The one who invented 4 Gate / 3 Gate blink vs terran. Yeah. He is one of the best If Not the best Micro Player. This is Said by Other pro Players.
Iâm sorry, I just canât find one-base rushes that impressive, when youâve got people taking the map and stuff.
Parting wouldâve loved to be Astrea in game 4 against Scarlett, dude couldâve had half the immortals and still held off that attack. Astrea gave Scarlett so many opportunities for a comeback.
His opening is 2 base. Hes also the one doing dt snipe in lategame.
I Just have the Feeling you are very biased.
1 Like
Not really, 2 base or 1 base is nothing compared to players like Scarlett who take the map in 5 minutes and multitasking everywhere.
Scarlett cheeses very very very often. But yeah she can creep the map.
But yeah anyways. You have wild Takes but its your opinion. Its OK.
Itâs not really an opinion. Which style looks harder? 99% would say macro games I bet.
Ah, I missed a subject switch, my apologies. Scrollbar lied to me.
So, uhhhh, definitely not, macro play is much easier than micro play.
Like, ignoring the frequency element, how you macro does not change depending on what your opponent did. Itâs much more rote - you build either the unit youâve rushed upgrades on or an army of units that counters the opponentâs.
Micro, in contrast, is entirely dependent on exact moment understanding of the field in front of you, reacting to it, and adapting under much more significant time pressure.
I can understand your argument, but really I canât imagine a player that wants to play macro zerg. Just facts. Too difficult.
Ok i found the one Guy who thinks it takes more Skill to creep the Map than the legendary Parting builds Hes Pulling Off. In best of StarCraft compilations there are multiple Matches of him Displaying His insane Micro.
Be it Soul train or godlike cannonrushes (cannonrushes have a loooooot of Skill Expression in pro Matches. Most Players cant pull Them Off and thats why there are so few actual cannonrushers. Dont get me wrong. In Casual they are braindead to execute and very hard to hold. But on pro Level this is a whole other world) or His blink Micro or His Immortal Prism juggle or His forcefields.
Saying its Not impressive would be saying serral is Just pressing sdsdsdsd and wins.
Please have some respect for pro Players regardless the Race.
But why do i Care ? I wrote a whole Paragraph about the diverse skills of Parting but i Bet the answer is: but duuuuuh she can creepspread.
Exactly this.
20 characters.
Iâll give you one reason why Iâm not impressed: I watched Parting cannon rush Serral and cringed. I could study maps for hours to find abuse spots too, but it doesnât appease me.
Think about the amount of endurance you need to play macro, especially Zerg. Forget it.
You donât need to imagine such a player because I am one. I like six basing on every race.
Itâs⌠so much easier though??? Like, to me, Protoss is the hardest to play properly late game because of the mixed production methods. Iâve encountered so many 4v4 players who revert their warp gates back to gateways at like 10 minutes.
Proper macro is hard in an entirely different way than proper micro is; and unsurprisingly different players have different skills. They therefore play differently, either leveraging the skills that they are best at or the method of execution they are most comfortable with.
You and I think these different ways because we are not the same person and have our experiences in varied places. I donât find unit control fun or interesting for most units, I dislike stutter stepping with most units and find it actually kind of lame, the notion of âsplit armyâ confounds me because I keep having to do it but Iâd rather my units stay split apart in the formation I gave them earlier. Them constantly bunching back up usually feels more like the game fighting me instead of doing what I asked.
Itâs all relative and opinion based. Some people think that microing a ball of twenty Marines as they shoot their guns is the coolest thing on the planet. I think watching fifty Zerglings run by, get eviscerated, only to get replaced by fifty more who do manage to do something, is far cooler.
Show me a good Protoss player that can do both good macro and good micro. I can think of maybe 2, whereas Terran and Zerg have plenty.
hahahahahahahahaha. Now I see why batzy gives you a hard time.
1 Like
He knew they played a critical role without which zerg had no viable alternatives. The one thing no zerg unit has is durability. Not even ultras are durable. They melt to immortals and libs for example. Zerg has basically zero durability. The baneling also has zero durability but it does splash when it dies, so if you can get it in range of enemy units then it will still get some value when it dies. This is good vs buildings because they canât run away. So the baneling is zergs tool for cracking a turtler who camps and places a billion DPS army at the top of a ramp. Because zerg has no durability and no range, the baneling was the only way to penetrate that kind of defensive setup. With -5 hp, banelings now are totally useless as long as a protoss has storm. Uou have basically no way to deal with a turtler who camps behind his simcity. Zerg just doesnât have any tool to deal with that scenario. Broods used to do it but they no longer have the range advantage. Ultras will never work because they are so bulky vs the simcity. Lurkers donât have enough range either. Basically the only play is to pray the toss makes a positioning mistake.
