Falls dieses Thema schon iwo eröffnet wurde, kann man den Post dahin verschieben:)
Ich habe mich im Web ein bisschen umgeschaut wegen ZvT und bin auf einige Prospieler Meinungen und Diskussionen gestoßen:
Das erste Zitat kommt von diesem Link:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmes ... _id=144149
und beschreibt die aktuellen Möglichkeiten von Z und T gegeneinander:
Hierzu poste ich auch nochmal den Link über die aktuelle Rassenverteilung in Sc2:MasterAsia United States. August 15 2010 09:34. Posts 117
Mod Edit: There is a reason this thread remains opens while other "whine" threads have been closed - that's because this isn't a whine thread. This is a serious discussion detailing many of the issues that Zerg are currently facing. The OP is the 5th best Zerg in the USA, this isn't some Bronze newbie, he knows his shit - so listen to him.
On August 15 2010 11:03 Saracen wrote:
This guy is a good player. Even if you don't like what he's saying or disagree with it, at least respect him because he's significantly better than anyone else who's posted in this thread so far. The problem is exactly what MasterAsia stated in the OP: at lower levels, he can still win ZvT no problem. But once he players better and better players, it becomes harder and harder to win. At the moment, there doesn't exist a single top Zerg player who thinks TvZ is "fine." People like Sheth can hardly take any games off of their Terran teammates in practice, even versus ghost/hellion/marauder strategies. Do you really think that's because Qxc/drewbie/CauthonLuck are just so much better than Sheth? You can argue all you like about the matchup in your mid-level 500 point Diamond ranks, but the truth is it's really different at the top.
Hey there.
I know this thread may look similar to many of the others. But I did not see a ZvT comparison of SC2 and BW. I did not want to conclude that Z v T is totally worse than it was in BW, but I think this comparison will at least show why Z v T is so hard now in SC2. Sure of course I admit Zerg has some advantage from BW to SC2, so it is not totally worse.
The most serious problem is I have very little fun playing Z v T.
----
I just checked the sc2ranks and I am now no.5 Zerg in the US server. The first 4 Zergs are SLush, ostojiy, IdrA and Sheth (who plays Terran now). They are totally beasts,
definitely a lot better than me. BTW they are the only Zergs in top 40. Here I just want to present what I observed and thought of. Sorry for my poor English writing.
----
First I want to state my opinion of the current situation of Z v T. It is totaly broken.
Some may argue two facts:
(1) Idra has a very decent win ratio;
(2) Koreans are doing fine with zerg.
Those two facts lead to total misunderstandings.
I have two points to mention. One, Idra is definitely playing in a pro scene, while the terran players around his points are all ameteurs.
Two, Idra got those win-ratio very early in the release, when Terrans are not so imba. Terrans are improving very fast, while Zergs improvement is very slow.
During the first week of release, I have no problem playing with the Terrans who now rank at top 50 US and won a decent amount of games. During the second week, my win ratio against Terran drops, still not so bad. Now in the third week, it becomes a nightmare to play against Terran (I don't even want to mention that 70% of my opponents are Terrans since I got my position in ladder now). They are almost the same players, but now they are definitely more aware of how to abuse the Terran advantages.
I did not say the race Terran has changed since the release. I just say when it was first released, Terran players were not so abusive. They were not so aware of what they can do.For the Korean scene, I noticed that the number of top Zergs rapidly droped as well, which confirms my statement about Terrans getting better.
------
To sum up the reasons why Terran has this huge advantage. I would compare it to BW, in 6 different aspects.
1, As Sheth mentioned, Zerg has no ability to defend against sieging or to siege.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmes ... _id=140800
Thanks to Sheth, quite well stated post.
2, The Terran is very flexible with strategies, but Zerg is not.
In Z v T, Terran has at least 10 openning strategies that are considered effective against good Zergs. I just list some here:
reapers,
hellions,
banshees,
fast expand,
mass bio/marines,
ghosts/nukes,
tank rush,
pure mech,
dropships,
vikings...
