State of the Game: IdrA vs. Day[9]

[Genopath]

Recently SC:Legacy has provided news coverage on two important community figures: Greg “IdrA” Fields and Sean “Day[9]” Plott in addition to the latest Patch Notes from the PTR. State of the Game recently attempted to combine these two community figures for their balance comments for the next patch. The podcast had a riveting and heated discussion between these two community figures.

State of the Game is a podcast hosted by JP "itmeJP" McDaniel, Sean "Day[9]" Plott, Geoff "EG.iNcontroL" Robinson and Tyler "TLAF`LiquidTyler" Wasieleski. They invite top foreign players and notable people from the community to produce weekly podcasts. They also talk about the game in a more general sense, effects of patches, new meta game developments.

A small edited transcript can be found here:
http://sclegacy.com/editorials/105-s...g-idra-vs-day9

[JackhammerIV]

I watched that episode of SotG. I would side with Day9. Idra is basically complaining still about his own race. It was designed that way. And idra doesn't want to take risks to block off a possible risky move by terran or protoss.

Time is needed in order for the "metagame" to settle down. Then zergs might not even need to scout so much. Or they have better ways to scout. Seriously zergs don't try much.

I can imagine in the future zergs just "compensate" for their lack of scouting with like gas steals. Or like that evo chamber broodling trick. They sacrifice overlords anyways. Spend a bit more to have info by having an evo chamber in terran/protoss base.

The game is too young to just say zerg has no scouting options. Really i was gonna say protoss doesn't have much scouting options either. But idra would probably argue protoss is so op we dun need scouting.

[TheRabidDeer]

Many of the problems that idra were mentioning for zerg other races also have issues with. Terran less so due to scan, but they still have the same issues.

I mean the early game is generally the following:
Initial scouting worker finds as much as he can, then is chased out by a unit. Protoss cant push them out until the stalker, terran with the marines and zerg with lings on creep (and later speedlings).

From there, races change.
Zerg CAN sacrifice an OL to try to get scouting information on a walled in race, otherwise they are the same as protoss in regards to scouting ability. Zerg also usually have early map control thanks to speedlings denying scouting.

Protoss can sacrifice a zealot to the ramp to try to get basic army information (probes frequently die before information is obtained, especially against zerg), otherwise they have to wait until hallucination or an observer.

Terran can stim a marine or use another unit, or use a scan. Terran have the best early game scouting but have to sacrifice economy.

So that completely throws out his "zerg cant scout" mentality, since every race suffers from the same issue.

His issue with early aggression isnt true either. Baneling busts, 6 pool, 10 pool, roach rushes and various other builds exist and can be REALLY aggressive. The fact that races are forced to at least partially wall off against zerg should speak volumes on how aggressive zerg CAN be and how much they can be punished if they dont wall is insane.

[Twilice]

If you use scan instead of mule that early your going to die

[Genopath]

I’m gonna have to side with IdrA 100% here. As much as I respect Day[9], he gets completely outplayed in this discussion. Please note that I have respect for both of these community figures.

Day[9]: To be able to like appropriately discuss imbalance would take like a very very long time and will require like...

This is true. This shows that Day[9] is far more educated than 99% of anyone speaking about balance. Balance design is a multidimensional game design field and it goes beyond just analyzing unit compositions, strategies, tactics and timing. Still there are 1% of the players that actually know just as much or, in this case, more than him. IdrA explains thoroughly the specific problems with Zerg. However the issue that poses the most problem is the fact that Zerg can’t scout. StarCraft 2 can pretty much be called “Build Order Poker” when trying to read opponents and it’s too much of a gamble to pick the right BO. For Blizzard balance design team, this effect is desirable to some extent. Pretty much their reasoning behind the latest patch. Check Kapeselus on 4 Gate.

http://sclegacy.com/news/23-sc2/998-kapeselus-on-4-gate.

However, in ZvP or ZvT early scouting is a big gamble for the Zerg player. IdrA explained this very well and he even provided actual examples (sC vs. Losira) instead of just theorycrafting.

