|
So, alot of people have been saying terrans are a bit too powerful (such as yellow after his 0-3 to boxer)
i think this is a really simple balance change that one of my friends thought of:
Drop SCV health to 45
I think this is a great idea because, alot of times, bunker rushes are only really effective when a bunch of SCVs are brought along.
Also, Protoss could be a bit more intimidating to terrans early on since SCV's are alot weaker. with 45 health, dragoons could SCVs in one less shot (making for a slightly scarier dragoon rush) and terrans would have only a slightly more difficult job holding early expansions.
Overall, i think its a pretty brilliant change, since it allows for a SLIGHTLY weaker early game terran, but not alot
thoughts?
i like it 
|
I love it but I bet the Terrans are going to complain =P
|
|
|
But then again SCVs dont regain health..so...
Terrans will bitch
|
of course terrans will bitch 
but not cause of those reasons
I mean storm raids will be even more fucking devastating.. even if you do react its gotta be within 1 second reaction time (and this is with 60HP) cause leaving force behind is pretty useless if they drop 1/2 zeals before high temp. Obviously talkin about a good multitasker as a toss here i mean they can easily fight your main army with theirs and raid at the same time =/ I sound like a whining newb but it's fucking hard to play vs a good toss who plays like that ;D most people dont abuse it enough I think
how fucked up will reavers be at the beggining? 2nd radius of splash will kill them in one shot too, right? 50% dmg?
.. maybe 50HP?
|
Scvs who are given the command to build a bunk in the first 4 minutes should turn into little midgets doing the hoe down to 'ice ice baby'.
or something.
IF you care anything about balance.
|
No, that would fuck the game up.
I don't think it needs any balancing, but if anything make bunkers build slower. Still, yellow was raped fair and square those games, and bunker rushes are hard to pull off.
|
8 brax just turns the game into ling vs. rine/scv micro battle.
A zerg with good micro who doesn't 12 hat should win that battle.
I see nothing wrong with 8 brax SCV rushing. If it's annoying for terrans to whine about lowering SCV hits, it's more annoying that zergs act like it's their god given right to a free second hat without having to scout.
|
United States10774 Posts
Well anything that makes Terran weaker sounds good to me~
|
On January 03 2005 20:46 ProudCappi wrote:
No, that would fuck the game up.
I don't think it needs any balancing, but if anything make bunkers build slower. Still, yellow was raped fair and square those games, and bunker rushes are hard to pull off.
i REALLY like that thought
|
On January 03 2005 20:53 MrIncognito wrote:
8 brax just turns the game into ling vs. rine/scv micro battle.
A zerg with good micro who doesn't 12 hat should win that battle.
I see nothing wrong with 8 brax SCV rushing. If it's annoying for terrans to whine about lowering SCV hits, it's more annoying that zergs act like it's their god given right to a free second hat without having to scout.
i played like 10 games w/ froz where i early expanded on 12 and he gave me vision while doing the boxer vs yellow style bunker rush. although my micro was not incredible, only ONCE did i hold it off (happened to be the only time it was cross positions). not saying its impossible to hold off, but it is damn fucking hard. the main problem was the SCV's got in the fucking way of everything and made it impossible to win.
|
day: make a ums version of a map and change the SCV health to 45 and try doing your boxer rush experiment again.
|
On January 03 2005 21:21 SoMuchBetter wrote:
day: make a ums version of a map and change the SCV health to 45 and try doing your boxer rush experiment again.
..and how about to also post the replays afterwards? 
EDIT: also, why not try changing the bunker buildtime from 30 to 40.
|
Keeping an SCV alive in someones base is more impressive than keeping a probe alive in someones base.
Keep it at 60.
|
United States37500 Posts
On January 03 2005 21:34 Nal_Testie wrote:Keeping an SCV alive in someones base is more impressive than keeping a probe alive in someones base. Keep it at 60.
Um, why?
|
On January 03 2005 21:19 Day[9] wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2005 20:53 MrIncognito wrote:
8 brax just turns the game into ling vs. rine/scv micro battle.
A zerg with good micro who doesn't 12 hat should win that battle.
I see nothing wrong with 8 brax SCV rushing. If it's annoying for terrans to whine about lowering SCV hits, it's more annoying that zergs act like it's their god given right to a free second hat without having to scout. i played like 10 games w/ froz where i early expanded on 12 and he gave me vision while doing the boxer vs yellow style bunker rush. although my micro was not incredible, only ONCE did i hold it off (happened to be the only time it was cross positions). not saying its impossible to hold off, but it is damn fucking hard. the main problem was the SCV's got in the fucking way of everything and made it impossible to win.
What I'm saying is that a 12 hat exp build shouldn't be without risk. The terran is taking a pretty big risk by going 8 brax... if you don't 12 hat exp, he's way behind.
In any case, if it's 12/3 temple-like positions, you should see the build early enough to 12 pool or w/e. If the spots are a bit farther, drone scouting isn't the worst idea in the world.
|
On January 03 2005 21:34 Nal_Testie wrote:Keeping an SCV alive in someones base is more impressive than keeping a probe alive in someones base. Keep it at 60.
nick, that's a horrible justification lol
|
Yellow lost because he played like an stubborn noob... a 45scv is ludacris, it would die easily against annoying exploring probes and the goon rush would be a noisiance.
|
On January 03 2005 21:19 Day[9] wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2005 20:53 MrIncognito wrote:
8 brax just turns the game into ling vs. rine/scv micro battle.
A zerg with good micro who doesn't 12 hat should win that battle.
I see nothing wrong with 8 brax SCV rushing. If it's annoying for terrans to whine about lowering SCV hits, it's more annoying that zergs act like it's their god given right to a free second hat without having to scout. i played like 10 games w/ froz where i early expanded on 12 and he gave me vision while doing the boxer vs yellow style bunker rush. although my micro was not incredible, only ONCE did i hold it off (happened to be the only time it was cross positions). not saying its impossible to hold off, but it is damn fucking hard. the main problem was the SCV's got in the fucking way of everything and made it impossible to win.
Day, the point is that 8 rax is the counter to 12hatch early expand, its engineered to beat it, especially if they bring an ungodly amount of scvs. (Kind of like how joyo rush > pvt goon robo [before range]) The best approach is simply to 12 pool 11 hatch (which isn't bad on the eco) or just 11 hatch 10 pool possibly. Lowering SCV health would screw up so much other things, like storm drop / reaver drop T_T
|
Yellow should have a) 12 pooled, b) scouted earlier if he still wanted to 12 hatch (5/6 drone scout) - he played stubbornly and poorly and I'm sure he'll be willing to admit it today.
|
lots of good advises, but not going to happen sorry =[
|
yeh they would whine about stormdrops, but then again everyother race has to be CAREFUL with their workers. why not terran?
yeh terran can use their scvs to snatch victory with scv/mm micro+bunkers, but its v. difficult. My thought is i think scvs are too powerful early-game, but terran has evolved to a very high degree and they are very difficult to successfully kill/thwart their plans. the other races are by their design very dfensive, and thats why toss/zerg players are called cheesers (do or die strats) when they try to throw their weight around like terrans do. Its because with cheap turrets, scans and effective tank/mm/vulture terran has a good light counter to almost anything in the early game, throw in scvs and the other races whine hardcore. For the other races however, its much harder to have a light counter to everything (cloaked units, massfrontal assault, drop etc) without investing large sums of money and being left behind when a terran expo's and goes for t3h economic win.
Thats why i think people whine about terran, its not a question of scvs, terran is just very flexible in many situations. and a bit of costeffective walling-in / proxy rax/facting can put the pressure on an opponent who otherwise should have an upper-hand overpowering the terran. In the situations when terran cannot out -flex their opponent.
I'm tired, its probably incoherant, but how many of my ~1200 posts ever were?
|
-
The game already is very balanced and almost don’t need anymore help. Lower SCV hp to 45 would make early PvsT easier, but I believe Terran will adjust fairly quickly to the new threats. I mean do Terran players think Vulture harasses is fun for Protoss players? 2 Vultures are able to kill entire expansions, while a mass goon rush (and many other rushes) could be stopped by SCV alone.
I hate when you make a great goons rush vs. terran, great micro and macro; you beat the supply and first marines/tank. And get totally owned against mass, mass SCV which's act like a big will, that can't be killed.
-
|
On January 03 2005 19:03 dronebabo wrote:
i want scv health to be 60 when they're buildings buildings then drop to 40 when they arent
What would be the scientific explanation for this ?
|
45 health of scv is nonsence, coz of storms, upg vultures, dark templars, dragoons, reavers, early scout, 5 pool, 9 pool and so on. SCV will affect all game, coz he have to be used by terran EVERYWHERE and EVERYTIME.
My advice is, when t is so powerfull, play him.
|
On January 04 2005 00:54 thelucas wrote:
My advice is, when t is so powerfull, play him.
We're talking about balance... if everyone played 1 race sc would died about 5 years ago
|
Try to play t, then u will understand of improtance 60 hp for scv. I think this change can kill terran.
|
|
|
On January 04 2005 01:11 hasuwar wrote:
close and ban
It gives me sence , tvp and tvz is 99% balanced.
|
Iraq1230 Posts
perfect if u are zerg, not perfect if u are terran 
SCV:s should be at 60 otherwise zerg dont even need to think about rush and do like 12 hatch 13 pool and still manage to stay alive.
|
when did the game become so unbalanced?
since boxer owned yellow 3-0 with a perfect counter build?
i dont think it is statistically correct to judge the balance of a game from the achievements of what, 30? progamers?
|
Norway28674 Posts
agreed with testie
and probe harassing would be far too annoying with 45 hp scvs. I'll support this idea if protoss probes can't leave the buildings they are building.(no, I don't want this. )
|
|
|
SCVs have faster attacking speed for some reason. Ridiculous. Make their attack speed 1.5 cooldown of drones.
|
This is not a problem of balance. To change anything except underused units would destroy the very thing I play starcraft for - the very delicate balance that it achieved. What people need to understand is that during all the time starcraft is around, there always was something that people thought of as imbalance. Sometimes they were right but mostly the trouble was just to find the right counter. I think that this is such a situation. So stop whining and start practicing and experimenting. And yes, I am a terran player...
|
the only acceptable changes to sc balance at this point would be tiny changes to vastly underused units
so no cutting scv health by 1/4 please
|
Norway10161 Posts
a better change is giving drones more hp and/or faster attack.
|
drones should have +1 armor > , more health of faster life regeneration. They are just too weak for scouting. I think other things are balanced enought on balanced maps. One thing that is annoying me is spider mine splash damage. I mean you can loose 2-3 dragoons in early stage of game just to one mine if they are damaged before.
|
Btw. do marines get any range addition once they are inside the bunker ? The bunker is a large structure that fires, not only a single unit placed in a certain sqare, so I am wondering how the radius of any of four marines is calculated.
|
why can't zerg do any build other than 12 hat
if you make bunker build times longer then pulling off any bunker rush is nearly impossible
bunker rushing is part of the game because it keeps zerg from getting away with 12 hat if you as terran go for a lower econ playing style. nerfing bunker rushes dumbs down the game, which is always bad.
|
Faster drone attack might be a good solution. Make drone the king of peons and that should solve it:D
I really think all balance is in the maps though. To be fair the pro map circuit has been really T friendly for a long time now. If nothing else Terran gets good chances to show their "Consistancy" where they can defend well and keep a tough balled up force at the same time.
|
|
|
Norway28674 Posts
drones are already the kings of the peons.
|
|
|
jesus christ if terran scv hp was lowered to 45 the zerg could just 4 pool and win every game
|
|
|
then as some1 suggested at SG make so that medics cannot heal scv, they already can be repaired by scvs.
|
ah come on powering drones would make 2 gate even less powerful.
|
i think we should just go back to how it was in 1.07, i was happy then
|
why 45? I think 50 would be enough -_-;
|
|
|
On January 04 2005 04:22 ygor wrote:
Btw. do marines get any range addition once they are inside the bunker ? The bunker is a large structure that fires, not only a single unit placed in a certain sqare, so I am wondering how the radius of any of four marines is calculated.
