1 z and 1 t in the TaekBangLeeSsang.
But I can't defend protosses for their weaknesess as heartedly as zergs for the supposed ZvT imbalance. Most probably that is because I haven't been playing so much PvZ throughout the years. I've had plenty of ZvT (and it's never enough) though. And I really like to offrace PvZ. I used to offrace PvZ vs the bulgarian terran LameR a lot before and he was genuinely advicing me to switch to P. Perhaps i should have listened.
Again all you're saying is that your personal experience is that ZvT is imbalanced, when tournament results and statistics suggest that ZvP is more imbalanced.
I referenced Scan defending the length of my posts, it has nothing to do with the T-Z theme here. It is obvious to just everybody now that he shouldn't have been allowed, while back then a lot of people were defending him so I was writing lenghty posts, as I am now.
Could you also please give some opinion on the matter that Blizzard were making terran stronger in the last patches where they changed balance, while making zerg and protoss weaker? Or this is not a fact to you?
Also I am not sure that I am the one "pulling statements out of nowhere here". From LegalLord "On the aggregate, we get the favorable matchups with ZvP (54.7%) > TvZ (54.4%) > PvT (52.6%)". Judging from these numbers it's more like TvZ is as imbalanced as ZvP. But this data do not account for all the risks a zerg is taking throughout the whole game to survive and fair well. This doesn't account for the fact that terran scouts zerg well early while zerg does not and zerg is "in the dark" a bigger amount of the time while Terran has a lot of viable options to attack and defend cheaply with. Did you know that a 12hatch build on a 2 player map by a zerg could very well be considered a gamble? Do you know why? If you can provide numbers and statistics to answer these questions, I would be pleased to see them. But for now, the "data" does not answer these questions. The "data" won't answer you why Jaedong, without doing a single mistake vs FlaSh on Match Point on that WCG, lost in that game. Qualitative interpretations become a good tool to explain imbalances.
Even though I do not consider my opinion on the TvP issue of not as much value. The methaphor I used to describe the ZvT perspective is not as valid for the TvP match perspective. Terran has cheap and strong static defence - turrets, bunkers, mines, tanks. Terran just builds a bunker and 6 turrets in total and you deny all possible harass by protoss in early game. The worries for defence are nowhere near as big as the ones a zerg have vs Terran. Also there's the early marine, tank, vulture push that is done very frequently and gains quite a lot of intelligence, where as with zerg I don't think that is the case. Also you don't have hive by 10th minute of the game unless you want to sacrifice your eco a lot to make guardian and ultra rushes. This only shows that you haven't experienced ZvT at high level of play and don't know the timings of the ZvT matchup. This is some of the kind of experience I am talking here.
Well, Terrans use in almost all their attacks medics against zerg up until the 20th minute of the game. It's just a unit frequently used in attacking. While zergs dont send overlords to tank damage for example? Also dropships are pretty frequently used for harrass, dropships are usually the way terrans get back into the game when behind. I hope you have watched such games, because in the, belittled by you, experience of mine, there are plenty of TvZ games where Terrans use the dropship in their attacking arsenal SIGNIFICANTLY more often than zergs use overlord for drops and/or anything else considered part of an attack. And for the Nth time - you can't make queens, guardians and ultras viable pre 10th minute on FS and use it super often. On the other hand T is better off hiding its build order pretty well and go for whatever he wants inside his ling tight walls in the main or on the natural.
Faking lurker and mutalisk rushes is very hard to pull off and it is also very expensive. This is a very big and real risk for zerg to not prepare attacks and defences at proper moments. Harassing with 7 mutas is not viable vs decent T. When was the last time you saw somebody do it? Link to the game or rep please? Almost nobody does it or has been doing it throughout time on a relatively high level of play. Waiting for the opponent to scan to trick him is not viable. While on the other hand Shinee does 1 base builds all the time, 2base fac and 1base 2port wraiths and he is top 1 fish since ever. Does that evidence fit your criteria? More recently "stranger" builds have been employed by Light and Fantasy. 2 port wraith from 1 base - is that frequently used build order a good evidence to you? 3port wraith by Light (I believe) vs Jaedong is fine for you? Even Advokate almost took down Jaedong in a bo3 with a mix of build orders that is very well in line with my arguments - T 1 base builds are viable and have been played throughout the years in tournaments and in competitive play in general.