Day[9]: I haven't seen the games, so I can't actually comment. That’s the problem.

This is mostly irrelevant. Unless this was a recent development, there is no need for an actual replay. These concerns have been out for some time. This is old news and it has been discussed even since Beta.

Day[9]: I’m curious as how would you comment on Zerg vs. Terran from the Zerg’s point of view on Broodwar.

I’m sorry but you can compare these games so easily. If Day[9] wishes to prove that the fact that IdrA might be subjective on this discussion by the fact that he is defending the race he plays, he probably should do it some other way. Besides what IdrA said, a lot of the units in StarCraft II are new, some old units have been changed considerably and of course the strats and tactics are different and let’s not even talk about UI imbalance, map imbalance or the use of game exploits for tactics.

Day[9]: I just don’t know what that statement means though, that’s the problem. It’s poorly defined terms, like "oh the better player lost" but the only clear metric we have is winning/losing so that’s like benchmark you have at work. In a sense and interesting thing to notice that regardless of any game created a balance meta-game will form, period. Tic-Tac-Toe has a balance metagame, despite the fact that it consists of solely draws. StarCraft 2 has, no matter what the situation is, it should hit on some tone of balance. Actually it will necessarily have a balance meta-game that might involve one race not even being played at all but we are just so extremely far from anything even remotely

This is absolutely incorrect. There are a number of metrics that have always been available to us, and Blizzard balance designers probably have even more at their disposal. Units Lost, Units Killed (in resource value) are examples of metrics that have some correlation with win percentage. In TvP and Protoss and Terran mirror matchups these are highly correlated. ZvX doesn’t share this correlation and thus other methods must be used. The most useful are the ones involving game theory. Perhaps the most appropriate approach would be Strat by Strat comparison in Normal Form.

This works in the following way: we outline Zerg’s available strats and compare them with Terran’s available strats, next we account a success rate to each strat and display them in normal form. This eventually gets a little more complicated for the casual user. Punch line is, metrics are available. Even if you find this confusing you probably know about micro and macro. Good micro and good macro will have a very high correlation with a good player.

Day[9] is correct that most games will have a balance meta game, or more appropriately a Nash equilibrium. However, Nash Equilibrum does not imply race balance. If you reading this good, you probably noticed the subtle contradiction Day[9] used here by saying “meta-game that might involve one race not even being played at all”. If a race has a significant lower chances of winning against another race then this strategy, even if it’s a best-response strategy, will show the existence of race imbalance. Okay, sorry for too much game theory lingo. A good approximation to define this “best-response strategy” is what IdrA refers to as an “all-purpose build”. It is what you should do to maximize your chances of winning in particular context or situation. If this still doesn't make sense, PM me and I will give more detailed explanations

Day[9]: Hold on, what I’m saying is that that is an endpoint that will emerge but right now there’s just no statistical evidence to really support that.

This is also incorrect. Blizzard has numerous times used statistcal data to report race vs. race results regularly to justify their balance design statements. Of course I wrote on a paper how impractical this is for race balance. Later on, Blizzard will state that they aren’t particularly useful when it comes to the actual balance design: http://sclegacy.com/feature/106-bliz...ft-ii-gameplay

I think IdrA responded appropriately to the rest of the comments (at least the ones in the transcript). For instance:

IdrA: ...is on your way to your base.

Day[9]: Well let’s say a Banshee comes out or something like that or like a 2-rax Marine. Once they go down that path. I honestly think that the Terran is highly limited upon that revealed...

IdrA: Highly limited but if you have to respond after the attack is on the way you die.

This is where theorycraft separates from empirical evidence. While it may sound nice to state that once you see a Terran player move out that you should react accordingly, in reality this is too late.

[Twilice]

Is it really? I got the biggest problems actually scouting the zerg. . . So I am not sure if I agree.

It might be different from the 0.1% of players.

