Race balance.

Edmon wrote:

I'm losing the will to play this map any more. I basically feel that if two teams play, the one with the most protoss will generally win.

It just seems to be that zerg are worthless later on, because they have no decent air units and no decent anti-air. So when shit gets serious, zerg just get owned. C

Because you didn't found the best combination

When you are used to play that game, with advanced strategies and good players, you can notice that team WITHOUT at least 1 Zerg loose automatically.

gilmore wrote:

Quote :

Yeah, I ignored that as a potental opening because it's cost ineffective and will cause you to be down minerals the next time you spawn.

4 roach is 340. Gaz is 100. You start at 250 so I need 440 mineral.
With 0 gaz I get 4 minerals per second so it will take ~48s to build 4 roach + gaz.

That's 48s with 100% income, followed by 25 with 0 income. It coincide with the clash of the first units in the middle of the map.

During that time, if you start directly with gaz you will get :
25s with 0 income followed by 48s with 110% income = 4.4 minerals per second.

So when your 2 zealots will face my 4 roach you will have the upper hand in mineral by 0.4*48 = 19 minerals.

I don't mind having 19 less minerals for my next spawn.

Consider now the fact that you loose the first clash of units.
I get (and my teamates too) +15% income so it will be less than 19 minerals.

That's how I like to play this game.
If you prefer to build gaz as soon as possible everytime you are able to build one, do as you please.

I prefer to get the control of the middle of the map and destroy as fast as I can the first defense.
If you play zerg without putting the pressure early on, you will lost late game.

You just don't get it. If you get gas after spawn, your "time where you don't earn money" will be timed to be exactly when you have middle control. So it's like you never had it at all. The only ones to benefit will be your teammates, but you will lose out heavily. So when the second wave comes, you will be down about 30-40 minerals to me and thus, I will win the second clash and then my team mates will make back what I lost them when I lost out on the first wave.

This is the problem with just "saying stuff" and "theory craft" over actually going out and trying things.

And btw, 30-40 minerals is usually an extra unit, early on that can be all it takes to get the middle early

Quote :

Yeah, I ignored that as a potental opening because it's cost ineffective and will cause you to be down minerals the next time you spawn.

4 roach is 340. Gaz is 100. You start at 250 so I need 440 mineral.
With 0 gaz I get 4 minerals per second so it will take ~48s to build 4 roach + gaz.

That's 48s with 100% income, followed by 25 with 0 income. It coincide with the clash of the first units in the middle of the map.

During that time, if you start directly with gaz you will get :
25s with 0 income followed by 48s with 110% income = 4.4 minerals per second.

So when your 2 zealots will face my 4 roach you will have the upper hand in mineral by 0.4*48 = 19 minerals.

I don't mind having 19 less minerals for my next spawn.

Consider now the fact that you loose the first clash of units.
I get (and my teamates too) +15% income so it will be less than 19 minerals.

That's how I like to play this game.
If you prefer to build gaz as soon as possible everytime you are able to build one, do as you please.

I prefer to get the control of the middle of the map and destroy as fast as I can the first defense.
If you play zerg without putting the pressure early on, you will lost late game.

gilmore wrote:

Quote :

The most minerals you have if you are first and spawn first is 299.

You need to build in the right order.
Roach*4 then gaz.

If you build gaz first you waste 200 mineral because the rafinerie cost 100 and stop your income for 25s wich is 100 more minerals.

Yeah, I ignored that as a potental opening because it's cost ineffective and will cause you to be down minerals the next time you spawn. Gas is more effective in the early game because actual lane control is hard to maintain (unless you dance lots/lings/marines). Losing the second spawn hurts you harder than losing the first spawn.

These are the most basic of the basics here.

Quote :

The most minerals you have if you are first and spawn first is 299.

You need to build in the right order.
Roach*4 then gaz.

If you build gaz first you waste 200 mineral because the rafinerie cost 100 and stop your income for 25s wich is 100 more minerals.

I'm just going to ignore you gilmore. Why even bother discussing it if you are going to just make stuff up?

The most minerals you have if you are first and spawn first is 299.

That means your opening (with gas) can be:

2xRoach + Gas
(Ling + Roach) OR Bane + Gas
2xZealot + Gas
Reaper OR Marine OR Mara + Gas

And the zealot one will win of these with near certainty.

You may also add one upgrade while the units travel, if you so wish. I sometimes add shield if I see Ling/Roach open as that one is pretty close.

Arkless wrote:

Edmon wrote:

gilmore wrote:

3 Archons cost (1020) < 3 roach + 8 hydralisks (1055)
Archons will kill the roach in a few hits but during this time they died to hydra.
Hydra are high dps with low hp so use roach + 2/3 zerglings to take dmg while they rape.