Marines and Ghosts in a bunker get +1 range, and I think the distance is calculated from the middle of the bunker?
-
On January 04 2005 07:06 araav wrote:
then as some1 suggested at SG make so that medics cannot heal scv, they already can be repaired by scvs.
If you do that SCVs are no longer bio, so u'll have to make them invulnerable to Maelstrom and Irradiate as well :O
On January 04 2005 07:57 Famouzze wrote:i think we should just go back to how it was in 1.07, i was happy then
Why don't we go back to 1.04-1.06, when a sunken was 400 hp 40 dmg :[
or even better, before 1.02 when cannon damage was explosive, that should be fun :S
|
actually, my mistake, 1.07 was also 400 hp 40 dmg sunken :S
i still say we should go back to 1.02, 500 gas for arbiter is just too good XD
|
On January 04 2005 08:41 [G]Max_Power wrote:
make scv mine 4 minerals
OMFG you must be retarded.
|
in ways i would like terran scv's to be lowerd.... but being a random gamer i would hate it when i was terran lol
|
i bunk rushed hnr)nazarene 4 times, it was fun:D
|
Netherlands13554 Posts
On January 04 2005 05:03 Liquid`Drone wrote:
drones are already the kings of the peons.
drones suck
snakkes no re.
|
On January 04 2005 10:13 Twisted wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2005 05:03 Liquid`Drone wrote:
drones are already the kings of the peons.
drones suck snakkes no re.
hmz hmz hmz
the icon for the ranged units' attack upgrade in the evo chamber is in fact the icon of Drone's attack which is very similar yet different than the hydra's one
so hey why not give the silly drone the attack upgs as well
it's very cruicial if u play workers-only game
btw scvs sux in that, have u ever tried killing a +3 plasma probe with an scv :[ it sux the plasma regenerates by the time u do any dmg :s
|
Netherlands4511 Posts
the only reason people like satanik, ig.crack, and iv.goody even win terran vs zerg games is cuz bunker rush is so fucking imbalanced, when these people are able to sneak even 1 game away from someone like midian, something is obviously wrong. Doubt the imbalance will ever get fixed tho.
|
OMG, blah blah blah. Look on progamers scene, no more than 10 % of tvz are rushes. Some time before i saw perfect conter on 8rax rush on mercury played against nada. Z kicked his ass in 8 min. Sry but i dont remeber that game.
This is theme only for total newbies, whose rather cry than try to learn play.
|
Yea I agree, Twisted, ret and Drone are total newbies.
Oh no wait... i'm talking crap.
|
I have been thinking about scv`s hp through this day.
Becouse scv has 60 hp t player can with good micro find out what you are doing. I mean he can even find out about hidden tech and such. First I thought how it would be if dragoons does 15 damage to scv ( normal is 10). Scv would die with just 4 shoots from dragoon. That was not so good idea obviously. Scv would die too fast. But what if scv`s hp is 50, and dragoons damage stays at 10? I think it would be good. Dragoons will have to hit scv 5 times before it dies. It would lower time scv can stay in your base, and terran player couldn`t find out what you are doing that easy. IMO. This would also prevent scv`s from owning dragoons so badly. How many times were you in situation where your expensive dragoons are owning by scv`s? Do you remember Iloveoov vs Reach where Iloveoov defended with scv`s vs dragoons and won? Were you ever in situation where you attacked t player, curshed his defence line, and then you headed to his choke, and there you find 5+ scv`s and tank or two? That sux. You cannot kill scv`s fast enought, and tanks are owning your dragoons. So you have to retreat. This would be good for zergs too, becouse bunker rush wouldn`t be so good. Zerg could easily defend that rush. The only thing that would be imbalanced is zerg early 4-9 pool rush. But with scv`s on choke and marine it shouldn`t be problem T_T. To terran players remember how weak drones are, and how fast can few vultures kill all mining probes at protoss base . And how much they cost 75 minerals or so? I think that dragoons for its cost should be more effective against scv`s.
Yes you can flame me.
|
I like the idea of strengthening drones
|
My imho that Zergs are still overpowered, I think many people will say that in about year. Zerg has so many great strats they can use. Zergs are very strong and they starting to rule now. And drone has longer attack range than SCV, so this give you a chance to micro your drones better then terr's micro of SCV (but I don't think terr need great micro of SCV with marines, he just needs to put them in the right place in the right time).
PS Could someone write for me BO of Boxer vs YellOw bunker rush, cos I don't think I can see this VOD soon. Thx in advance.
|
United States4991 Posts
I think SCV should just attack at the rate of Drone/Probe. I'm not saying the reason SCVs are overpowered for stuff like Bunker rush is that they attack quicker, but it's just dumb that they attack quicker. I can see the reason for the extra life for SCVs, but not for the quicker attack 
|
Maybe not such a drastical change as to 45, but maybe 50, 55?
|
;D Making scvs 45 would be retarded, theyd die so easy to muta harass and probe harass and goon harass ;d
Goon rushes are already hard enough to hold off if you go 2 fact vult and only make one tank, not to mention changing them just for bunker rushing and thereby totally fucking up tvp is retarded ;D
|
I like the idea of increasing the Bunker build time, and making the SCVs attack rate the same as the Probe and Drone. ElegantSolution I think you don't know what you're talking about.
|
On January 04 2005 02:34 WickeD wrote:
This is not a problem of balance. To change anything except underused units would destroy the very thing I play starcraft for - the very delicate balance that it achieved. What people need to understand is that during all the time starcraft is around, there always was something that people thought of as imbalance. Sometimes they were right but mostly the trouble was just to find the right counter. I think that this is such a situation. So stop whining and start practicing and experimenting. And yes, I am a terran player...
You had 1.08, stfu.
|
scv's hp doesnt need any change... what needs balancing is....
>>Dragoon's AI.. i dont think any protoss player can disagree with this -_-
>>the fact that 4 goliaths can go into a dropship..
>>and... prob balance vultures a bit... considering their cost, they are far more effective than any other units.
i mean.. a 75 mineral unit having same damage as dragoon(although they do less damage on dragoon's actual hp), and a longer range than a non-upgraded dragoon... but dragoons have longer range when upgraded...
|
On January 03 2005 18:57 Day[9] wrote:So, alot of people have been saying terrans are a bit too powerful (such as yellow after his 0-3 to boxer) i think this is a really simple balance change that one of my friends thought of: Drop SCV health to 45 I think this is a great idea because, alot of times, bunker rushes are only really effective when a bunch of SCVs are brought along. Also, Protoss could be a bit more intimidating to terrans early on since SCV's are alot weaker. with 45 health, dragoons could SCVs in one less shot (making for a slightly scarier dragoon rush) and terrans would have only a slightly more difficult job holding early expansions. Overall, i think its a pretty brilliant change, since it allows for a SLIGHTLY weaker early game terran, but not alot thoughts? i like it
1. No SCV health should not be dropped to 45.
-This will make it harder for scv's to repair walls when toss goon rush
-It will make reaver, lurker, vult, tank, stimmed marines, hydra, and High temp drops the new fads
-Terren will have a hard time scouting Toss and Zerg, making them have to "guess" their opponents build everygame because scouting scv will die too quick
-Probe > SCV = No thx
PS. Any direct quotes from Yellow crying about getting owned?
|
He never said anything about balance changes as far as i know. It was the other gamers (not progamers) requesting these changes.
|
On January 04 2005 08:41 [G]Max_Power wrote:
make scv mine 4 minerals
Bullshit. Give scvs 200 hp, 5 armor and Gauss rifles and make them mine nothing. Oh, and make bunker cost 0.
|
the thing is...
SCV cannot regenerate like zerg or protoss, and have to stay with the building and need slightly higher hitpoints.
The problem is that mostly protoss and to some degree zerg lack basic fighting units to kill off SCVs in large numbers.
Lowering hitpoints of SCV to 50 would mean that they'd be badly owned by reavers, but hen again reavers are kind of screwed up right now with extremely poor scarab ai.
Making SCVs medium-sized would be good news for hydras and goons (would it affect dropship capacity?), but then like above, reavers would own them badly.
Ideally I feel that SCVs could have 50 hitpoints, but the reaver makes it impossible imo. Hence leave it at 60.
EDIT: Instead of focusing on balance changes, not that many units need tweaking (scout, infested terran), fixing ai for goons or scarabs would be nice, and most importantly: a map visible from start option (still with FOV of course).
|
Just giving drone some bonuses should do it. An additonal +1 on attack range would own.
|
If you gonna make the SCVs health 45, make sieged Tanks hit stuff under Dark Swarm.
I'm willing to trade for that.
|
that's cool but imagine vs toss, ur scv wouldn't be able to wall the marines in front of the goons, they could die pretty easy. GG for Marine Rush
|
terran`user - he covered a few of your points.
and the issue about muta/storm/reaver harass... zerg and toss also need to worry about that! why should terrans get that little extra bonus for more reaction time? terran tanks are already godly enough..
why can't the bunker time be increased?
does it change anything? i think it wouldn't matter.. as the scvs will hold off the lings for such a long period of time. but i guess that would be of some help..