Map making is significantly better than 10 years ago, but if Rose.of.Dream does not know how to balance mineral patches in the main base, why can we trust him for the rest?
On October 26 2016 03:40 B-royal wrote: I don't have the time right now, but I just wanted to add that there have been some useful numbers. The best 3 zergs in the world have win rates barely breaking 50-60% against average pro terrans (People are probably going to object but here it goes: sea, mong, sharp, piano, sSak). Hero had a sub 50% win rate one particular month and seeing Effort's, hero's and zero's win rates these past few months against terran has been quite depressing (around the 55% mark).
This win rate is against all the pro terrans, so not exclusively against Flash and Last who are the best of the best currently.
On the other hand you have Bisu, who manages to get a 70% win rate against the top 3 Zergs albeit it did include a 16-0 series against larva (lol).
Whenever I watch PvZ I see tons of mistakes by the protoss players that I often don't see being made by Bisu (overstaying with the remainders of an attacking force, not doing enough storm drops or other forms of harassment, bad corsair control,...).
Zerg: Zero 4-3, Miso 2-0, Hero 9-5, Effort 8-4, Larva 16-0 Terran: Last 14-16, Light 0-2, Flash 8-8, Mong 2-1, Ample 1-0, Piano 1-0, FireBatHero 2-0, Hiya 3-0, Sharp 3-0, ssak 5-0, Mid 5-0, Sea 17-8 Protoss: Sky 0-1, Movie 2-1, Shuttle 1-0, Zeus 1-0, Tyson 1-0, Guemchi 2-0
Your avg pro Terrans are all tournament winners in the post Kespa era, if I'm not completely mistaken. Why should the best zergs have more than 50-60% winrate in a matchup that doesn't favour them vs good opponents? Bisu is obviously the most gifted PvZ player of all time, nothing to argue there, but even he lost to Effort in the 2015 VANT36.5 National Starleague.
Since laddering is pretty random (as a lot of the streamers tend to do random shit and not take their win rates too seriously) I just checked out TLPD Broodwar Amateur Tournaments (First page of 20 Tournaments) + Show Spoiler +
Protoss - Shuttle - 2016 Afreeca Starleague Terran - Last - 2016 Kim Carry Starcraft Myeongin League Zerg - Larva - 2016 41 Ranking Tournament Season 1 Zerg - ZerO - 2016 Terror NINUS Starleague Terran - Mong - 2015 41 Starleague Season 4 Zerg - Zero - 2016 GaePpulBae SikSin League Zerg - EffOrt - 2015 VANT36.5 National Starleague Zerg - ZerO - 2015 Spotimes Starleague Season 2 Protoss - Shuttle - 2015 Spicy Rice Cake Tournament Season 2 Terran - Sea - 2015 KDS Starleague Season 2 Zerg - by.hero - 2015 Bisu Blind League Terran - Sea - 2015 Spicy Rice Cake Tournament Season 1 Zerg - EffOrt - 2015 Spotimes Starleague Zerg - by.hero - 2015 SBENU 11th SonicTV BJ Starleague with OnGameNet Terran - Sea - 2015 Draemong Starleague Zerg - by.hero - 2015 Seaside Super Tournament Protoss - Bisu - 2015 Terror TEMPTS Starleague Zerg - EffOrt - 2015 41 Maki Starleague Season 1 Terran - Mind - 2015 HoSic BJ Starleague Season 2 Zerg -ZerO - 2015 PianO Starleague
Also, how do you account with numbers that the mutastack might be just a bug that could and more importantly SHOULD have been removed? TvZ would have been even more imbalanced without the mutastack.
Or how do you imagine 100 mutalisks stacked 1 over another in the air shooting at the same time at the same target from the same angle?
On October 26 2016 03:23 DarkNetHunter wrote: I don't have the time or interest to pick apart all of your posts individually, the only 'whole logic' stemming from them is that you're pulling statements out of nowhere and are not providing evidence besides your own experience to support your statements. There's again nothing wrong with this, but quit making it out like I've not read your stuff or that you have anything else to back it up that you've posted.
As for your comment on maps, you were the one referencing your own experience on air maps or LT as evidence, rather than considering a 'recent' map such as Fighting Spirit. I did read your little back and forth with Freakling and I strongly believe that map making can provide balance that the Koreans haven't touched yet. What I'm saying though is that recent maps such as CB or FS were already vast improvements over maps in old times.