+ zerg upgrade is cheaper and more effective because you will boost 10+ units at the same time.

Archons are all shield, so you only need one upgrade, which is the shield upgrade. You need hydra range and roach speed and archons need no such upgrades.

I need to test your setup to see if it wins, but I really doubt it, because I've seen archons kill the setup you describe on a regular basis. Thats why their cost was increased.

It works. I already played vs mass archon a lot of times and normally I win.

My standard zerg build is something like x*(1*queen+1*roach+1*hydra). It beats every other race in the early game, just change the amount of queens according to your opponents tactics. Build more hydras the longer you play this.
Gotta find the right time to tech or you lose big time.

It doesn't work sadly, as soon as I realised how close it was I just added a single colli and it turned into a slaughter. You need serious corruptors to take down a colli before it sodomises your massy units.

Zerg has no choice at that point but to sell their ground units. Colli just make roach/hydra look silly.

But I'd love to play you 1 on 1 arkless . I'm sure it would be interesting.

Here is my general protoss opener vs zerg:

First wave, first spawning:
Gas > 2 Zealot (feel free to dance your zealots in their zone, 2 zeals beat all other openers)

Second Wave:
+2 Zealot, Tech

Third Wave: +1 Archon, shield, shield

Forth:
Archons or colli rush, basically, if there are a lot of hydra it's colli time, otherwise, archons all the way.

Once you have 2-3 colli, zerg ground is all but done, switch into carrier and add 3rd shield upgrade.

Don't bother with any weapon uprades, as they won't benefit you when you transition to carriers.

Almost all zergs will add corruptors, so don't sell your archons, as the corruptors will ball up and come at you before the rest of the zerg army. A few archon blasts will cripple if not outright kill the whole group!.

Edmon wrote:

gilmore wrote:

3 Archons cost (1020) < 3 roach + 8 hydralisks (1055)
Archons will kill the roach in a few hits but during this time they died to hydra.
Hydra are high dps with low hp so use roach + 2/3 zerglings to take dmg while they rape.

+ zerg upgrade is cheaper and more effective because you will boost 10+ units at the same time.

Archons are all shield, so you only need one upgrade, which is the shield upgrade. You need hydra range and roach speed and archons need no such upgrades.

I need to test your setup to see if it wins, but I really doubt it, because I've seen archons kill the setup you describe on a regular basis. Thats why their cost was increased.

It works. I already played vs mass archon a lot of times and normally I win.

My standard zerg build is something like x*(1*queen+1*roach+1*hydra). It beats every other race in the early game, just change the amount of queens according to your opponents tactics. Build more hydras the longer you play this.
Gotta find the right time to tech or you lose big time.

gilmore wrote:

3 Archons cost (1020) < 3 roach + 8 hydralisks (1055)
Archons will kill the roach in a few hits but during this time they died to hydra.
Hydra are high dps with low hp so use roach + 2/3 zerglings to take dmg while they rape.

+ zerg upgrade is cheaper and more effective because you will boost 10+ units at the same time.

Archons are all shield, so you only need one upgrade, which is the shield upgrade. You need hydra range and roach speed and archons need no such upgrades.

I need to test your setup to see if it wins, but I really doubt it, because I've seen archons kill the setup you describe on a regular basis. Thats why their cost was increased.

gilmore wrote:

Edmon wrote:

Do a carrier vs 3 corruptors in a battle and get back to me.

Well for the same price it is :

1 Carrier : 250 + (t2) + 450 (t3) + 490 = 1190

5 Corruptors : 250 (t2) + 5 corruptors (180*5=900) = 1150

I'm pretty sure corruptor will win.

This is a very biased way of doing the calculations, because you know you are wrong. You can't count the T3 unlock cost in this weighting.

180*3 is 560 and a carrier is 590. You will get T3 because if you don't, you won't get T3 weapons for your air units and you will definitely suffer for that, because carriers benefit quite extremely from +3.

Corruptors always charge in first and ball up massively, one archon will actually do hundreds of hundreds of points of damage to a corruptor ball with a single blast, so 3 corrupters vs 1 carrier is actually a very nice situation for a zerg and that is not saying much tbh.

Edmon wrote:

Do a carrier vs 3 corruptors in a battle and get back to me.

Well for the same price it is :

1 Carrier : 250 + (t2) + 450 (t3) + 490 = 1190

5 Corruptors : 250 (t2) + 5 corruptors (180*5=900) = 1150

I'm pretty sure corruptor will win.