If you gonna make the SCVs health 45, make sieged Tanks hit stuff under Dark Swarm.
I'm willing to trade for that.
haha.. in your dreams! you'll never be able to hit my precious lurkers.
|
On January 03 2005 19:35 radiaL wrote:of course terrans will bitch but not cause of those reasons I mean storm raids will be even more fucking devastating.. even if you do react its gotta be within 1 second reaction time (and this is with 60HP) cause leaving force behind is pretty useless if they drop 1/2 zeals before high temp. Obviously talkin about a good multitasker as a toss here i mean they can easily fight your main army with theirs and raid at the same time =/ I sound like a whining newb but it's fucking hard to play vs a good toss who plays like that ;D most people dont abuse it enough I think how fucked up will reavers be at the beggining? 2nd radius of splash will kill them in one shot too, right? 50% dmg? .. maybe 50HP?
You've never played with toss/zerg or what? I mean with toss/zerg you have to deal against reaver and storms with peons that only have 40 hp..... Why terran should have a bonus of hp for there peons....it gives them more time to react/escape and it makes total nonsense...
|
On January 04 2005 19:02 Bladox wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2005 19:35 radiaL wrote:of course terrans will bitch but not cause of those reasons I mean storm raids will be even more fucking devastating.. even if you do react its gotta be within 1 second reaction time (and this is with 60HP) cause leaving force behind is pretty useless if they drop 1/2 zeals before high temp. Obviously talkin about a good multitasker as a toss here i mean they can easily fight your main army with theirs and raid at the same time =/ I sound like a whining newb but it's fucking hard to play vs a good toss who plays like that ;D most people dont abuse it enough I think how fucked up will reavers be at the beggining? 2nd radius of splash will kill them in one shot too, right? 50% dmg? .. maybe 50HP? You've never played with toss/zerg or what? I mean with toss/zerg you have to deal against reaver and storms with peons that only have 40 hp..... Why terran should have a bonus of hp for there peons....it gives them more time to react/escape and it makes total nonsense...
Because that is not the source of the imbalance. If that is changed, terran becomes weaker.
Anyways, terran usually has fewer bases with more scv at each base. If they die faster, terran would lose many more scvs than say zerg.
|
You guys are attempting to defy the mechanics of the game...
You're saying that a RUSH strategy, shoudln't be able to beat a FAST EXPAND strategy? Wtf? You have to take a step back and look at what is beating what - as stated countless times before, fast expand is a privilege, not a right. And so you try to fast expand and you get _rushed_ and you call it inbalance? You want to make it so the zerg can comfortably fast expand every game and even if the terran sacs so much econ to 8rax [a risk in itself if the zerg plays safely] it's no use?
Bitch plz reconsider before you state more bullshit about how scvs are overpowered.
|
|
|
On January 04 2005 19:14 ProudCappi wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2005 19:02 Bladox wrote:On January 03 2005 19:35 radiaL wrote:of course terrans will bitch but not cause of those reasons I mean storm raids will be even more fucking devastating.. even if you do react its gotta be within 1 second reaction time (and this is with 60HP) cause leaving force behind is pretty useless if they drop 1/2 zeals before high temp. Obviously talkin about a good multitasker as a toss here i mean they can easily fight your main army with theirs and raid at the same time =/ I sound like a whining newb but it's fucking hard to play vs a good toss who plays like that ;D most people dont abuse it enough I think how fucked up will reavers be at the beggining? 2nd radius of splash will kill them in one shot too, right? 50% dmg? .. maybe 50HP? You've never played with toss/zerg or what? I mean with toss/zerg you have to deal against reaver and storms with peons that only have 40 hp..... Why terran should have a bonus of hp for there peons....it gives them more time to react/escape and it makes total nonsense... Because that is not the source of the imbalance. If that is changed, terran becomes weaker. Anyways, terran usually has fewer bases with more scv at each base. If they die faster, terran would lose many more scvs than say zerg.
Terran has fewer bases only vs zergs(zergs=no stomrs and no reaver) and it is a great advantage as zergs always have to deal with lots of ''less defended'' bases. But playing agaisnt ptotoss they both have the same number of bases.
As I think scv'S health need to be decreased I dont know to how many hp it have to be fixed.
For the ''probes increased'' thing I think it is not a good idea at all since my sexy probes are always owning bunches of zealots in early zvp but if you insist.. do it
|
Instead of decreasing SCV HP to 40 lets increase Probe hp to 40 (20 shield still) and Drone HP to 60.
|
United States4991 Posts
I posted this earlier I thought, but I guess my post didn't register or something :O
I think SCVs should just attack at the speed of Probes/Drones. It's not a huge thing, but I see no reason for SCVs to attack quicker than Probes and Drones
|
On January 04 2005 19:45 HnR)Insane wrote:I posted this earlier I thought, but I guess my post didn't register or something :O I think SCVs should just attack at the speed of Probes/Drones. It's not a huge thing, but I see no reason for SCVs to attack quicker than Probes and Drones
I think the reason of this speedy attack is that even if the scv pilot looks like a total moron he still have better reflex that his 2 cousins aka the dumb spitting crab and the fucked up AI peon. ^^
|
exalted - i'm no zvt pro, but doesn't zerg need that 2nd base sooner rather than later in order to even compete with terran?
|
On January 04 2005 19:45 HnR)Insane wrote:I posted this earlier I thought, but I guess my post didn't register or something :O I think SCVs should just attack at the speed of Probes/Drones. It's not a huge thing, but I see no reason for SCVs to attack quicker than Probes and Drones
OK, then give scvs range.
|
hnr)insane: check the earlier page -_-, it did register it just was a little farther back see
On January 04 2005 12:51 HnR)Insane wrote:I think SCV should just attack at the rate of Drone/Probe. I'm not saying the reason SCVs are overpowered for stuff like Bunker rush is that they attack quicker, but it's just dumb that they attack quicker. I can see the reason for the extra life for SCVs, but not for the quicker attack
and i think changing SCV health from 60 to 45 or even lowering cooldown is a dumb idea --;
*maybe* bunker build time change
|
On January 04 2005 19:28 Bladox wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2005 19:14 ProudCappi wrote:On January 04 2005 19:02 Bladox wrote:On January 03 2005 19:35 radiaL wrote:of course terrans will bitch but not cause of those reasons I mean storm raids will be even more fucking devastating.. even if you do react its gotta be within 1 second reaction time (and this is with 60HP) cause leaving force behind is pretty useless if they drop 1/2 zeals before high temp. Obviously talkin about a good multitasker as a toss here i mean they can easily fight your main army with theirs and raid at the same time =/ I sound like a whining newb but it's fucking hard to play vs a good toss who plays like that ;D most people dont abuse it enough I think how fucked up will reavers be at the beggining? 2nd radius of splash will kill them in one shot too, right? 50% dmg? .. maybe 50HP? You've never played with toss/zerg or what? I mean with toss/zerg you have to deal against reaver and storms with peons that only have 40 hp..... Why terran should have a bonus of hp for there peons....it gives them more time to react/escape and it makes total nonsense... Because that is not the source of the imbalance. If that is changed, terran becomes weaker. Anyways, terran usually has fewer bases with more scv at each base. If they die faster, terran would lose many more scvs than say zerg. Terran has fewer bases only vs zergs(zergs=no stomrs and no reaver) and it is a great advantage as zergs always have to deal with lots of ''less defended'' bases. But playing agaisnt ptotoss they both have the same number of bases. As I think scv'S health need to be decreased I dont know to how many hp it have to be fixed. For the ''probes increased'' thing I think it is not a good idea at all since my sexy probes are always owning bunches of zealots in early zvp but if you insist.. do it
Terran always has fewer bases, even versus P.
And lowering scv health would make terran weaker to drops.
|
Russian Federation4447 Posts
On January 04 2005 19:24 exalted wrote:
You guys are attempting to defy the mechanics of the game...
You're saying that a RUSH strategy, shoudln't be able to beat a FAST EXPAND strategy? Wtf? You have to take a step back and look at what is beating what - as stated countless times before, fast expand is a privilege, not a right. And so you try to fast expand and you get _rushed_ and you call it inbalance? You want to make it so the zerg can comfortably fast expand every game and even if the terran sacs so much econ to 8rax [a risk in itself if the zerg plays safely] it's no use?
Bitch plz reconsider before you state more bullshit about how scvs are overpowered.
If you think fighting terran using 1 base zerg is easy, than shut up and play good terrans using zerg, and go 1 base every game. See how many you actually win. You know why 12/3 positions are so hard for zerg? 2 reasons:
number 1 reason is because zerg doesnt have a fast expansion to work with
2nd is positions are close. So now that we have proven that zergs need a fast expansion just to be equal to a terran, lets discuss the other things you said.
8 rax is risky. Bullshit.
Standard build for terran: double rax
Standard build for zerg: Fast expo
Even start off
Terran going 8 rax has a higher percentage of winning every game.
Zerg going 9 pool has a very low percentage of winning every game.
Considering the other race is going STANDARD BUILD.
12 pooling every game starts zerg off at a disadvantage if terran goes standard build!
A rush build beats a fast expo build. True. But how many terrans do you see fast expoing compared to zergs????
See the disadvantage here?!?! Its so fucking obvious. Just connect the dots and put your ego aside.
All im suggesting is one thing:
- Increase bunker building time (these things build in like 2 secs)
Thats all! Is it too hard? I believe weakening scvs is too harsh against protoss. But since terrans dont need bunkers vs toss I believe this is fair.
I find it insulting that terrans believe it is their god given right to abuse advantages whenever they see fit and openly say it isnt an advantage.
In return for this minor change, I am perfectly happy to weaken the ultra/ling combo for protosses. Or make certain protoss units stronger so that they can fight ultra/ling easier.
Unlike you, im willing to admit to an advantage when I see one.
|
Yep, 9 pool and 12 pool are the only other options besides fast expo for zerg!
|
Russian Federation4447 Posts
On January 04 2005 20:33 ProudCappi wrote:
Yep, 9 pool and 12 pool are the only other options besides fast expo for zerg!
Yeah there is 6 pool and 4 pool.
Maybe you should actually read what I wrote. I covered all possible openings of the zerg. Yes that includes in main hatchery!!
|
Well, there's 12 hatch 11 pool.
Anyways, 9 pools don't = a loss. They can set the course for the game.
|
im a terran user and even i agree that bunker build time should be increased
|
AFTER your changes z and p builds will change, coz option of starting game for t will decrease.
Normal z build can change on 14 hatch 13 pool, one scv will die after shoot of 6 mutas. Reaver drops will be insane. I like to play z.