1 Like
The baneling ânerfâ was actually a revert of a buff theyâd received early in LoTV.
In both cases, the change also turned out largely inconsequential, as it changed very few damage breakpoints. The difference between 31 and 36 hp (If the unit doesnât get killed in a single hit it will regen hp) simply does not matter that much, especially for a unit that deals its damage on death and will detonate on its own to deal damage (thereâs no difference beween a baneling at 1 Hp and at full HP once it makes contact).
When the buff initially happened, there was a lot of concern that it would have a huge impact, and it didnât. When the nerf/revert went through, it was the same thing. Lots of doomsaying, then negligible real impact.
Only since late 2019. Zerg was in a pretty similar position to where Protoss is right now throughout pretty much all of WoL/HoTS and well into LoTV, with the exception of a couple of periods when Terran was very clearly OP, such as HoTS launch when hellbat drops were completely busted. The difference being that Zerg was also winning premiere tournaments and not lagging in performance among the top 20 or so players on the pro scene for all that time that it was also dominating the minor tournaments.
Heck, Batz tried to make the absurd claim that Zerg was actually underpowered and Terran was OP, because it âwasnât winning enough compared to its tournament representationâ, when it was winning the most and had the most representation on the pro scene⌠At least thereâs nobody bending over backwards to claim nonsense like that for Protoss.
Pretty much everyone has acknowledged that Protoss is overperforming on the upper ladder, but itâs also still struggling towards the higher end of the tournament scene, even with outliers like Serral and Maru disregarded, which is why it kept getting buffs, because thatâs the level that people are looking at the most for a competitive game.
The HP nerf does not change the interaction between storm and banelings at all.
2 Likes
Lmao this guy. Legit delusional posts. Baneling hp nerf meant banelings canât spend as much time in storms. Pre nerf some banelings could survive a storm with 1 or 2 hp. Post nerf every baneling will die. Mind you the baneling has the lowest trading efficiency in the game. They nerfed the worst unit in the game because protoss were too lazy to transfer workers during an attack. Now we are confronted with the uncomfortable reality that chronoboost makes protosd eco stronger than zergs, and the baneling was the way to take toss eco down a notch. Now toss has the mobility of terran, eco of zerg, and deathball strength of toss. Itâs literally the best of each race merged into one, and toss players still manage to lose games. They stopped doing lobotomies years ago, but how else do you explain 
toss and their inability to win despite having literally every advantage on their side.
⌠You donât even seem to know how much damage storm actually deals.
Storm deals 10 damage per tick, 3 ticks is 30 damage, which leaves a baneling with 1 HP due to regen post-nerf. Pre-nerf/revert, 3 ticks of storm would leave banelings with 6 HP.
Now, that is a difference against stalkers if storm only deals 2 ticks of damage, but only if the stalkers arenât wasting any shots (which they very often do vs units like banelings). In pretty much all other cases, the HP difference is completely irrelevant vs protoss.
The same thing goes vs Terran, where it only comes into play with certain upgrade differences and with tank splash combined with marine fire. But, due to banelings being a suicide unit and lings drawing marine fire if there isnât target fire on the banes, itâs still largely inconsequential in practice.
Yes, them being the worst unit in the game is why Zerg was massing them even when it shouldnât make sense to do so, like vs stalker compositions or non-bio Terran. Clearly they must be terrible units because they arenât the most cost efficient statistically. /s
They nerfed baneling damage because Zerg would rush +2 banes, then send 4-8 of them into a mineral line, and if even 1 connected, itâd wipe out a big chunk of probes/Drones (It was also a problem in ZvZ). Youâre talking about 2 completely different changes and acting like the same situation was driving both of them, which is simply not the case.
3 Likes
Making banelings is indicative of a lack of viable alternatives, not the power level of banelings. Listen kid. Nobody on earth wants to make a unit thatvhas negative trading efficiency. If zerg could make immortals weâd be making immortals and not banelings.
1 Like