What do Zergs have? They have speedlings or roaches. Basically we have to choose one of this. (don't mention baneling bust please. It is not effective against good Terrans) Neither of those two method is a threat to Terran. They are only defensive (that means the Terran can open as whatever he likes). And roaches are badly countered by nearly every strategy of Terran even when those strategies are not designed to counter roaches. So speedlings becomes nearly the only solution. Too few choices of Zerg, versus too many choices of Terran. We only have 1 base or 2 base openings, usually as a reaction to the Terran strategy rather than a choice by ourselves.
While in BW, things are different. Lurker is possible, muta is possible, speedling is possible, hydra is possible as well. Also 1 hatch is possible, 2 hatch is possible, 3 hatch is possible, fast upgrade is possible... Those are nearlly all possible against most of the Terran strategies, and they all lead to different mid-games.
3, The Terran mobility is too good comparing to the Zerg ground army.
I did not say Terran has a better mobility, which is obviously false. But Zerg needs a much better mobility in SC2. In BW, the slowest unit of zerg army is the upgraded hydralisk, which can outrun any terran army very easily. That means, if you are in bad position, you can choose to retreat and hold a better position. In SC2, the hydras and roaches are relatively slow off creep, and you can not have creep everywhere to attack at your desired directions. That makes Zerg extremely difficult to surround the Terran army and attack from several directions (which is common in BW). This point is very critical. Now terran has reapers and helions as very fast units, and they counter the fast units of Zerg (Zerglings and Banelings), so the Terran army is usually guarrenteed a moderate position when the fight begins. It is very different from that in BW, where T is always surrounded by Zerg units.
edit: I think he made it more clear than what I said
On August 15 2010 12:36 Neverhood wrote:
Finally, the other noticeable thing I feel like zerg is missing from BW is the mobility. OP makes an excellent point in that zerg players can no longer be as selective about where to engage the terran army. A decent terran will be very diligent at clearing out creep once it reaches the center of the map and the only zerg ground unit thats actually good off creep are lings....which got significantly worse since BW.
4, Zerg army is hard-countered, and Terran army is slightly-countered.
For each unit or unit combination of Zerg, Terran can find a very effective unit or unit combo to counter it hard. Ex. Muta - Thors/Ghosts, Broodlords - Vikings, Roaches - Marauders/Tanks, Hydra - Bio/Tanks/Thors, lings - Helions... unit combo: Muta&lings - bio/Thors&Helions, Roaches&Hydras - Marader&Tanks/Mech, Zerg everything together - Mech...
The only unit that is not hard-countered is the ultralisks, but it comes too late, and you can't use it along. Ultra&lings is slightly countered by mech.
On the other side, if you see terran goes hard marauders/mech, you don't have anything really counter them. Zerglings might be good against Marauders, Banelings good against marine, but the combo is only slightly good (or even) against Marau & Marines with good control due to the fact that Marauders consume all the damage and marines are really good DPS.
That raises the problem, that even if the Zerg knows exactly what the terran is going to do, it can not find a good counter to the Terran army. Recall in BW, the mech consists of two major units: Goliaths and tanks. If the T goes heavy on Goliath, the zerg will make more hydras. If the T goes heavy tanks, the zerg can make all mutas. Switch between those two units is very effective in Z v mech games. The reason is Hydras totally own goliaths and Mutalisks kill tanks free. But in SC2, I can't see any switch that is so effective. Changing from Muta to Roaches or Hydras does not help so much with killing Thors...
5, Zerg units are too weak compared to BW when they are in small number.