This change will not help community, will not help z and p but it will hurt to all people, when t will slowly disapper. Now t has the lowest percentage of winning on PGT, WGT.
And tell me! Really 8 rax has no counter and is unbeatable?
|
On January 04 2005 20:30 Tien wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2005 19:24 exalted wrote:
You guys are attempting to defy the mechanics of the game...
You're saying that a RUSH strategy, shoudln't be able to beat a FAST EXPAND strategy? Wtf? You have to take a step back and look at what is beating what - as stated countless times before, fast expand is a privilege, not a right. And so you try to fast expand and you get _rushed_ and you call it inbalance? You want to make it so the zerg can comfortably fast expand every game and even if the terran sacs so much econ to 8rax [a risk in itself if the zerg plays safely] it's no use?
Bitch plz reconsider before you state more bullshit about how scvs are overpowered. If you think fighting terran using 1 base zerg is easy, than shut up and play good terrans using zerg, and go 1 base every game. See how many you actually win. You know why 12/3 positions are so hard for zerg? 2 reasons: number 1 reason is because zerg doesnt have a fast expansion to work with 2nd is positions are close. So now that we have proven that zergs need a fast expansion just to be equal to a terran, lets discuss the other things you said. 8 rax is risky. Bullshit. Standard build for terran: double rax Standard build for zerg: Fast expo Even start off Terran going 8 rax has a higher percentage of winning every game. Zerg going 9 pool has a very low percentage of winning every game. Considering the other race is going STANDARD BUILD. 12 pooling every game starts zerg off at a disadvantage if terran goes standard build! A rush build beats a fast expo build. True. But how many terrans do you see fast expoing compared to zergs???? See the disadvantage here?!?! Its so fucking obvious. Just connect the dots and put your ego aside. All im suggesting is one thing: - Increase bunker building time (these things build in like 2 secs) Thats all! Is it too hard? I believe weakening scvs is too harsh against protoss. But since terrans dont need bunkers vs toss I believe this is fair. I find it insulting that terrans believe it is their god given right to abuse advantages whenever they see fit and openly say it isnt an advantage. In return for this minor change, I am perfectly happy to weaken the ultra/ling combo for protosses. Or make certain protoss units stronger so that they can fight ultra/ling easier. Unlike you, im willing to admit to an advantage when I see one.
uhm dunno, i really don't think ultra/lings is imbalanced cuz if z has so many ultra /lings he would've prolly won with any other combo anyway cuz u let him get too much exps... and i'm p player, storms is too good vs ultra lings dunno why they make it all archon/zeal, storms is deadly =o storm even get the ultras like they have no armor.... dunno i've never really had any real problms with ultra/ling combo, more with guardians lings lurkers sunkens. Anyway i also think bunker rush although easy to pull off (even i won a game vs satanik like a year ago when i was even noobier and i didn't play terran at all) and wining vs better players, so is having a real easy fast exp as a zerg player, cuz admit it z players it gives you a real awesome advantage as well, u can lurk / muta and terran is really fucked unless they got godly micro... so i dunno :D
|
why would storm drop kill scvs faster with 45 hp than 60? isnt it 20 seconds per second with storms
|
On January 05 2005 00:11 TreK[cF] wrote:
why would storm drop kill scvs faster with 45 hp than 60? isnt it 20 seconds per second with storms
45 is less than 60
U think storm takes 20 damage per second?
So it will last 3 seconds to kill scv.
Storm takes about 115 damage maximaly and it dont last 6 seconds
|
On January 04 2005 15:36 cacat wrote:
scv's hp doesnt need any change... what needs balancing is....
>>Dragoon's AI.. i dont think any protoss player can disagree with this -_-
>>the fact that 4 goliaths can go into a dropship..
>>and... prob balance vultures a bit... considering their cost, they are far more effective than any other units.
i mean.. a 75 mineral unit having same damage as dragoon(although they do less damage on dragoon's actual hp), and a longer range than a non-upgraded dragoon... but dragoons have longer range when upgraded...
vultures not being able to shoot air and having concussive (omg sux) dmg type makes their value exactly 75 minerals
how much would u like them to cost? 100? like zealot? sure, vultures can eat zealots up, but only if u micro them ~
besides, a cannon can take down 3 or maybe even 4 vults shooting at it.. 4 vults cost like 2 cannons now and if ull change cost 3 vults will cost like it :O
On January 04 2005 19:24 exalted wrote:
You guys are attempting to defy the mechanics of the game...
You're saying that a RUSH strategy, shoudln't be able to beat a FAST EXPAND strategy? Wtf? You have to take a step back and look at what is beating what - as stated countless times before, fast expand is a privilege, not a right. And so you try to fast expand and you get _rushed_ and you call it inbalance? You want to make it so the zerg can comfortably fast expand every game and even if the terran sacs so much econ to 8rax [a risk in itself if the zerg plays safely] it's no use?
Bitch plz reconsider before you state more bullshit about how scvs are overpowered.
I agree with this the most &_&
I'm no Z player and obviosuly by what Tien says it's reallyrealylreally hard beating a terran with one base but expecting to start with 2 bases as a granted fact is just out of place
besides, if boxer would have done anythin except that 8 rax, yellow could have exp and defended it, right?
its an anti-exp build
so even tho it sux for a zerg to go 1 base etc., if he would do one of the builds u suggested against 8 rax, the terran build which makes him behind will make up for the zerg having to deal with 1 base
|
i didn't know storm damage was a matter of opinion
|
Norway28674 Posts
regarding storm
if I remember correctly, it used to be 8 x 16 damage
it is now 8 x 14
(went from 128 to 112)
however each of those attacks are not "per second"
and this does indeed mean that it makes a difference.
but that's not the important reason why scvs should have 60 hp. they need that kind of hp when repairing buildings under attack and to withstand peonharassment while building buildings.
if you are seriously under the opinion that terran > all then I'm sure you can justify this.
however personally as a random player, I'd hate this. of course, as a random player I never encounter rax before depot builds and I can safely fast expand every zvt I play, but whatever.
|
i still dont see why everyone think sc is so imbalanced all of a sudden.
funny that zerg players suddenly start to complain about the unbeatable 8 rax strat just because it happened in ONE progamer final.
i mean, its not like boxer invented bunker rushes, they have been around for years but suddenly they are imbalanced.
|
You who complaint answer this. Why is this strat used som few times, when u find it so imbalanced on a progaming scene?
|
On January 04 2005 20:30 Tien wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2005 19:24 exalted wrote:
You guys are attempting to defy the mechanics of the game...
You're saying that a RUSH strategy, shoudln't be able to beat a FAST EXPAND strategy? Wtf? You have to take a step back and look at what is beating what - as stated countless times before, fast expand is a privilege, not a right. And so you try to fast expand and you get _rushed_ and you call it inbalance? You want to make it so the zerg can comfortably fast expand every game and even if the terran sacs so much econ to 8rax [a risk in itself if the zerg plays safely] it's no use?
Bitch plz reconsider before you state more bullshit about how scvs are overpowered. blahblahbalh
That's great, except 12/3 isn't difficult for zerg because of the fact he can't fast expo, but becuase its hard for the zerg to get control of the middle as well as DEFENDING his expo as soon as he takes it because they are close. Has nothing to do with bunker rushes, fast expoing on close positions is RETARDED anyway.
Increase bunker time? How about we just increase hatchery build time for the same increase that we add bunker time? Would gladly do that. At least you're not talking about lowering SCV health, but I'd also gladly lower SCVs to 45 if lings are reduced to 30.
|
If you reduce lings life to 30, zvp would be fucked. Zeal does 16 damage to ling right, and with 2 hits ling is dead.
|
12v3 is obviously a map imbalance and has nothing to do with the balance of the game.
|
Some people want to does not exist any strategy to beat Z 12 hatch ^^.
8 rax is only strategy on this buil, when Z use any another build, t is in da shit.
|
to anyone bitching about 8 rax
go 12 pool then hatch, 8 rax sucks ass against it if i'm not mistaken
|
On January 05 2005 05:15 thelucas wrote:
Some people want to does not exist any strategy to beat Z 12 hatch ^^.
8 rax is only strategy on this buil, when Z use any another build, t is in da shit.
plz learn english and stop sucking with T and giving advice and then using ^^
actually all of you stop using ^^ -it makes you look like a dumbass
|
|
|
Most likely blizzard will not change scv hp.
IMO blizzard needs to impruve scarab ai, so he can`t miss once fired.
|
when did starcraft get so imbalanced?
because boxer beat yellow 3-0?
because some terrans are cheesing a lot in ladders?
sorry, but these are not reasons for claiming that tvz is imbalanced, i always considered it the most balanced matchup, bunker rush or no bunker rush, its not like 8 rax is an unstoppable strategy or something, but the way some people are posting here, you would start to believe it.
|
This is waste of time. Coz people dont want to balance bw, but they want to dismiss all little things and strategies, they dont like.
|
Russian Federation4447 Posts
Exalted..... 
I never liked tree in the first place but now I understand why he hates you so much.
lings reduced to 30? What are you talking about? Do you even use your brain to think? Ever heard of ZvP? What makes increasing bunker build time so impossibly difficult for you? Even though you dont even need to bunker rush a zerg to win a game.
Increasing bunker time does not mean there will be no more bunker rushes, it just means it will be easier to fight them off to maintain an equal footing.
This is an obvious terran advantage early game.
|
I used to think only the protoss players whine but now the zerg's are taking over that.
|
United States4991 Posts
I don't see why SCVs should be made ranged if they had cooldown like Probe/Drone. Even with the increased cooldown, they still would have 20 more life than Probe/Drone...
|
Russian Federation4447 Posts
Well terrans used to whine back in the day when 2 hatcheries produced as much as 3 today.
And they also whined about zerg rushes so Blizzard gave them what they want and bumped the pool to 200 bucks. This helped protosses too.
|
On January 05 2005 09:36 Tien wrote:
Well terrans used to whine back in the day when 2 hatcheries produced as much as 3 today.
And they also whined about zerg rushes so Blizzard gave them what they want and bumped the pool to 200 bucks. This helped protosses too.
90% of the 1.08 changes were to stop newbie terrans from bitching.
The funny thing is that quick rax builds are much more devastating now than ling rushes were back then.
|
On January 05 2005 09:40 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2005 09:36 Tien wrote:
Well terrans used to whine back in the day when 2 hatcheries produced as much as 3 today.
And they also whined about zerg rushes so Blizzard gave them what they want and bumped the pool to 200 bucks. This helped protosses too. 90% of the 1.08 changes were to stop newbie terrans from bitching. The funny thing is that quick rax builds are much more devastating now than ling rushes were back then.