Here's a few examples of your posts and some responses, just to prove I've read your stuff.
LRM)TechnicS wrote: Viable terran army AND buildings for attack vs Z that frequently used: marine, firebat, medic, vulture, tank, goliath, vessel, dropship, wraith, valkyrie, bunker (which alone is super imba). Imagine the combinations between them.
Viable zerg army vs T: lings, lurks, mutas, scourge. Maybe hydras when terran is mech. The amount of combinations is laughable.
Attack with a medic or dropship? I'll be impressed. You forgot some viable zerg units overlord (omg it's so imba it's mobile free detection and dropship for supply you need anyway), queens, guardians, ultras, defilers. Then immediately after that you dismiss Cryocs counter-argument and say you were only referring to early game, which you didn't say anywhere in your own post.
LRM)TechnicS wrote:
I mean, do you honestly expect a zerg to do any damage to you until 10th minute of the game with a unit that is not a mutalisk or a lurker?
Yes, zerglings. Ever watched Kwanro play? Mutas and Lurkers require different responses from T by 6minute mark, by 10min you should have Hive already.
LRM)TechnicS wrote: I remember the days that T 1 base mnm play was the standard and terrans were still doing pretty good. These are openings/early game stuff, not late game. The combination of units that terrans can attack and defend relatively early with are just about any unit from any building T has.
The combination of units a Zerg needs to defend anything a terran can throw at him early game is..zerglings and sunken colonies. If you count Siege into early game, then zerg can expand possibilities to hydra/muta to counter anything. If 1 base builds were good you'd see pro players playing them in tournies.
Your response to Cryoc suggesting you place Hydra Den and Spire
LRM)TechnicS wrote: Because the investment is relatively big - it is done very rarely by zerg users. You spent resources and time because you have to wait for terran's scan to build your units while you could have built them earlier. Maybe it's a mistake, but if Jaedong, EffOrt, Hero don't do it 70% of the time, my guess is that it's not worth it.
Well I guess by this logic if Flash, Last etc. don't do 1base builds 95% of the time, my guess is that it's not worth it.
... and you would end up being beaten severely by a good T almost every game cuz 7 mutas barely kill an scv and 2 hydras are well just 2 hydras. and late 7 lurkers, caused by the spire investment and the sunks u will need to survive the mnms, will barely get you out of your base and maybe kill the initial bunker T lays... just for the sake of unpredictability
7 Mutas kill an scv, using the a + m-click method you're almost always going to kill one. Either way the Terran doesn't know if you have 7mutas or 9, he has to build full complement of turrets and keep mnm to defend. You can add more muta with the next larva if you want to harass harder or not. 2 Hydras can be used for lurkers, which you want anyway.
LRM)TechnicS wrote: Overall, I view the ZvT matchup when we account for decent Z and decent T, from the Z perspective as suffering to survive for a good amount of time to then maybe win, excessive worries for proper defending most of the time, mixed with very few "easier and relatively quick " wins (that are not all-ins). While from T perspective as pressuring all game to then maybe win, little worries for proper defending most of the time, mixed with frequent amount of "easier and relatively quick" wins (that are not all-ins).
Imagine I replaced ZvT with TvP here, read this, sounds pretty normal for most Terran players. Overall, I view the TvP matchup when we account for decent T and decent P, from the T perspective as suffering to survive for a good amount of time to then maybe win, excessive worries for proper defending most of the time, mixed with very few "easier and relatively quick " wins (that are not all-ins). While from P perspective as pressuring all game to then maybe win, little worries for proper defending most of the time, mixed with frequent amount of "easier and relatively quick" wins (that are not all-ins).
which leads me to what Jealous wrote and your response where you just go off on tangents about your own experience, how foreigner terrans are not a problem to begin with and Scan shouldn't have been allowed to play in TL tourneys (relevant to the topic, how?) What Jealous wrote is 100% true, anyone can come up with a convincing narrative, you didn't make up numbers because you don't have any numbers or vods to backup any of your statements to begin with.
On October 23 2016 01:16 LRM)TechnicS wrote:
On October 23 2016 00:46 Jealous wrote: Honestly Technics, if Terran was so overwhelmingly imbalanced all this time, then why would anyone play Zerg? At some point it would become obvious that playing Zerg is not viable, and proteams would structure accordingly - Protoss and Terran players only. Why pay Zergs money and house them when Terran is the better race, so in theory if you're raising a player from scratch then making them play Terran is the way to go?