I think what is an imbalance are the cookie builds. As much reward as possible, 4-gate 2-gate+robo colossus, 3-gate+robo immortal.
Where zerg doesn't rely on this kind of gameplay at all.

[Genopath]

Is it really? I got the biggest problems actually scouting the zerg. . . So I am not sure if I agree.

In my opinion it is a little bit more valuable using 255 minerals for a scan to know the Zerg's unit composition than 2 extra Marauders or 5 extra Marines in the long run since it's not like you can build them all right away

I think what is an imbalance are the cookie builds. As much reward as possible, 4-gate 2-gate+robo colossus, 3-gate+robo immortal.
Where zerg doesn't rely on this kind of gameplay at all.

Tyler in that same podcast has some really good comments on cheese and coin flipping, you should check it out.

Well the openings Zerg has against Terran are maybe: 14 Hatch, 15 Hatch, 16 Hatch builds. Any pool first build can have its early aggression negated by walling and in the long run they will be behind Terran because of Mules. Then you can probably decide between Roaches or Banelings. Roaches might be good if you know Hellions are coming but if this isn't the case, you will get destroyed by bio. If you go for Banelings but if Terran went anything other than mass Marines, you would get destroyed as well. Also, it's not only guessing which units Terran will make, but what % of those units make up the Terran army. A great part of the success of Fruitdealer in GSL S1 was that he grabbed all tech paths and reacted more appropiately to HopeTorture's unit composition. Thus, Zerg is a more reactive race because of the nature of hard counters.

[JackhammerIV]

I dislike this idea of an "all-purpose build". Everything is based on scouting and assuming the opponent is going down one path. It's more like there's a best response strategy for everything the opponent is doing. That follows from the idea of hard counters being really emphasised in SC2.

Lack of scouting common among all races:

Hidden Content:

I dislike how Idra keeps saying Zerg lacks scouting. Realistically protoss does as well. That's what keeps us having that safe build of "3gate robo" in every matchup. It's the one build that offers general safety against everything. The safest way to use it is what Tyler does of getting the 3 gates and robo then scouting with observer and having a nexus being built and being prepared to cancel the nexus if the observer sees something all-in-ish coming.

Protoss has the same kind of "stupid losses" from lack of scouting. I see 1 rax no gas and I think ok 1 rax FE so i plant my nexus. But turns out terran was going 2-3rax marines (optionally all-in). Then i just lose.

Terran has the fewest problems with this in that once they get an orbital they can sacrifice economy to see exactly what the opponent is doing. In PvZ zerg frequently has map control and protoss has to rely on hallucinations or observers to see what zerg is doing. And if that hallu/obs is late then an all-in could easily break Protoss.

"Just in case" builds:

Hidden Content:

I term these builds "just in case" because it's the safest way to play in order to "defend against almost everything". The builds have tradeoffs obviously but each race has them.

Now here's why I think Idra has a problem with lack of scouting even though the other races have the same problem.....his perceived lack of "just in case" defenses for zerg. Idra wants basically something more of a "throw down in an emergency".

Protoss feeling a bit unsure just gets lots of sentries "just in case" and later on in the game they serve a purpose because sentries are always useful. Additionally they get observers. Every protoss does it because we need the scouting and detection. More observers is more safety but it still uses up build time in robo and gas. The tradeoff is slower tech since gas is dumped into them. This is the essence of 3gate robo before expand basically. Sentries and observers for safety.

Terran gets engineering bay, missile turrets and bunkers "just in case". Tradeoff is smaller army since minerals dumped into buildings. But later game they provide upgrades, defense from cloaked and air attacks. And bunkers can be salvaged to return some minerals later on. Additionally, the "just in case" build for terran focuses more on barracks play and delay teching. The idea is that other builds (such as Protoss 3gate aggression) can punish them hard for teching too fast. The tradeoff here is a larger army but lower tiered.

Zerg has evo chamber, spores, spines and queens. Realistically zerg can't rely on larvae and making units/defensive structures in time. That's exactly true like Idra says. However, I argue this is true for terran and protoss. Terran facing DTs and not being prepared has to use up scans and make the eng bay and turrets. Protoss facing banshees has to get up detection that he might not have been getting.