Pro terrans were also fucked up. Pretty much only boxer managed to shine as a T.
EDIT: And exalted was clearly joking about the zerg health. He was making a point.
|
On January 05 2005 09:56 ProudCappi wrote:
Pro terrans were also fucked up. Pretty much only boxer managed to shine as a T.
Boxer knew what he was doing, others did not. It's as simple as that.
|
Russian Federation4447 Posts
I guess I didnt see that joke.
But I was being serious and never did I mentioned anything about reducing scv health so I dunno why he would say something about lowering ling health to me.
|
On January 05 2005 09:58 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2005 09:56 ProudCappi wrote:
Pro terrans were also fucked up. Pretty much only boxer managed to shine as a T. Boxer knew what he was doing, others did not. It's as simple as that.
No, it isn't...
Do you seriously think that if the changes were undone the game would be more balanced!? You can't. No one is saying that the game is imbalanced other than bunker rushing besides chobo zergs.
And there is even dispute over the imbalance of bunker rushing, or whether it is just the maps.
|
On January 05 2005 10:07 ProudCappi wrote:
Do you seriously think that if the changes were undone the game would be more balanced!? You can't. No one is saying that the game is imbalanced other than bunker rushing besides chobo zergs.
Ah yes, chobo zergs who can't stop a bunker rush... You realize that yellow has claimed imbalance since long before bunker rushing became a fad. It's not that zerg's CAN'T stop bunker rushes, it's that doing a build that does stop them is detrimental.
Most of the 1.08 changes were fine. Here's a list of the stupid 1.08 changes.
Missile Turret:
- Decreased cost to 75 minerals. - stupid change. Only put in effect because newbie terrans bitched about lurker/dt.
Hydralisk Den:
- Lurker Aspect cost increased to 200 minerals, 200 gas. - fucking stupid change put in effect because newbie terrans couldn't stop fast lurk builds
Spawning Pool:
- Increased build cost to 200 minerals - again, fucking stupid. Honestly, what decent player had trouble against 4pool/6pool back then?
And there is even dispute over the imbalance of bunker rushing, or whether it is just the maps.
Obviously maps play a role.
|
No, yellow has always been whining.
And turrets shouldn't cost the same as bunkers. Zerg would be and was overpowered without the patch. Terran would be fucked early game without that.
|
On January 05 2005 10:44 ProudCappi wrote:
No, yellow has always been whining.
There's a difference between whining and telling what one honestly believes. Have you looked at tournament results since 1.08 came out? They pretty much back up yellow's claims.
And turrets shouldn't cost the same as bunkers.
They wouldn't cost the same as bunkers, bunkers cost 300 mins with 4 rines in them.
Zerg would be and was overpowered without the patch. Terran would be fucked early game without that.
I disagree.
|
you have got to be kidding me if you thought 1.07 was better balanced then 1.08, to me most of you just seem like a bunch of whiners, if you think zvt is so imbalanced, then maybe you should try to play some pvz (which imo isnt imbalanced at all, but there are so many people who whine about it).
|
On January 05 2005 10:54 pfff wrote:
you have got to be kidding me if you thought 1.07 was better balanced then 1.08
If you're refering to me; I never said this.
|
If terran SCV drop hp down to 45 I demand Drones+Probe drop HP to 10 and cant regain HP over time
|
On January 05 2005 11:03 LetMeBeWithYou wrote:
If terran SCV drop hp down to 45 I demand Drones+Probe drop HP to 10 and cant regain HP over time
Yes because dropping scv hp to a reasonable level would be so fucking imbalanced. 
|
On January 03 2005 20:53 MrIncognito wrote:
I see nothing wrong with 8 brax SCV rushing. If it's annoying for terrans to whine about lowering SCV hits, it's more annoying that zergs act like it's their god given right to a free second hat without having to scout.
EXACTLY!
|
On January 05 2005 10:41 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2005 10:07 ProudCappi wrote:
Do you seriously think that if the changes were undone the game would be more balanced!? You can't. No one is saying that the game is imbalanced other than bunker rushing besides chobo zergs. Ah yes, chobo zergs who can't stop a bunker rush... You realize that yellow has claimed imbalance since long before bunker rushing became a fad. It's not that zerg's CAN'T stop bunker rushes, it's that doing a build that does stop them is detrimental. Most of the 1.08 changes were fine. Here's a list of the stupid 1.08 changes. Missile Turret: - Decreased cost to 75 minerals. - stupid change. Only put in effect because newbie terrans bitched about lurker/dt.Hydralisk Den: - Lurker Aspect cost increased to 200 minerals, 200 gas. - fucking stupid change put in effect because newbie terrans couldn't stop fast lurk buildsSpawning Pool: - Increased build cost to 200 minerals - again, fucking stupid. Honestly, what decent player had trouble against 4pool/6pool back then?Show nested quote +And there is even dispute over the imbalance of bunker rushing, or whether it is just the maps. Obviously maps play a role.
Don't even post if you're going to be that biased for zerg. Christ.
|
I'm a T player , in all objectivity such changes are almost impossible , if T is slighty better , it's impossible to change that by increasing or descreasing a simple unit HP .
Also and the most important : Faggot biased zerg players , go kill yourselves , thanks
|
On January 05 2005 11:10 RiSE wrote:
Don't even post if you're going to be that biased for zerg. Christ.
It's hard to not be biased when zerg has won about 1/3 of the tournies toss has won in the past 4 years, and about 1/8th what terran has won.
|
On January 05 2005 11:14 Lykathea[Go] wrote:
I'm a T player , in all objectivity such changes are almost impossible , if T is slighty better , it's impossible to change that by increasing or descreasing a simple unit HP .
This thread is not about the overall matchup, it was about one facet of the matchup.
|
45 is a bit harsh, I say lower SCV hp to 50.
One creative solution would be to put Scv health down to 45 or 50 but give them 2 armor when building to suit the original purpose of being not so easy to interrupt construction.
|
On January 04 2005 20:30 Tien wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2005 19:24 exalted wrote:
You guys are attempting to defy the mechanics of the game...
You're saying that a RUSH strategy, shoudln't be able to beat a FAST EXPAND strategy? Wtf? You have to take a step back and look at what is beating what - as stated countless times before, fast expand is a privilege, not a right. And so you try to fast expand and you get _rushed_ and you call it inbalance? You want to make it so the zerg can comfortably fast expand every game and even if the terran sacs so much econ to 8rax [a risk in itself if the zerg plays safely] it's no use?
Bitch plz reconsider before you state more bullshit about how scvs are overpowered. If you think fighting terran using 1 base zerg is easy, than shut up and play good terrans using zerg, and go 1 base every game. See how many you actually win. You know why 12/3 positions are so hard for zerg? 2 reasons: number 1 reason is because zerg doesnt have a fast expansion to work with 2nd is positions are close. So now that we have proven that zergs need a fast expansion just to be equal to a terran, lets discuss the other things you said. 8 rax is risky. Bullshit. Standard build for terran: double rax Standard build for zerg: Fast expo Even start off Terran going 8 rax has a higher percentage of winning every game. Zerg going 9 pool has a very low percentage of winning every game. Considering the other race is going STANDARD BUILD. 12 pooling every game starts zerg off at a disadvantage if terran goes standard build! A rush build beats a fast expo build. True. But how many terrans do you see fast expoing compared to zergs???? See the disadvantage here?!?! Its so fucking obvious. Just connect the dots and put your ego aside. All im suggesting is one thing: - Increase bunker building time (these things build in like 2 secs) Thats all! Is it too hard? I believe weakening scvs is too harsh against protoss. But since terrans dont need bunkers vs toss I believe this is fair. I find it insulting that terrans believe it is their god given right to abuse advantages whenever they see fit and openly say it isnt an advantage. In return for this minor change, I am perfectly happy to weaken the ultra/ling combo for protosses. Or make certain protoss units stronger so that they can fight ultra/ling easier. Unlike you, im willing to admit to an advantage when I see one.
Well said.
|
On January 05 2005 11:22 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2005 11:10 RiSE wrote:
Don't even post if you're going to be that biased for zerg. Christ. It's hard to not be biased when zerg has won about 1/3 of the tournies toss has won in the past 4 years, and about 1/8th what terran has won.
You are starting to piss me off. Even at this very moment zergs are doing fantastic. And they are totally dominating the semi-pro level. If we went back before 1.08, you have to be the most biased person ever if you think that it would make things "more fair". Right now, it is clear that iloveoov/nada are simply fantastic players, and they would most likely be the top had they chosen zerg.
BTW: if you ever watched old vods, you see terran build bunkers instead of turrets because they costed the same. Terrans would have to run back some of their marines and load them in the bunkers. Mutas are less gay now, but they are not underpowered.
|
On January 05 2005 11:23 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2005 11:14 Lykathea[Go] wrote:
I'm a T player , in all objectivity such changes are almost impossible , if T is slighty better , it's impossible to change that by increasing or descreasing a simple unit HP .
This thread is not about the overall matchup, it was about one facet of the matchup.
WTF!? You can't ignore all of the effects of your actions becuase you are focusing on one of them.
|
Lowering scv health is no option at all, because scv health plays a large role not only in bunker rushes, but also against any kind of harass and in tvp as well. If scv health is changed, we don't only make bunker rushes less effective but change many other things as well, which are balanced right now.
I like the idea of scv's attack rate to be the same as that of probes and drones, bunker rush is one of the only scenarios where people actually use scv as an offensive unit.
I also like the increased bunker building time, it would probably make 12hat more possible.
|
On January 05 2005 11:42 ProudCappi wrote:
You are starting to piss me off. Even at this very moment zergs are doing fantastic. And they are totally dominating the semi-pro level.
I'll let the tournament results speak for themselves.
If we went back before 1.08, you have to be the most biased person ever if you think that it would make things "more fair".
I never said going back would be a good thing.
The changes that I did say were stupid, would hardly make a difference in the average game, but would help out zerg in situations where they are at a disadvantage currently.
Cheaper lurk research would help in situations where zerg is forced to 3hatch for example. In a game that gets past early game, the change makes no difference because it ends up only being like 100/100 min/gas.
And a cheaper pool would mean slightly faster lings to combat obunk. How long does it take to gather 50 minerals? Maybe 2 seconds? This ammount of time would only really matter vs obunk.
The cheaper turret shouldn't be changed imo, I was merely stating the stupid reason for it's change.
Right now, it is clear that iloveoov/nada are simply fantastic players, and they would most likely be the top had they chosen zerg.