In BW, zerg is the race that uses the smallest food and fewest resource to generate a single effective unit. 2 hydras kill 1 dragoon or 1 tank, 4 zerglings kill 2marines or 1 zealot, 4 hydras kill 1 battlecruiser, etc... The zerg units only get beaten when the number of army is large. That is a perfect balance: when army is small, zerg is more resources effective, but it will sacrafice the economy to make army early game for zerg (not that bad for T and P!). When army is large, P/T is more resources effective, but Z has a better economy then.
edit: a good point
On August 15 2010 12:36 Elite00fm wrote:
OP your point 5 needs revision, zerg is stronger at low unit counts because of how T armies become exponentially stronger as they get larger, and since the majority of z units are melee/close range, T units standing in a ball protect each other from being attacked individually by z units, greatly diminishing the dps of a zerg army.
Now in SC2, Zerg units are really weak. 5 Hydras < 1 battlecruiser or 1 thor, 5 roaches < 1 thor. That means hydras and roaches are really resource ineffective against big things (In BW, those big things are ineffective because they have the ultimate power when you get more of them). Even facing small things their behavior is not as good as in BW. Zerglings are much weaker as well. This will make the zerg very difficult to survive after a big battle. In BW, if after a big battle, there are 5 marines left on the battle field, the newly-made zerg units will crash them + the newly-made terran units because in small number zerg dominates (also tanks are not in good position, medics and marines are not perfectly matched, etc). Now in SC2, if after a big battle, there are 5 marines left, with both side has the similar volume of reinforcement coming, Zerg dies.
6, The new AI helps Terran too much.
(1) In SC2 unit turn to get into a ball - good for tanks, ravens to kill zerg, also good for marauders to consume damage for marines, good for thors to block the tanks, etc.. Also good for Terran to reposition their reinforcement very quickly. It used to be a pain to let the newly-made Terran units to cooperate perfectly with the attacking army in BW.
(2) The auto-repair thing is terrible. Zerglings do not attack the repairing scv, so if a thor is being surrounded and auto-repaired, no zergling will do any damage to it unless you force them to attack scvs one by one. Not to mention that the scvs around a thor is very difficult to catch.
(3) Tanks do not waste DPS.. They are too smart to avoid self-damage now. If you spawn infested terran in the middle of a ball of Terran tanks, only one tank will fire, and it is not a big deal. In BW the tanks around the infested terran will all die instantly.
17th Augest, added three more observations that I think is important.
7, The Terran scout is insanely easy.
Just an example. Many zergs may think that if T opens with reapers then it is a success to just prevent them from killing your drones. However I found it wrong. The reaper only cost 50/50 even plus their upgrade its just 100/100. But it stays at your base forever until you have mutas. You have to either make speedlings or roaches in respond to 1 or 2 reapers, and you don't even dare to send them out. The reapers serve two purpose: continuously scout & keep your units at home.
So basically the reapers will give the Terran all the information he needs at a very low cost plus a good threat to the Zerg. Back in BW the only method to scout early zerg is the scan which increases the danger of being hit or contained by lurkers in early game if it is used for scouting purpose..
The zerg scout is a pain. If the Terran is doing something early harass or attack, sacraficing an overlord or an overseer would simply just make the defending more difficult even if you get what he is doing. Most of the time you only got to see 1/1/1 build and have no idea what is going on in Terran.
8, The Terran map control / macro is insanely effective.
Some may say "just outmarco them" to zerg players. Yes it is true in BW. Zerg outmacros Terran. But in SC2 I found it really difficult to outmacro Terran. I have been outmacroed by Terran multiple times.
Let us recall why Zerg can outmacro Terran in BW. That is because Zerg has the map control for most of the game when Terran turtled at his own base. This is the only reason that Zerg can expand without endangering himself. (Same arguement holds for PvT and ZvP.)
Why Zerg has the map control then? Two main reasons. One, the Zerg units are more effective when the number is small (point 5 above). Hence sending army in the wrong time-spot is stupid for Terran. (Consider sending 6 marines and 1 Tank out each time for a Terran!) Two, most importantly, the mobility (point 3 above). Terran never gets his army back if he is not dominating the battle field. The army will be surrouded and ambushed. Due to its slow movement speed it never comes back, if it can not win the battle against the Zerg army.