As you know, this was not the case. I do believe there is a slight T>Z>P>T circle going around, which is corroborated by statistics, but the number of posts you made and the amount of reasons you're trying to present as facts (when really they are mostly made-up numbers and interpretations of what you perceive the game to be) is just coming off as blatant balance whine and not very substantiated whine at that.
I could write a narrative in the same manner about any match-up, even the reverse (TvZ being hard for T) if I selectively pull information that supports my biased agenda. You're a Zerg, you struggle with ZvT, so you look for reasons in the game as opposed to solutions in yourself. I'm sorry to say this but there have been many great Zerg champions over the years. To become a champion you have to win consistently against the best of the best Terrans (unless you're July on his 3rd OSL). Zergs have been winning the most recent Korean SLs. The foreign scene was/is(?) completely dominated by Zergs for the past few years. And even during the KeSPA era, Zerg representation in both tournaments and teams in general was always healthy - and I trust the coaching staff + progamers' decision-making far more than I trust yours. If they didn't think Zerg was too weak against Terran, then it probably wasn't the case.
Tell me one number that I made up please. edit: And what % of the total amount of numbers I gave these made up numbers are?
I could not write a narrative on every match up. I'm z user and won't dare to write extensively on TvP or PvT imbalances. I like playing PvT but dislike playing TvP. I don't know the game minute by minute there with all the viable variations and combinations as in ZvP, ZvT and TvZ and PvZ. While you sir? What race have you played competitively?
I don't think I struggle vs foreigner Terrans. I feel fine in my abilities in all the MUs. If you are interested, my main struggle in competitive BW so far was to show the skills and abilities that I present in practice games to resemble well what I do in tournament games. I play much better in practice games than in tournament games. This distinction of two player types - one that performs significantly better in practice and another - significantly better in tournaments - was also made by Grrrr... in some interview, if that's anyhow valid.
To the question - why people invested time, resources and efforts to play and sponsor/house zergs? As I said T>>Z, but Z>P IMO. But notice how I placed two times ">" for the T-Z imbalance, while only one ">" in the Z-P one. Besides that I don't know? Because they liked doing so? I played competitively for many years without even questioning this kind of stuff and now I realize how much I suffered when playing vs T for reasons like weird maps, air maps, lag on bnet, terran being made stronger by Blizz until they started work on WC3 and now the latest 2base modern variations of builds.
And yes, if you are raising a player from scratch - whatever that even means - playing Terran should yield better results atm. If indeed the most pros in Korea are terrans, that itself alone speak enough, at least for me.
edit2: and for the long posts and their number, it's just me when I try to defend an argument I think corresponds to the reality somewhat well. Now seems obvious that Scan shouldn't have been allowed in the last TL events right? He is a Korean offracing vs a top foreigner for a 14-0 challenge, barely pays attention to the games and wins 11-3. Claims he is tied with or better than many known top korean BW streamers atm. However, at the time, I had to post a number of lengthy posts to persuade a number of people that Scan not playig in these is the most sensible thing to do for the described for foreigners TL events.
On October 24 2016 07:01 LRM)TechnicS wrote:
On October 24 2016 04:31 ortseam wrote: Wow can't believe this is still going on, I actually gathered stats from the most important tournaments in 2015-2016 (i started from SSL 10, including all TLPD leagues): TvZ: 198-180 (52.4%) ZvP: 168-108 (60.9%) PvT: 197-210 (48.4%)
Top places per race (1st-2nd): T: 9-10 Z:11-7 P:3-6
Throughout the years, in my eyes, most tournaments were consisted of mostly terrans and zergs with very few protoss players. Also, to my knowledge, historically protosses are the least successful in obtaining major tournament top 1 titles. They don't even have a bonjwa. But it is somewhat comforting to have 2 protosses next to only 1 z and 1 t in the TaekBangLeeSsang.
But I can't defend protosses for their weaknesess as heartedly as zergs for the supposed ZvT imbalance. Most probably that is because I haven't been playing so much PvZ throughout the years. I've had plenty of ZvT (and it's never enough) though. And I really like to offrace PvZ. I used to offrace PvZ vs the bulgarian terran LameR a lot before and he was genuinely advicing me to switch to P. Perhaps i should have listened.