3 Archons cost (1020) < 3 roach + 8 hydralisks (1055)
Archons will kill the roach in a few hits but during this time they died to hydra.
Hydra are high dps with low hp so use roach + 2/3 zerglings to take dmg while they rape.

+ zerg upgrade is cheaper and more effective because you will boost 10+ units at the same time.

Arkless wrote:

We have no way to actually find out wich race is the strongest. I have no problem winning with any of the races, not against carrier spam, nor against bc spam. Everone says <race> is the strongest and/or <other race> is the weakest. But reading through everything, all races are named the "strongest" by some guys an the "weakest" by others. What I did find out is that terra + zerg + protoss as a team wins more often than anything else, when they stack up you got all the casters, storms stack with fungal and emp (wich is kinder overkill if you get to that point).

I play random, and I'm not sure why anyone would think zerg is the strongest. All their units are biological, so archons literally own a zerg pretty hard.

If your relying on your terran ally to bail you out with emp, thats a different story.

Do a carrier vs 3 corruptors in a battle and get back to me.

We have no way to actually find out wich race is the strongest. I have no problem winning with any of the races, not against carrier spam, nor against bc spam. Everone says <race> is the strongest and/or <other race> is the weakest. But reading through everything, all races are named the "strongest" by some guys an the "weakest" by others. What I did find out is that terra + zerg + protoss as a team wins more often than anything else, when they stack up you got all the casters, storms stack with fungal and emp (wich is kinder overkill if you get to that point).

Strange because I feel zerg is in fact the most powerful race.

Quote :

I'm losing the will to play this map any more. I basically feel that if two teams play, the one with the most protoss will generally win.

It just seems to be that zerg are worthless later on, because they have no decent air units and no decent anti-air. So when shit gets serious, zerg just get owned.
>> Corruptor are excellent anti air, so are hydralisk. The weak point of curruptor is their speed, they arrive in the front line and get one shot by yamato canon. If you speak of late game, build 4/5 infestor (Fungal Growth) and just look how fast 20 void ray get killed.

Corruptors just clump up too tightly (Muta even more so) and since the healing nerf queens are no longer cost effective vs BC/Carrier.
Plus archons seem to rape everything zerg related and there is little a zerg can do about it.
>>Archon have 0 armor and get raped by hydra. Add in a few broodlord and their are useless.
Zerg can't stop storms either, it's just kind of sad you can beat any zerg by spamming nothing but carriers and maybe adding one templar and one archon for some burst splash.
>>storm are extremely expensive and ineffective against armored unit (roach ultra).
>>spamming carrier is the worst strategy I have ever seen. Your will have lost your first defense + middle control in 4/5mn because you build NOTHING.
>>counter strat is simple : don't follow him spending mineral + time to tech heavily. I finish this kind of game with only t1/t2 unit before the rock get destroyed.

To be honest, very late game terran become the same way, because 4 collies will mop up an almost infinite amount of anything on the ground, eliminating your marine air defence on which most terrans rely and then the rest of the protoss money can go on a game ending mix of carriers and carriers and more carriers.

A good terran can of course, stand their ground against a good protoss, by mixing in ghosts with emp and ravens with drone. Then adding BC's with yamato. But it's a supreme effort to stop someone spamming carriers to victory. Zealots are so cost effective in the early game against terran that you can almost certainly control the middle unless terran goes hellions, which certainly won't be useful later.
>>reaper own light units

Dunno, with selling it seems much easier now to zealot spam and then sell 'em all for carriers later...I've yet to see anyone stop it.

I'm losing the will to play this map any more. I basically feel that if two teams play, the one with the most protoss will generally win.

It just seems to be that zerg are worthless later on, because they have no decent air units and no decent anti-air. So when shit gets serious, zerg just get owned. Corruptors just clump up too tightly (Muta even more so) and since the healing nerf queens are no longer cost effective vs BC/Carrier. Plus archons seem to rape everything zerg related and there is little a zerg can do about it. Zerg can't stop storms either, it's just kind of sad you can beat any zerg by spamming nothing but carriers and maybe adding one templar and one archon for some burst splash.

To be honest, very late game terran become the same way, because 4 collies will mop up an almost infinite amount of anything on the ground, eliminating your marine air defence on which most terrans rely and then the rest of the protoss money can go on a game ending mix of carriers and carriers and more carriers.

A good terran can of course, stand their ground against a good protoss, by mixing in ghosts with emp and ravens with drone. Then adding BC's with yamato. But it's a supreme effort to stop someone spamming carriers to victory. Zealots are so cost effective in the early game against terran that you can almost certainly control the middle unless terran goes hellions, which certainly won't be useful later.

Dunno, with selling it seems much easier now to zealot spam and then sell 'em all for carriers later...I've yet to see anyone stop it.