In SC2 things are different. If the Zerg does not go mutalings, then Bio mobility is much better than the Zerg ground army. That means most of the time terran can send his army out their control the map safely and when he thinks its no longer safe just retreat to his home. Sentry towers will greatly help this as well. And even the Mech, which is considered the most immobile army in the world, can safely run back from Z's base to his own base when chasing by hydras. On their way home zerglings are taken down by hellions and roaches are taken care of if they dare to move away from hydras. Yes, infestor helps with this, maybe a few units each time.
Don't even need to mention that Hellions always controls the Xel'Naga towers and they just mess all around...
When Terran has the first hellion or reaper, he gets the map control (also perfect scout for reapers). He can expand at that time very safely, because he knows you wont send anything out untill very late. If you send roaches, then reapers and hellions will run into your poor home and slain everything that comes to their sight. After that they run back to their own base ahead of your attacking roaches - Yes I am a little bit exaggerating...
Also the static defence of Terran is insane. In BW Terran always has to put an army to defend a expansion. But in SC2 you simply just leave it there and everything will be fine. Free banker, invincible PF, increadible turrets,...
All those will lead to the fact Terran very easy to expand. Just stand 1 minute (well, hydras are on their way! ETA, 2 minutes.) on a expansion, waiting for the PF to complete and this expansion belongs to Terran forever. I think in high-level plays, Terran will have more and more expansions compared to the Zerg. (I remember a replay where CheckPrime is outmacroed by a Terran lol.)
I believe this is the reason why Zerg is heavy on mutalings now. At least mutalings are mobile and you will not be outmacroed by Terran so easily.
9, The Terran is so easy to play.
According to my experience and words from DIMAGA and Sheth, I think Terran is too easy to play.
I was A- Zerg on iccup and I play TvZ a lot. But I can hardly take down any Zerg who is B- or better. It is a huge difficulty when playing as a Terran. You have to worry about everything. Early harass, early push, a black map, lurker threat, the dark swarm, the plague, the counter attack at any time, the defending of any base... You have a lot to do to become a good Terran. For example, you have to overreact if you saw just 2 speedlings when you FE. A miscontrol will lose almost your entire army. Everytime I felt ZvT is hard, I turned to play TvZ and realized how difficult it is.
In SC2, at first I thought it should work the same way. Terran is powerful and difficult to play. On the first day of my terran playing (I absolutely never played it except for the campaign and a few random 2v2s), I was shocked by the ease of playing as Terran. My first 4 games were against an 800+ diamond zerg and I killed him 4-0 without letting him sending anything across the middle of the map. It is way too easy to play. Compared to BW, too few things to worry about. T is almost always in an aggressive position, even in the very early game. For a race with weapons like siege tank and thor, there should be some weak spots like unable to scout/difficult to defend or expand/ vulnerable to early push/can not give early pressure/have to build a lot of static defence even the opponent is not going harassment/,,,.
----
I do not enjoy playing Z v T now. Too few strategies, too long time of defending and reacting, getting destroyed so easily. It seems like I am a machine just sitting there defending all those reapers hellions banshees vikings dropships thors .... finally I have the freedom to choose to do something, then 2 minutes later I get owned. ............ It is not fun. Really not fun.
I will not switch race to terran like someone said, but I will keep complainting. We Zerg users choose Zerg for a reason, and all of us want Zerg to be playable again.
http://sc2ranks.com/stats/race/all/1
Zudem habe ich noch einen Thread gefunden, in dem mehrere Prospieler gefragt wurden, wie sie ZvT zurzeit einschätzen und was der Patch 1.1 verändern wird oder nicht:
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic ... 398?page=1
Ich hoffe es entsteht eine rege Diskussion
mfg crnine
es nimmt mir richtig die Laune beim tvz wenn ich lese wie IMba Terraner gegen zerg sind... 
Ich weiss, das wäre krass aber eigentlich nur fair.