They are indeed great players, but there's no way on earth they would've had as much success were they zerg players.
|
On January 05 2005 11:52 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2005 11:42 ProudCappi wrote:
You are starting to piss me off. Even at this very moment zergs are doing fantastic. And they are totally dominating the semi-pro level. I'll let the tournament results speak for themselves. Show nested quote + If we went back before 1.08, you have to be the most biased person ever if you think that it would make things "more fair". I never said going back would be a good thing. Show nested quote + Right now, it is clear that iloveoov/nada are simply fantastic players, and they would most likely be the top had they chosen zerg. They are indeed great players, but there's no way on earth they would've had as much success were they zerg players.
1. Why? Why not look at the current situation? If anybody should be complaining its the poor toss.
2. I'm sorry, but 150 spawning pool would be gay. Imagine the july vs. nada game, but with 150 pool.
3. I disagree.
|
On January 05 2005 11:58 ProudCappi wrote:
1. Why? Why not look at the current situation? If anybody should be complaining its the poor toss.
Oh, because toss hasn't done much other than a few very high placings by reach in the past few months? Wait, how many tourney wins do they have total? How many does zerg have? Zerg has like 3 or 4 pro tourney wins. The only ones I can remember are the coca cola starleague won by yellow, and the ogn starleague and itv league which were won by july.
Toss has every right to complain about pvz though, imo.
2. I'm sorry, but 150 spawning pool would be gay. Imagine the july vs. nada game, but with 150 pool.
I'm sorry I haven't seen this game. How long does it take to gather 50 minerals though? That's how much difference it would make.
|
On January 05 2005 12:07 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2005 11:58 ProudCappi wrote:
1. Why? Why not look at the current situation? If anybody should be complaining its the poor toss. Oh, because toss hasn't done much other than a few very high placings by reach in the past few months? Wait, how many tourney wins do they have total? How many does zerg have? Zerg has like 3 or 4 pro tourney wins. The only ones I can remember are the coca cola starleague won by yellow, and the ogn starleague and itv league which were won by july. Toss has every right to complain about pvz though, imo. Show nested quote +2. I'm sorry, but 150 spawning pool would be gay. Imagine the july vs. nada game, but with 150 pool. I'm sorry I haven't seen this game. How long does it take to gather 50 minerals though? That's how much difference it would make.
1. Look at the races right now, not over the last few years. Toss is not so hot, with Zerg doing very well and Terran doing fairly well. On the semi-pro level zerg is completely dominating.
2. Zerg would have earlier and more lings.
|
BW is fine and balanced........ its a zerg's choice to 12 hatch, and a terran's choice to 8 rax rush, sorry........ bad luck for u........ maybe u should learn to pool before hatch ^_^ and u won't have this problem.
|
On January 05 2005 12:11 ProudCappi wrote:
1. Look at the races right now, not over the last few years. Toss is not so hot, with Zerg doing very well and Terran doing fairly well. On the semi-pro level zerg is completely dominating.
Zerg is doing very well? How so? Because Gorush is on a winstreak?
2. Zerg would have earlier and more lings.
How much earlier and how many more? With a 9pool or a 12pool the difference would be about 2seconds and 2-4 lings.
|
On January 05 2005 12:11 Norway wrote:
BW is fine and balanced........ its a zerg's choice to 12 hatch, and a terran's choice to 8 rax rush, sorry........ bad luck for u........ maybe u should learn to pool before hatch ^_^ and u won't have this problem.
I think you should read Tien's post.
|
Russian Federation4447 Posts
Im trying to be as neutral as possible here.
I think we should keep the 200 pool.
150$ pool would make 4 pools even stronger, and then the gay zergs will use it more. 9 pool will also become a fad.
150$ pool will hurt protosses too early game.
45 health scvs is out of the question, this shouldnt even be discussed. Keep it at 60.
The only thing I have a beef with is bunker building time. Just increase this by a little bit or make it 150 bucks. Terrans can throw these things around so easily without it being detrimental to their economy where as the zerg has to waste many drones and even maybe a sunk to fight it off.
The other mini beef I have is those fucking medics. Why are they even a mana unit.
This is a ZvT thread guys, keep protoss out of it.
If you guys wanna talk about helping protoss PvZ, id be more than willing to discuss in another thread, which has been done so many times. I shook my head in shame so many times in this matchup because I opted for the cheapest and easiest way to win, that is, abusing the ZvP advantage. I have won so many better protoss players camping with mass lurk/sunk/spore while grabbing the islands and going ultra/ling.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Aaaaaaaah how wonderful TvP on korhal would be with 45 hp scvs!
Actually, TvP would be a walk in the fucking park with such weaksauce scvs -.-
The fact that it's 45 and not like 50 means that if a probe hits it once (quite likely) it will further reduce the neccessary amount of attacks from a dragoon for it to perish -_- (I know that's a horribly ugly sentance but it's the only thing in my head right now, no idea why)
|
On January 05 2005 12:16 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2005 12:11 ProudCappi wrote:
1. Look at the races right now, not over the last few years. Toss is not so hot, with Zerg doing very well and Terran doing fairly well. On the semi-pro level zerg is completely dominating. Zerg is doing very well? How so? Because Gorush is on a winstreak? How much earlier and how many more? With a 9pool or a 12pool the difference would be about 2seconds and 2-4 lings.
1. No, look at all of the zergs. They are all winning. Look at KT-KTF. Also, you keep ignoring the semi-pro level, in which zergs completely dominate.
2. Which would have won the game, even with nada's perfect play.
btw: I'll have to respond later, I'm changing classes right now. Been fun talking, I'll be back later.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On January 05 2005 12:18 Tien wrote:
Im trying to be as neutral as possible here.
I think we should keep the 200 pool.
150$ pool would make 4 pools even stronger, and then the gay zergs will use it more. 9 pool will also become a fad.
150$ pool will hurt protosses too early game.
The only thing I have a beef with is bunker building time. Just increase this by a little bit or make it 150 bucks. Terrans can throw these things around so easily without it being detrimental to their economy where as the zerg has to waste many drones and even maybe a sunk to fight it off.
The other mini beef I have is those fucking medics. Why are they even a mana unit.
This is a ZvT thread guys, keep protoss out of it.
If you guys wanna talk about helping protoss PvZ, id be more than willing to discuss. I shook my head in shame so many times in this matchup because I opted for the cheapest and easiest way to win, that is, abusing the ZvP advantage. I have won so many better protoss players camping with mass lurk/sunk/spore while grabbing the islands and going ultra/ling.
Tien, if they can't deal with that they are inferior not superior players ;o (EDIT: Inferior LT players anyway )
Like, most people can't deal with chojja doing that. But there is NO toss player who is superior to fucking chojja ;o
|
Russian Federation4447 Posts
we'll see about that FA, Chojja is as an unpredictable player as Yellow. Who knows who he will lose to.
|
On January 05 2005 12:20 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Tien, if they can't deal with that they are inferior not superior players ;o
How can you know? What if people had this attitude in 1.03?
Like, most people can't deal with chojja doing that. But there is NO toss player who is superior to fucking chojja ;o
No argument there. <3 chojja
|
On January 05 2005 12:19 ProudCappi wrote:
1. No, look at all of the zergs. They are all winning. Look at KT-KTF.
If you haven't figured this out, I'm only going to be swayed by tournament wins.
Also, you keep ignoring the semi-pro level, in which zergs completely dominate.
The fact that there are a bunch of zerg players just below pro level doesn't mean much imo.
2. Which would have won the game, even with nada's perfect play.
Can you link me to the vod? So did july win or lose? 
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On January 05 2005 12:22 Tien wrote:
we'll see about that FA, Chojja is as an unpredictable player as Yellow. Who knows who he will lose to.
Well there's still no superior player to chojja when it comes to PvZ (no superior P player anyhow, gorush has even better stats but I dunno..), he's got a 75% winning % ffs ;o
|
Agreed with exalted, i rape many terran going 12pool 11hatch, mainly because they expect hatch first, you can rape them easily with 6 lings with more coming if they leave their base for a bunker rush.
Yell0w was just stupid to do the same thing 3 times when it already fucked him over the 1st and 2nd time.
Keep the game as it is, Terran maybe a bit strong, but theres always a way to counter it, just like anything else. If anything is imbalance, its probably your lack of skill.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On January 05 2005 12:27 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2005 12:19 ProudCappi wrote:
1. No, look at all of the zergs. They are all winning. Look at KT-KTF. If you haven't figured this out, I'm only going to be swayed by tournament wins. Show nested quote +Also, you keep ignoring the semi-pro level, in which zergs completely dominate. The fact that there are a bunch of zerg players just below pro level doesn't mean much imo. Can you link me to the vod? So did july win or lose?
Only swayed by tournament wins, eh? Well how about the thrilling ZvZ final between GoRush and July which is coming up in like a week -_-
|
On January 05 2005 12:41 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Only swayed by tournament wins, eh? Well how about the thrilling ZvZ final between GoRush and July which is coming up in like a week -_-
I am indeed very excited! But one tournament won't do the trick.
Isn't this the first zvz finals ever?
|
I think it is the first ZvZ final ever, and hopefully the last. Good god, I can't imagine anything less climactic than a ZVZ FINAL
Zerg dominates pretty much everything EXCEPT the professional scene, and even there they're doing just fine.
I'm sorry but nothing bothers me more than a sub-pro Zerg player calling for balance changes that favor Zerg. Sub-pro Zerg players have a huge edge over sub-pro Terran and Protoss, shut your mouth and let people like Hong do the whining
|
so wat ur saying is we shud make it easier to do a cheesy 4 pool resulting in more and more no skill, boring to watch, very short, win or die games.
And can u explain why semi-pro zerg players doesnt mean much 2 u?
|
On January 05 2005 13:12 Chris307 wrote:
I think it is the first ZvZ final ever, and hopefully the last. Good god, I can't imagine anything less climactic than a ZVZ FINAL
zvz owns~
I'm sorry but nothing bothers me more than a sub-pro Zerg player calling for balance changes that favor Zerg. Sub-pro Zerg players have a huge edge over sub-pro Terran and Protoss, shut your mouth and let people like Hong do the whining
I wish there were more terrans who thought like you in 1.07. thx
|
On January 05 2005 13:16 TheGreenBeret wrote:
so wat ur saying is we shud make it easier to do a cheesy 4 pool resulting in more and more no skill, boring to watch, very short, win or die games.
What do you think 8rax is?
And can u explain why semi-pro zerg players doesnt mean much 2 u?
