Starcraft II: Wings of Liberty

ArmyOfWin posted...
Doesn't stop the best protoss players in the world from losing to mass roach herpderp all the time.

Everyone loses to something all the time.

*Ace vs DRG FF Ramp*

*dat PvP Oz's ramp gets FF-ed*

Takes more than numbers to make a unit (look at stalkers, probably the worst unit in the game offensively and defensively for cost).

Actually, if it DOES take numbers to make the Roach a good unit. By itself, it's a bad unit. It's mediocre, and lack-luster, as well as crappiliciously bad in terms of killing stuff due to overkill.

The Roach is good because you can get 30 of them (hopefully at the same time) but it's bad in the sense that if you get them past certain numbers, you'll gg no re because they don't stack favorably, which makes getting them counter-intuitive.

The only reason they're a staple unit ZvP is because they have "range", which prevents things like Stalker Mass or Zealot Warp-Ins from owning you, due to how chrono and forge works, and even then, Stalker Mass works frightfully well.

Edit:

Also if you make things like "cost for cost", there's literally no reason to tech past tier 1. But the game doesn't work that way.
---
"Rewind, I wanna go it again, light up the dark, halo on the side
So I'll know it will not leave me wanting, I see my heart, waving me bye-bye"

ArmyOfWin posted...
That was my point... you wouldn't want ramp forcefield to be any stronger. You don't want players like DRG to lose to Ace due to ramp ff, but you also don't want players like HerO losing to mass roach from players like Morrow.

No. My point is that Roaches are bad. Roaches are never good unless he goes heavy Zealot or heavy Hellion for some reason.

That doesn't hinder the fact that they have uses, but that doesn't make them any better than they are. It only makes them essential (a take-what-you-can-get thing)

You can't say "LOL ROACHES ARE GOOD," then point to players who clearly could've done something to not out of the way. That doesn't mean that the strategy was any less bad; it just means they played really REALLY bad since there is a clear-cut counter to it that's in no way out of their tech paths, or transition.

The immortal is good because they do well against roaches, but they are bad in the sense that if you get them past certain numbers, you will lose to the zerg transitions. They don't stack favourably which makes getting them counter-intuitive.

Uh.........

IIRC, the only things that beat an Immortal Heavy Composition is......

Muta
Broodlord
Zergling

>_> That's not a good comparison, all things considering, since by all means, they stack very well, and blend with the Toss army, and they stack VERY well due to their decent range as well as decent survivability. Their only flaw is that they can't shoot up, and they're fairly slow for a Protoss unit.

Try again.

Edit:

Clearly read, I never said "Roaches need buff plox." I said Roaches are bad, and they are. You can't debate that point, since they are very VERY bad.
---
"Rewind, I wanna go it again, light up the dark, halo on the side
So I'll know it will not leave me wanting, I see my heart, waving me bye-bye"

ArmyOfWin posted...
Any unit that is used frequently in every matchup, and is solely responsible for a large amount of wins in one matchup, is not in fact bad. No matter how much zerg players say so. Look at MC vs Stephano. MC tried a 4 gate +1 zealot pressure, which Stephano countered (aka he made a few roaches). Now MC has lost the game to roach max even if he responds correctly. Watch Stephano vs any protoss who aren't high Code S and he will win with only roaches. Bad unit indeed.

I beg to differ. I would actually say the Roach is very VERY bad for a Zerg, mainly because it's balanced on how many you can get, and thus can never be a good unit in and off itself.

It's not by any means a good unit. But it's an essential one mainly because if all you made were Lings, you would die in no time flat. If Zergs could skip Roaches, they would, but they can't.

After all, a unit can be used ALL the time, and it would still be bad, no matter how many times it's used, in the same way a good unit can be rarely gotten, but it's still good even if it's niche as hell (Phoenixes being really "bad" despite being a jack-of-all-trades forever harassing unit that should theoretically never die)

Void Rays are good, even if they are niche at what they do. Mothership is a good unit, even if they are niche at what they do. Carriers are good units, even if they are niche at what they do.

And even how Roaches work is pretty stupid.

They fend off gateway units, but they need to do it enmasse. So you get a lot of them for them to be semi-effective at their job. However, what makes them good ALSO makes them bad. Getting a lot of Roaches gives you diminishing efficiency on how good they do in battle, and that's horrible.

I guess you could argue individually, on a 1:1 basis, Roaches are good, but there are way, WAAAAAAY more units on a 1:1 basis that seem "worse" but fare better.

The immortal thing was showing that because a unit doesn't transition well doesn't mean it is bad, obviously. And all of those things you mentioned are exactly what zergs transition to.

If you transition, you should win, mainly because playing smart is important.

However, it's the thin line between transition and not transition that makes the Roach bad.

ZvP
If he's making more killy units, I should obviously make more Roaches, because he would otherwise roll me.
If he techs, I should tech as well, because there's little chance of me breaking his wall if he plays his cards right, and I'd be caught at a really bad disadvantage since I'll be stuck on Roach, and he'd have Stalker/Immortal/Sentry with upcoming Colossus.

That's basic Zerg logic right there, and it's smart play. If you can't break him in an attack, don't throw away your units, and rather, tech, and wait for a better time to strike.

However, it's the line that is drawn between the two that makes the Roaches oiobhjomgofm. How many Roaches should I get? Did I interpret his build correctly? Should I get a lot more Roaches for a 2nd wave or not?

It's that idea that makes Roaches so bad, because if you even misinterpret what he's doing, chances are, you're going to lose. Overmake Roaches, you'll be behind. Undermake them, you'll also be behind. And both are horrible choices for Z players since Roaches have little to no use past early game and early mid-game timing attacks. After a certain point, they're little more than dead supply, and that's really REALLY bad.

The Roach has horrible scaling, horrible damage output, horrible stacking (they're not only stupid in terms of range, they're also stupid in terms that because they're so fat), with their only saving grace their possible 1 armor and decent health.
---
"Rewind, I wanna go it again, light up the dark, halo on the side
So I'll know it will not leave me wanting, I see my heart, waving me bye-bye"

^ That seems to be unit design concerns rather than unit strength concerns.

Calling the only unit in the game that can win a match all by itself (not even blink stalkers or marines can do that anymore) really, really bad, or "worst unit in the game" is wrong and arguing contrarily is wrong.

ArmyOfWin posted...
^ That seems to be unit design concerns rather than unit strength concerns.

Unit design matches with unit strength. Based on how a unit is designed, a unit's strengths or odfogvfdoividf comes out. If a unit is designed badly (think Ultralisk) its strength will be really bad, because it's obvious.

Calling the only unit in the game that can win a match all by itself (not even blink stalkers or marines can do that anymore) really, really bad, or "worst unit in the game" is wrong and arguing contrarily is wrong.

Ahaha. You're too cute.

1) I never said Roaches were the "worst units in the game."
2) I argue that they are bad. You argue they are good. Opinions differ; facts do not.

Opinions =/= facts. I stated what made my opinion thus. The only counter-arguement you can come up with is "They can win games!"

That doesn't make them any better then they are. By all intents and purposes, 2port banshees can win me games TvZ and TvP. That doesn't make the strat any better than it is.

Also, Marines and Blink Stalkers are more than capable of winning games by themselves, just like 12 minute Roach max. The only difference is, Marine/Stalkers needs positioning because you can't spam them too much (at least until Blink Stalkers reach mass), and Roaches can't afford that advantage unless it's a flank due to their poor range.
---
"Rewind, I wanna go it again, light up the dark, halo on the side
So I'll know it will not leave me wanting, I see my heart, waving me bye-bye"