Again all you're saying is that your personal experience is that ZvT is imbalanced, when tournament results and statistics suggest that ZvP is more imbalanced.
I referenced Scan defending the length of my posts, it has nothing to do with the T-Z theme here. It is obvious to just everybody now that he shouldn't have been allowed, while back then a lot of people were defending him so I was writing lenghty posts, as I am now.
Could you also please give some opinion on the matter that Blizzard were making terran stronger in the last patches where they changed balance, while making zerg and protoss weaker? Or this is not a fact to you?
Also I am not sure that I am the one "pulling statements out of nowhere here". From LegalLord "On the aggregate, we get the favorable matchups with ZvP (54.7%) > TvZ (54.4%) > PvT (52.6%)". Judging from these numbers it's more like TvZ is as imbalanced as ZvP. But this data do not account for all the risks a zerg is taking throughout the whole game to survive and fair well. This doesn't account for the fact that terran scouts zerg well early while zerg does not and zerg is "in the dark" a bigger amount of the time while Terran has a lot of viable options to attack and defend cheaply with. Did you know that a 12hatch build on a 2 player map by a zerg could very well be considered a gamble? Do you know why? If you can provide numbers and statistics to answer these questions, I would be pleased to see them. But for now, the "data" does not answer these questions. The "data" won't answer you why Jaedong, without doing a single mistake vs FlaSh on Match Point on that WCG, lost in that game. Qualitative interpretations become a good tool to explain imbalances.
Blizzard was obviously buffing Terran, presumably based on ladder evidence, but who knows why. The buffs for Terran are in the patch notes, most of it in patch 1.04, but even in the last balance patch 1.08 they decreased costs for queens and supply for ultra to make these units more viable, so the narrative that they're only weakening Zerg and Protoss isn't a fact. Why would we discuss Blizzard who as you yourself said had no interest beyond 2001 in balancing BW and maps were still in their infancy then?
The scouting deficit for Zerg can be improved by having better overlord placement spots on maps (you basically get to see T nat/movement til way past vessel if correctly). Anyway I'm not arguing that Zerg doesn't have a scouting deficit. 12 Hatch is a gamble on 2player maps because proxies for T become much more viable if he knows Z starting position, the same for ebay block shenanigans etc. I don't need numbers or statistics to answer that question since I'm not making huge claims that TvZ is so imbalanced compared to other matchups, which you have no evidence to support.
On October 26 2016 04:49 LRM)TechnicS wrote: Even though I do not consider my opinion on the TvP issue of not as much value. The methaphor I used to describe the ZvT perspective is not as valid for the TvP match perspective. Terran has cheap and strong static defence - turrets, bunkers, mines, tanks. Terran just builds a bunker and 6 turrets in total and you deny all possible harass by protoss in early game. The worries for defence are nowhere near as big as the ones a zerg have vs Terran. Also there's the early marine, tank, vulture push that is done very frequently and gains quite a lot of intelligence, where as with zerg I don't think that is the case. Also you don't have hive by 10th minute of the game unless you want to sacrifice your eco a lot to make guardian and ultra rushes. This only shows that you haven't experienced ZvT at high level of play and don't know the timings of the ZvT matchup. This is some of the kind of experience I am talking here.
Zerg has stronger static defense than Terran, (mines and tanks are not static defense, though they can be used defensively). By your logic, zerg can build a sunk or two and thus deny 99% of harass in early game. The worries are equal to those Zergs have vs Terrans, not to mention you are put behind economically if you spend too much on defense, the same as in every matchup. If you're referring to the FD push in TvP, yes it gains intelligence, but it will still be too late to save you vs some proxy builds, with zerg you can scout T marine count with ling, you can usually even sneak a ling into nat mineral line to force him to send some rines so you can count. If you haven't got hive by 10 minute mark then you're not playing optimally, see Jaedong vs Flash on Tau Cross here for evidence. I did not state you have hive units out harassing or doing things by 10min, but hive options are available then. I never claimed to have high level experience of play nor of timings, but I'm perfectly capable of observing games and replays and basing sound conclusions from them. I think arguing experience is fruitless, none of us have played in pro circles in Korea during the KeSPA era (exceptions to this would be Idra, Draco etc.), so there is no reason to base anything off our own experiences.