No matter how much Idra likes to bash on Spanishiwa's build...it is really the safest opener for Zerg. There is a buff to early game economy due to the mineral focus but it sacrifices early game aggression. I argue that the Spanishiwa build is Zerg's "just in case" build. If you do that build you're generally safe from everything. But as with the other races there is a tradeoff of slower gas and lack of aggression in early game. The benefit is a large amount of drones as larvae is almost exclusively spent on drones. This can set up nicely for later in the game since you'd typically have a higher drone count than a defense relying on units.

The protoss equivalent of this is what I said of Tyler's style of 3gate robo and only then expand upon using the obs to scout. Terran can realistically take a quick expo and prepare defense in time to defend any aggression. Tyler has a followup of double forge which can be devestating despite the early game sacrifice of using the Protoss "just in case" strategy.

Zerg just needs a good followup to the Spanishiwa build. Something strong that can force the opponents back and make up for the tradeoff made earlier in the game "just in case". Perhaps Spanishiwa's infestor/nydus play fulfills that role or perhaps not. Either way it finally seems like Zerg have their "just in case" build. Spines, evo chamber+spores, queens with transfuse and some larvae on hand to make units. And additionally slightly faster creep spread. But it just seems to me that Idra wants a "just in case" build that does not sacrifice anything at all. That is completely unrealistic.

Emergency defenses

Hidden Content:

This is basically what Idra wants. Spines and spores being able to complete upon seeing the opponent move out from across the map. Defensive bunkers and cannons have a similar problem although they obviously complete sooner. But I feel that is due to the counterattacking abilities of zerg. Terran and Protoss basically move fast units out to try and delay the opponent. Zerg can use speedlings to threaten a counterattack and delay attacks longer than the other races can.

Terran units are not on a front loaded production cycle and their bunkers do not build super quick. However, they have SCVs with repair. That's pretty much their emergency defense. Pulling SCVs into battle or to repair bunkers/walloffs.

Protoss have more emergency defenses due to the front loaded production cycle of warpgates and chronoboost. Can warp in a sentry to delay attacks. Only problem lies in warping in on time that can cause problems. Safe thing would be to stutter warp-ins so you can warp in the exact unit you want when it is needed.

For zerg they have to conserve larvae. Keep some in reserve to make emergency roaches/lings as needed. This is the main problem. "When to make units" vs "When to make drones".

If Idra wants more emergency defenses then I imagine it's fine to make spines build quicker but make them slightly weaker to compensate. Doubt idra would like that but spine rushes are quite strong. Terran and Protoss can't move bunkers and cannons in a slow advance towards the opponent easily.

Concluding remarks:

Hidden Content:

Idra basically wants "emergency defenses" that can finish in time when he starts them as he sees the opponent move out of their base. Basically shows greediness. He wants to tech/drone up as hard as he can until the very last moment.

It will be too late at this time. Same like how suddenly seeing a Terran all-in in TvP when you already FE as protoss is too late. There was a game in the IPL. I believe it was Select (unsure of terran) vs Kiwikaki. Select (unsure if it was him exactly) went for marine SCV all in. Kiwi fast expanded. But instead of being greedy and teching up hard Kiwi "bought safety" by warping in sentry after sentry. Those sentries helped him defend that all-in attack by Terran. If Kiwi acts greedy like Idra wants it's basically...

If Kiwi was Idra: 1 gate FE then robo teching to colossus and adding on the 2nd and 3rd gateway later. Make only a few sentries while conserving most gas to tech hard. Then Kiwi would spot the all-in coming from terran (through obs or whatever) and perhaps only be able to warp in 1-3 more units. Probably lose nexus and/or game. Then Kiwi would complain how Protoss needs to be able to prepare defenses in time if they spot things like that. Argue about how protoss can't walk right into terran's base to see exactly what is going on. And how protoss need obs to build faster or something like that.