They are not top tier players.
|
reply to original post:
any "balance change" that don't require toss to have more speed and better keyb/mouse coordination sucks, we don't want to have one race for slowass newbs. -15 health is a huge change, I find it too radical to balance anything.
yellow lost because he didn't adapt his strat choice, was obvious with his build, don't you think?
|
any retard that wants to change pool back to 150 and lurk to 100/100 HAS to be an incredibly biased whining zerg player, you cannot be serious when you say that that wouldnt change much.
do you have any idea what that would do to pvz?
the only possible solution is increasing bunker build time, this would not make normal terran play weaker, would hardly affect tvp and it would weaken bunk rushes (they should not be impossible, fe without scouting shouldnt be free).
i myself dont really think that bunk rushes are a problem, just because i really havent seen much proof of it, except for maybe boxer vs yellow, but you cannot draw any statistically relevant conclusions towards balance from what, 30 real progamers?
thats the reason why the argument of 'all the top players are terran' is irrelevant, im pretty sure if nada or iloveoov wouldve picked zerg or toss as their race, they wouldve owned too, just look at the next tier of progamers, zergs are owning that, does this mean zerg is too strong?
does the fact that 90% of the wgt top 30 are zerg mean anything?
no, it does not, not at all.
|
On January 05 2005 13:25 pfff wrote:
any retard that wants to change pool back to 150 and lurk to 100/100 HAS to be an incredibly biased whining zerg player, you cannot be serious when you say that that wouldnt change much.
do you have any idea what that would do to pvz?
Yes, yes I do. I was a toss player in 1.07.
im pretty sure if nada or iloveoov wouldve picked zerg or toss as their race, they wouldve owned too,
Undoubtedly, however, they would not be ranked #1 and #2.
|
I'm going to agree with whoever said that a rush strategy should be able to kill a fast expand strategy. I don't think even zerg should be able to expand before teching to their basic combat unit, unless on a big/cool map.
So in that respect SCV's are balanced.
But as a Toss player, two things annoy me:
1: How fucking hard SCV's are to kill even AFTER the early game. If a terran breaks into one of my expansions with a half-dozen units or so (call it 4 vultures and 2 tanks), I will lose pretty much every probe there even if reinforcements are 10 seconds away. If I break into a terran expansion with a similar/superior force, (say 4 zeals 4 goons), I could actually lose my force to the scv's, or at best kill 5-10 before being killled by terran reinforcements.
This sucks ^_^
2: The lack of a hard counter to fact-commandcentre on LT-style maps. There seems to be nothing Toss can do which will put them ahead if the players are roughly equal. Expanding twice is what is recommended to do, but it doesn't actually counter it in the same way vultures counter zeals. It just means you're on level terms again. If SCV's were easier to kill, it might help a bit.
|
On January 05 2005 13:19 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2005 13:16 TheGreenBeret wrote:
so wat ur saying is we shud make it easier to do a cheesy 4 pool resulting in more and more no skill, boring to watch, very short, win or die games. What do you think 8rax is? They are not top tier players.
8 rax is possible to beat. An even quicker 4 pool would be practically impossible to beat.
"They are not top tier players" is not an awnser. For a start, they pretty much are, secondly whats ur point?
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On January 05 2005 12:45 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2005 12:41 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Only swayed by tournament wins, eh? Well how about the thrilling ZvZ final between GoRush and July which is coming up in like a week -_- I am indeed very excited! But one tournament won't do the trick. Isn't this the first zvz finals ever?
Actually, unlike the last OGN Ever final which was the first TvT final ever, this is, to my knowledge at LEAST the second zvz final, the first being Mumyung 3-0ing Yellow in the first KPGA Winners championship some years ago.
Oh and since there's been 2 PvP finals, the same amount as ZvZ and TvT put together, GASP! SHOCK! I guess P needs a nerf ;(!
And July won Gillete just a few months back .. If boxer hadn't been there zerg would have had just as many OGN titles as toss and terran, so go ahead and blame it on boxer instead of the game plz ;p
|
I hope you are joking. 4 poor rush where spawning pool costs 150 minerals would be overpowered, and impossible to counter. pvz would suck even more.
I agree wiht you Tal, same I wrote in my first replay.
|
On January 05 2005 14:18 TheGreenBeret wrote:
8 rax is possible to beat. An even quicker 4 pool would be practically impossible to beat.
You obviously didn't play during 1.07.
"They are not top tier players" is not an awnser. For a start, they pretty much are, secondly whats ur point?
Why not look at bghers then?
|
On January 05 2005 14:23 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Actually, unlike the last OGN Ever final which was the first TvT final ever, this is, to my knowledge at LEAST the second zvz final, the first being Mumyung 3-0ing Yellow in the first KPGA Winners championship some years ago.
Wow, I thought there were more tvt finals what with boxer and themarine being 1/2 for so long.
And July won Gillete just a few months back ..
Indeed he did.
If boxer hadn't been there zerg would have had just as many OGN titles as toss and terran, so go ahead and blame it on boxer instead of the game plz ;p
nevar~
|
First of all, the game is not unbalanced at the highest levels. If it was, there wouldn't be a zvz final.
Regardless of that, you can't ignore the semi-pros, and even us. You especially can't compare them with money-map players. You may as well compare them to UMS players. Starcraft is starcraft, and money/ums isn't.
Zerg is raping at the semi-pro level. What would your changes do to that?
btw: Whoever like zvz is madly pro-zerg
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On January 05 2005 14:32 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2005 14:23 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Actually, unlike the last OGN Ever final which was the first TvT final ever, this is, to my knowledge at LEAST the second zvz final, the first being Mumyung 3-0ing Yellow in the first KPGA Winners championship some years ago. Wow, I thought there were more tvt finals what with boxer and themarine being 1/2 for so long. Indeed he did. Show nested quote + If boxer hadn't been there zerg would have had just as many OGN titles as toss and terran, so go ahead and blame it on boxer instead of the game plz ;p nevar~
Might have been a few TvT finals in the smaller leagues but none that I am aware of ;o
Grrr vs HOT was R/P vs Z
Garimto vs SKELTON was P v Z
Boxer vs Jinnam was TvZ
Boxer vs Yellow was TvZ
Garimto vs Boxer was PvT
Sync vs HOT was TvZ
Reach vs Boxer was PvT
Nada vs Chojja was TvZ
Xellos vs Yellow was TvZ
Kingdom vs Nal_rA was PvP
Nal_rA vs Zeus was PvP
July vs Reach was ZvP
Oov vs Boxer was TvT
That was all the OGN finals, excluding the two king of kings (or well, 3 if you count hotbreak.. which might have been a tvt final between oddy and nada.. but that was a REALLY small event :O) which were won by Grrr (was he all P or R/P?) vs HOT Z (DUH) and Yellow vs Gundam, obviously ZvT.
As for MBC.....
Well you can look in the article section ;p Tired of writing XD But yeah, there's been a TvT final there o.O
With the big ZvZ final coming up it's fairly even between same race matchups ;o
|
On January 03 2005 19:35 radiaL wrote:of course terrans will bitch but not cause of those reasons I mean storm raids will be even more fucking devastating.. even if you do react its gotta be within 1 second reaction time (and this is with 60HP) cause leaving force behind is pretty useless if they drop 1/2 zeals before high temp. Obviously talkin about a good multitasker as a toss here i mean they can easily fight your main army with theirs and raid at the same time =/ I sound like a whining newb but it's fucking hard to play vs a good toss who plays like that ;D most people dont abuse it enough I think how fucked up will reavers be at the beggining? 2nd radius of splash will kill them in one shot too, right? 50% dmg? .. maybe 50HP?
lol and what is a psistorm for zerg eco????
|
I only have one question.
Are all you zerg players who are complaining democrats?
( ;
Seriously, though, you can't please everyone, seeing as balance is subjective and changing regardless of whether or not changes to the game are actually made, because every so often a player comes along and says, "hey, if I do this..." and whattaya know, things change.
|
Russian Federation4447 Posts
ObsoleteLogic
Are you saying all the patches that have been implemented into this game is a bad thing?
Maybe we should revert back to the first patch or even 1.04 when BW came out and play with that one. We'll see terrans fill up the entire strategy forum with complaints.
|
Tien, I'm not saying they're a bad thing, but I'm saying that endlessly clamoring for changes when things seem to be fairly well balanced (no real hard-counters [unit destroys unit b and there ain't jack b can do about it], leagues are, for the most part, even in races represented, and the majority of players I know don't complain about balance) is wanton childishness. Maybe changing the bunker build time isn't such a bad idea, but really - is it that hard to stop? I played plenty of very good Zerg users who stopped bunker rushes almost every time, and my micro wasn't half bad. The times it wasn't stopped, they did what players who are actually good (truly experienced and smart, not just having watched a ton of reps of players who are) do, and rebounded from the bad play that caused them to be in a poor situation. I think thats the real problem here... ( : Not to insinuate anything, of course. From what I hear, what Yellow did was stupid (granted, I didn't watch the games nor do I know what maps they were played on). Being smart and perhaps, breaking the paradigms sounds like a good place to start. Especially on maps that AREN'T LT. So many players just follow the mold of the builds that were found to be most effective on LT, regardless of what differences, subtle or otherwise, there might be on other maps.
By the way, Mindcrime... have you ever played a semi-pro? They're very, very good, probably (no offense intended) a lot better than you are. Any semi-pro can beat a top level pro on any day of the week. There isn't that much of a skill gap.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On January 05 2005 15:11 baelrog wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2005 19:35 radiaL wrote:of course terrans will bitch but not cause of those reasons I mean storm raids will be even more fucking devastating.. even if you do react its gotta be within 1 second reaction time (and this is with 60HP) cause leaving force behind is pretty useless if they drop 1/2 zeals before high temp. Obviously talkin about a good multitasker as a toss here i mean they can easily fight your main army with theirs and raid at the same time =/ I sound like a whining newb but it's fucking hard to play vs a good toss who plays like that ;D most people dont abuse it enough I think how fucked up will reavers be at the beggining? 2nd radius of splash will kill them in one shot too, right? 50% dmg? .. maybe 50HP? lol and what is a psistorm for zerg eco????
Overlords.
Scourges.
Forget about dropping.
Until mass sair.
|
On January 05 2005 15:48 ObsoleteLogic wrote:
By the way, Mindcrime... have you ever played a semi-pro? They're very, very good, probably (no offense intended) a lot better than you are. Any semi-pro can beat a top level pro on any day of the week. There isn't that much of a skill gap.