On October 26 2016 04:49 LRM)TechnicS wrote:
Well, Terrans use in almost all their attacks medics against zerg up until the 20th minute of the game. It's just a unit frequently used in attacking. While zergs dont send overlords to tank damage for example? Also dropships are pretty frequently used for harrass, dropships are usually the way terrans get back into the game when behind. I hope you have watched such games, because in the, belittled by you, experience of mine, there are plenty of TvZ games where Terrans use the dropship in their attacking arsenal SIGNIFICANTLY more often than zergs use overlord for drops and/or anything else considered part of an attack. And for the Nth time - you can't make queens, guardians and ultras viable pre 10th minute on FS and use it super often. On the other hand T is better off hiding its build order pretty well and go for whatever he wants inside his ling tight walls in the main or on the natural.
Faking lurker and mutalisk rushes is very hard to pull off and it is also very expensive. This is a very big and real risk for zerg to not prepare attacks and defences at proper moments. Harassing with 7 mutas is not viable vs decent T. When was the last time you saw somebody do it? Link to the game or rep please? Almost nobody does it or has been doing it throughout time on a relatively high level of play. Waiting for the opponent to scan to trick him is not viable. While on the other hand Shinee does 1 base builds all the time, 2base fac and 1base 2port wraiths and he is top 1 fish since ever. Does that evidence fit your criteria? More recently "stranger" builds have been employed by Light and Fantasy. 2 port wraith from 1 base - is that frequently used build order a good evidence to you? 3port wraith by Light (I believe) vs Jaedong is fine for you? Even Advokate almost took down Jaedong in a bo3 with a mix of build orders that is very well in line with my arguments - T 1 base builds are viable and have been played throughout the years in tournaments and in competitive play in general.
Map making is significantly better than 10 years ago, but if Rose.of.Dream does not know how to balance mineral patches in the main base, why can we trust him for the rest?
Medics still can't attack, they participate in engagements, you were the one nitpicking over unit usage, I was just pointing out your flawed argumentation and use of language. Dropships again don't attack, they provide an avenue of attack.
I never said you could make queens or anything else viable before 10minutes on FS, quit arguing things that aren't even being discussed. You're right it is difficult to pull off, but it's not expensive as you need the buildings and tech anyway. You don't need the 7mutas to harass immediately, you just need to have the threat so that T is forced to build turrets/stay in base, with your next round of larva you can still get enough mutas to make normal harass viable if that is what you want to pursue. Again you're referring to ladder games by Shinee, which are a bad indicator as their seriousness can't be judged, unless you have a tournament game you'd like to point out? Generally referencing anything in the 'amateur' time of BW for a race balance argument isn't very strong, but you should at least focus on offline/online tournaments with prize pools and significant players participating. 2port wraith is a viable build on specific maps and I never claimed that 1base builds were completely impossible, just their lack of appearance in tournament play suggests they're not nearly as viable as you make them out to be. Advokate won a single game vs Jaedong using a 2base surprise build, while Jaedong was going Hydra/Lurk. (There are also rumors that Jaedong threw that game since he went visiting the Russians in the dorm the night before, maybe someone else can find the TL post/video related to that). There are no recent tournaments with evidence of 1base builds being very successful.
I have no faith in Rose or any other Korean mapmaker to provide better maps until there is a call for it by the Korean community.
You seem to be fundamentally misunderstanding our conversation here, I'm not trying to prove anything to you because I have no argument to prove. I am just pointing out flaws in your argumentation. You're the one making bold claims about how imbalanced ZvT is compared to other matchups.
On October 26 2016 05:20 LRM)TechnicS wrote: Also, how do you account with numbers that the mutastack might be just a bug that could and more importantly SHOULD have been removed? TvZ would have been even more imbalanced without the mutastack.
Or how do you imagine 100 mutalisks stacked 1 over another in the air shooting at the same time at the same target from the same angle?
Mutastack is a bug, you can read about the bug and its origins in the CodeofHonor Blog on Teamliquid. Whether it could or should have been removed is open to your own interpretation, other bugs were discovered and not removed (such as infinite stack/attack glitch, gas walk), but they were banned from tournament play. If there had been evidence to suggest air-stacking was going to break the game, then tournaments would have denied its usage. Why would I imagine 100 mutas stacking and shooting, I'm confused what this has to do with anything?
If you want to continue our discussion then let us move it to PM.