Then a bunch of people would jump on Kiwi saying it was really greedy of him to go gate->core->expo->robo->2nd and 3rd gates. And that it's normal to expect to lose if the terran goes for a 1base quick all-in.

Basically Zergs want better scouting so they can react perfectly and only make the exact units needed to defend. You talk about Fruitdealer getting everything in the tech tree to prepare for everything. Perhaps zergs should move away from greedy expanding and a bit more towards something like that.

Tyler always talks about "buying safety". He keeps saying he's a safe player and likes to buy as much safety as he can. Idra seems more like a "greedy" player. He'll try to get away with as much as he can. Idra wants safety but isn't willing to pay the price of safety in the current "market". You can agree with him about the lack of scouting and emergency defense responses of zerg. But that's a trait shared with the other races. Zerg might be more susceptible to suffering because of it but that just means zergs might need to consider a safer way to play.

So to conclude I still side with Day9. Either zergs will find a "just in case" build they all like or they will do something to force the game a certain way. This is the idea of 3gate aggressive expo in PvT. We protosses diverge away from the "safety" of an early robo to instead put on pressure. If the terran is trying something like cloaked banshees then we can break their wall and possibly kill them if terran isn't careful.

If zergs have problems because of the "variety" that the other races have then they should be more aggressive and limit the opponent's options. It's something Day9 has said before. Perhaps just always open 7RR or some other early strong aggression but just expo/tech behind it so it's not all in. That was the basis of the aggressive 3gate expo. The timing is similar to a 4gate but it's weaker. Idea is to punish terran if he's teching hard but not completely all-in like a 4gate. And being prepared to tech to the right counter behind it depending on what the army scouts.

EDIT: Sorry for the long read. I hope I at least sound sensible. Probably just incite a lot of Zerg hatred since I play Protoss. Don't think my opinion/points are completely useless though.

[Genopath]

I dislike this idea of an "all-purpose build". Everything is based on scouting and assuming the opponent is going down one path. It's more like there's a best response strategy for everything the opponent is doing. That follows from the idea of hard counters being really emphasised in SC2.

Lack of scouting common among all races:

Hidden Content:

I dislike how Idra keeps saying Zerg lacks scouting. Realistically protoss does as well. That's what keeps us having that safe build of "3gate robo" in every matchup. It's the one build that offers general safety against everything. The safest way to use it is what Tyler does of getting the 3 gates and robo then scouting with observer and having a nexus being built and being prepared to cancel the nexus if the observer sees something all-in-ish coming.

Protoss has the same kind of "stupid losses" from lack of scouting. I see 1 rax no gas and I think ok 1 rax FE so i plant my nexus. But turns out terran was going 2-3rax marines (optionally all-in). Then i just lose.

Terran has the fewest problems with this in that once they get an orbital they can sacrifice economy to see exactly what the opponent is doing. In PvZ zerg frequently has map control and protoss has to rely on hallucinations or observers to see what zerg is doing. And if that hallu/obs is late then an all-in could easily break Protoss.

"Just in case" builds:

Hidden Content:

I term these builds "just in case" because it's the safest way to play in order to "defend against almost everything". The builds have tradeoffs obviously but each race has them.

Now here's why I think Idra has a problem with lack of scouting even though the other races have the same problem.....his perceived lack of "just in case" defenses for zerg. Idra wants basically something more of a "throw down in an emergency".

Protoss feeling a bit unsure just gets lots of sentries "just in case" and later on in the game they serve a purpose because sentries are always useful. Additionally they get observers. Every protoss does it because we need the scouting and detection. More observers is more safety but it still uses up build time in robo and gas. The tradeoff is slower tech since gas is dumped into them. This is the essence of 3gate robo before expand basically. Sentries and observers for safety.

Terran gets engineering bay, missile turrets and bunkers "just in case". Tradeoff is smaller army since minerals dumped into buildings. But later game they provide upgrades, defense from cloaked and air attacks. And bunkers can be salvaged to return some minerals later on. Additionally, the "just in case" build for terran focuses more on barracks play and delay teching. The idea is that other builds (such as Protoss 3gate aggression) can punish them hard for teching too fast. The tradeoff here is a larger army but lower tiered.

Zerg has evo chamber, spores, spines and queens. Realistically zerg can't rely on larvae and making units/defensive structures in time. That's exactly true like Idra says. However, I argue this is true for terran and protoss. Terran facing DTs and not being prepared has to use up scans and make the eng bay and turrets. Protoss facing banshees has to get up detection that he might not have been getting.

No matter how much Idra likes to bash on Spanishiwa's build...it is really the safest opener for Zerg. There is a buff to early game economy due to the mineral focus but it sacrifices early game aggression. I argue that the Spanishiwa build is Zerg's "just in case" build. If you do that build you're generally safe from everything. But as with the other races there is a tradeoff of slower gas and lack of aggression in early game. The benefit is a large amount of drones as larvae is almost exclusively spent on drones. This can set up nicely for later in the game since you'd typically have a higher drone count than a defense relying on units.

The protoss equivalent of this is what I said of Tyler's style of 3gate robo and only then expand upon using the obs to scout. Terran can realistically take a quick expo and prepare defense in time to defend any aggression. Tyler has a followup of double forge which can be devestating despite the early game sacrifice of using the Protoss "just in case" strategy.

Zerg just needs a good followup to the Spanishiwa build. Something strong that can force the opponents back and make up for the tradeoff made earlier in the game "just in case". Perhaps Spanishiwa's infestor/nydus play fulfills that role or perhaps not. Either way it finally seems like Zerg have their "just in case" build. Spines, evo chamber+spores, queens with transfuse and some larvae on hand to make units. And additionally slightly faster creep spread. But it just seems to me that Idra wants a "just in case" build that does not sacrifice anything at all. That is completely unrealistic.

Emergency defenses

Hidden Content:

This is basically what Idra wants. Spines and spores being able to complete upon seeing the opponent move out from across the map. Defensive bunkers and cannons have a similar problem although they obviously complete sooner. But I feel that is due to the counterattacking abilities of zerg. Terran and Protoss basically move fast units out to try and delay the opponent. Zerg can use speedlings to threaten a counterattack and delay attacks longer than the other races can.

Terran units are not on a front loaded production cycle and their bunkers do not build super quick. However, they have SCVs with repair. That's pretty much their emergency defense. Pulling SCVs into battle or to repair bunkers/walloffs.

Protoss have more emergency defenses due to the front loaded production cycle of warpgates and chronoboost. Can warp in a sentry to delay attacks. Only problem lies in warping in on time that can cause problems. Safe thing would be to stutter warp-ins so you can warp in the exact unit you want when it is needed.

For zerg they have to conserve larvae. Keep some in reserve to make emergency roaches/lings as needed. This is the main problem. "When to make units" vs "When to make drones".

If Idra wants more emergency defenses then I imagine it's fine to make spines build quicker but make them slightly weaker to compensate. Doubt idra would like that but spine rushes are quite strong. Terran and Protoss can't move bunkers and cannons in a slow advance towards the opponent easily.

Concluding remarks:

Hidden Content:

Idra basically wants "emergency defenses" that can finish in time when he starts them as he sees the opponent move out of their base. Basically shows greediness. He wants to tech/drone up as hard as he can until the very last moment.

It will be too late at this time. Same like how suddenly seeing a Terran all-in in TvP when you already FE as protoss is too late. There was a game in the IPL. I believe it was Select (unsure of terran) vs Kiwikaki. Select (unsure if it was him exactly) went for marine SCV all in. Kiwi fast expanded. But instead of being greedy and teching up hard Kiwi "bought safety" by warping in sentry after sentry. Those sentries helped him defend that all-in attack by Terran. If Kiwi acts greedy like Idra wants it's basically...

If Kiwi was Idra: 1 gate FE then robo teching to colossus and adding on the 2nd and 3rd gateway later. Make only a few sentries while conserving most gas to tech hard. Then Kiwi would spot the all-in coming from terran (through obs or whatever) and perhaps only be able to warp in 1-3 more units. Probably lose nexus and/or game. Then Kiwi would complain how Protoss needs to be able to prepare defenses in time if they spot things like that. Argue about how protoss can't walk right into terran's base to see exactly what is going on. And how protoss need obs to build faster or something like that.

Then a bunch of people would jump on Kiwi saying it was really greedy of him to go gate->core->expo->robo->2nd and 3rd gates. And that it's normal to expect to lose if the terran goes for a 1base quick all-in.

Basically Zergs want better scouting so they can react perfectly and only make the exact units needed to defend. You talk about Fruitdealer getting everything in the tech tree to prepare for everything. Perhaps zergs should move away from greedy expanding and a bit more towards something like that.

Tyler always talks about "buying safety". He keeps saying he's a safe player and likes to buy as much safety as he can. Idra seems more like a "greedy" player. He'll try to get away with as much as he can. Idra wants safety but isn't willing to pay the price of safety in the current "market". You can agree with him about the lack of scouting and emergency defense responses of zerg. But that's a trait shared with the other races. Zerg might be more susceptible to suffering because of it but that just means zergs might need to consider a safer way to play.

So to conclude I still side with Day9. Either zergs will find a "just in case" build they all like or they will do something to force the game a certain way. This is the idea of 3gate aggressive expo in PvT. We protosses diverge away from the "safety" of an early robo to instead put on pressure. If the terran is trying something like cloaked banshees then we can break their wall and possibly kill them if terran isn't careful.

If zergs have problems because of the "variety" that the other races have then they should be more aggressive and limit the opponent's options. It's something Day9 has said before. Perhaps just always open 7RR or some other early strong aggression but just expo/tech behind it so it's not all in. That was the basis of the aggressive 3gate expo. The timing is similar to a 4gate but it's weaker. Idea is to punish terran if he's teching hard but not completely all-in like a 4gate. And being prepared to tech to the right counter behind it depending on what the army scouts.

EDIT: Sorry for the long read. I hope I at least sound sensible. Probably just incite a lot of Zerg hatred since I play Protoss. Don't think my opinion/points are completely useless though.

That is a good post. Very sensible too . IdrA mentions 2 ways of solving the problem though. One by better scouting and the other by a new "all-purpose" build. I also dislike the idea of an all-purpose build. It is why I agree that Zerg could use a little help scouting. I'm spitballing here but moving Overlord speed to Hatch tech could help here or just give enough speed for the Overlord to get a better view of a player's base without dying. More armor could also be a possible solution. The research would require some investment for the Zerg but it's worth it so that there is a little less uncertainty in the game.

Zerg has a "Just in case" build for Protoss which is why people have started to go pool first then hatch. Sadly, this same logic can't be applied to ZvT

Rep'd+

[JackhammerIV]

That is a good post. Very sensible too . IdrA mentions 2 ways of solving the problem though. One by better scouting and the other by a new "all-purpose" build. I also dislike the idea of an all-purpose build. It is why I agree that Zerg could use a little help scouting. I'm spitballing here but moving Overlord speed to Hatch tech could help here or just give enough speed for the Overlord to get a better view of a player's base without dying. More armor could also be a possible solution. The research would require some investment for the Zerg but it's worth it so that there is a little less uncertainty in the game.

Zerg has a "Just in case" build for Protoss which is why people have started to go pool first then hatch. Sadly, this same logic can't be applied to ZvT

Rep'd+

Thanks. Problem with messing with the overlord speed/armour/health is that you might end up with zerg ALWAYS being able to fully scout out the opponent too early. Could end up being almost like a maphack (LOLZ). Maybe just add on 1 armour to the overlord. But that might be too much. Hard to know without a lot of testing on a custom map.

No arguments here about vT. I think that's one of the few things zergs and protosses can agree upon....don't like playing terrans. LOL.