There's enough of a skill gap for them to not be pros.
|
On January 05 2005 14:41 ProudCappi wrote:
btw: Whoever like zvz is madly pro-zerg
actually really really top level zvz can be very interesting to watch. and i dont even like zvz
On January 05 2005 13:19 Pafnucy wrote:
yellow lost because he didn't adapt his strat choice, was obvious with his build, don't you think?
ppl need to stop using this argument. the chances that boxer would 8rax again in the 3rd game are the same as they were that he'd do it the first game... maybe even less. logically doing something three times in a row makes no sense because theres a good chance it'd be countered. this makes it entirely a guessing game as to whether or not hes gonna do the same thing again. and as yellow explained after, had boxer done a normal build and yellow done an anti rush build yellow would have been far behind, so he chose to take the chance that boxer wouldnt 8rax three straight times. whoops.
|
On January 05 2005 14:41 ProudCappi wrote:
First of all, the game is not unbalanced at the highest levels. If it was, there wouldn't be a zvz final.
Because one tournament is a representation of balance.
Regardless of that, you can't ignore the semi-pros, and even us. You especially can't compare them with money-map players. You may as well compare them to UMS players. Starcraft is starcraft, and money/ums isn't
Zerg is raping at the semi-pro level. What would your changes do to that?
The fact that zergs are dominating the semi-pro leagues in korea means what? We know from watching the top terrans that there is a way to win much more often than not.
The fact that zerg is a raping at a level that is below what people are capable of...... hmm...
btw: Whoever like zvz is madly pro-zerg
I know nonzerg players who enjoy zvz. Then again, I also know zerg players who can't stand it.
|
So, you want to imbalance the game for everyone else to fix a dubious imbalance at the highest level? Since when is this a good idea!?
About that dubious imbalance: there is none. It isn't just one tourney, you saw the other post. I have a feeling that you can't beat terrans, so you want to change the game using the yellow vs. boxer series to justify it.
|
On January 05 2005 16:23 ProudCappi wrote:
So, you want to imbalance the game for everyone else to fix a dubious imbalance at the highest level? Since when is this a good idea!?
I'd rather the game be balanced than giving certain players an advantage?
About that dubious imbalance: there is none. It isn't just one tourney, you saw the other post.
Oh my bad, two tournies?
I have a feeling that you can't beat terrans, so you want to change the game using the yellow vs. boxer series to justify it.
zvt is one of my top 2 matchups, and I consider myself a safe player for the most part. I personally haven't lost to a bunker rush since I stopped blindly powering drones. It must be said though, that I'm not playing against top tier players.
|
On January 05 2005 16:32 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2005 16:23 ProudCappi wrote:
So, you want to imbalance the game for everyone else to fix a dubious imbalance at the highest level? Since when is this a good idea!? I'd rather the game be balanced than giving certain players an advantage? Show nested quote +About that dubious imbalance: there is none. It isn't just one tourney, you saw the other post. Oh my bad, two tournies? Show nested quote +I have a feeling that you can't beat terrans, so you want to change the game using the yellow vs. boxer series to justify it. zvt is one of my top 2 matchups, and I consider myself a safe player for the most part. I personally haven't lost to a bunker rush since I stopped blindly powering drones. It must be said though, that I'm not playing against top tier players.
Who is to say that the very top teir is representative of the game? It consists of like 100 people.
And stop thinking about it in number of tourneys, think about what is currently happenning. For the past few months, top teir zergs have been really strong.
|
On January 05 2005 16:39 ProudCappi wrote:
Who is to say that the very top teir is representative of the game? It consists of like 100 people.
100 people who play the game to it's fullest.
And stop thinking about it in number of tourneys, think about what is currently happenning. For the past few months, top teir zergs have been really strong.
This trend will need to continue for months and months for me to change my mind!
|
On January 05 2005 16:53 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2005 16:39 ProudCappi wrote:
Who is to say that the very top teir is representative of the game? It consists of like 100 people. 100 people who play the game to it's fullest. Show nested quote +And stop thinking about it in number of tourneys, think about what is currently happenning. For the past few months, top teir zergs have been really strong. This trend will need to continue for months and months for me to change my mind!
Now you're being lame.
I can't beleive you are willing to screw the game for everyone so the 100 players who "play the game to it's fullest" will have more balance. And how long will the strong-zerg trend need to continue? I personally can't wait till it's over.
|
On January 05 2005 17:01 ProudCappi wrote:
Now you're being lame.
I can't beleive you are willing to screw the game for everyone so the 100 players who "play the game to it's fullest" will have more balance.
Why don't we just balance the game for bghers!
And how long will the strong-zerg trend need to continue? I personally can't wait till it's over.
Omg, 3 tourney wins within a few months!!! This is triple what zerg has had in the past 3-4 years. personally, I am very excited. You must realize, I WANT them to show me that I'm wrong.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On January 05 2005 16:14 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2005 14:41 ProudCappi wrote:
First of all, the game is not unbalanced at the highest levels. If it was, there wouldn't be a zvz final. Because one tournament is a representation of balance. Show nested quote +Regardless of that, you can't ignore the semi-pros, and even us. You especially can't compare them with money-map players. You may as well compare them to UMS players. Starcraft is starcraft, and money/ums isn't
Zerg is raping at the semi-pro level. What would your changes do to that? The fact that zergs are dominating the semi-pro leagues in korea means what? We know from watching the top terrans that there is a way to win much more often than not. The fact that zerg is a raping at a level that is below what people are capable of...... hmm... I know nonzerg players who enjoy zvz. Then again, I also know zerg players who can't stand it.
Actually, the 'top terrans' are like 5 really gifted persons ;p
Then there's scarcely a terran until REAAAAAAAAAALLY far down (pgr21 rankings that is).
I mean, there's nada, oov, boxer, xellos and sync.
What other really good terrans are there? DDanGG is mad good, so is goodfriend, not quite at their level though. Then there's like themarine.
Cloud.
Yeah.
Fearsome!! Okay, he's not bad at all, in fact he's VERY good but he isn't exactly top 5 level ;o
|
On January 05 2005 17:04 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2005 17:01 ProudCappi wrote:
Now you're being lame.
I can't beleive you are willing to screw the game for everyone so the 100 players who "play the game to it's fullest" will have more balance. Why don't we just balance the game for bghers! Show nested quote +And how long will the strong-zerg trend need to continue? I personally can't wait till it's over. Omg, 3 tourney wins within a few months!!! This is triple what zerg has had in the past 3-4 years. personally, I am very excited. You must realize, I WANT them to show me that I'm wrong.
Because BGH and UMS maps aren't starcraft. TL.net level and semi-pro level is, AS IS pro level. Zerg is raping at the below-pro levels, and is doing great at the pro levels. Look at the present instead of counting tourney wins.
|
On January 05 2005 17:52 ProudCappi wrote:
Because BGH and UMS maps aren't starcraft.
Fine, let's balance it for the pubbie lt players! Have you played pubbies lately? --;
Zerg is raping at the below-pro levels, and is doing great at the pro levels. Look at the present instead of counting tourney wins.
I'm sorry, but a small period of prosperity will not change my mind. I want some long-term equality with the other races.
|
mm dunno if my post was posted earlier. didnt have anytime at that time tho =O. Here is my input:
I dont think SCV should be decreased to 45, that is way too low. I have however never understood why they would need as much sa 60!? I think 50 would actually be a lot more fair...
And for those who are whining about the fact that reaver drops and storm drops, mutalisk harass etc will be way more effective: yes this is exactly what I was aiming for also. Why should they not be? As it is now, terran and zerg both have a very easy time stopping a reaver drop unless they absolutly didnt see it coming or just plain out suck. Both these reasons justify SCV health = 60 as much as "I think probes should have 60 hp cause I dont like lurker shooting them...".
SCV at 50 would mean that they die from one less shot by dragoons than before. I see no problems with this... Of course, you will have to play a little bit safer if you encounter a strong PvT rusher but unless you are very tired or the P is lots better than you, you will not ´lose your supply will you? And if you do, was this not because you missclicked and the tank went into the goons range and died? Plz tell me...
The "SCV will die too hard vs harass!!!" thing is not an issue, I hope everybody can agree on this...
Also, I agree that bunkers build too fast.
I can't believe nobody here has mentioned this yet but let's just look at PvZ for a moment.
These are two counter-fast exp builds a toss can go (that is, not all just two "standard"):
1. Two gate rush. Easy to pull of and with good micro you are able to beat inferior zerg players, do some damage to equal zerg players (as well as losing your zealots or allowing him to mass drone for awhile, that is he will benefit/lose from this strat as you do = balanced) and you will probably be outplayed early game by superior players.
This strategy is balanced if the map is balanced.
2. The Gateway/Forge + cannon build. This strategy is a bit risky (hope you are beginning to see my point soon). If everything works out for you (as p) your cannons will be almost finished when the worried z players hatchery pops up and he sees your pylon etc. The drones will come but your zealot will fend them off and cannons arrive just in time for the lings. Z has officially lost this game.
However, this strat will absolutly NOT work all the time and it will not even be close to working three times in a row. It all depends on wether or not the Z player scouts your base fast enough or gets that hunch. Ideally, he will have an overlord nearby or a drone or w-ever and discover your pylon fast enough. Or say he doesnt. There still is a chance to win if you have a bit early pool, if you attack with everything and overpower the zealot+probe before cannons are up.
These are two balanced early game rushes PvZ, agreed? There is no change needed!
Now Imagine if the cannons build time was decreased, or even worse, if the zealot build time was decreased. This would make the strats unbalanced in favour for toss. You would win almost every game vs an equally good player simply because there is nothing he can do, but do another build. That doesnt justify the fact that the two gate rush and the cannon build now are way too good early game vs fast exp, does it?
And now to the point of this whole blablabla post:
What needs to be changed needs to be changed very little. The bunker rush should not be made useless, it should be a viable choice in TvZ BUT you should not be able to overpower a superior zerg player just because you know "the boxer build"! It needs to be balanced in a manor that it comes of like the two gate rush build PvZ, that the better player wins or at least comes out on top.
Many argue that this is not the case at the moment, and I cant disagree because I have owned better Z players with my Terran and my Terran SUCKS...
Oh, and PvZ ultra/ling is imbalanced --;;
|
and that is why I agree to scv = 50 hp and bunker time increased, I'm not sure how much, but one should let some tests determine this !_!
|
On January 05 2005 17:54 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2005 17:52 ProudCappi wrote:
Because BGH and UMS maps aren't starcraft. Fine, let's balance it for the pubbie lt players! Have you played pubbies lately? --; Show nested quote + Zerg is raping at the below-pro levels, and is doing great at the pro levels. Look at the present instead of counting tourney wins. I'm sorry, but a small period of prosperity will not change my mind. I want some long-term equality with the other races.
1. The game is probably super zerg in pubbie games, I don't really know. I do know that we shouldn't balance for one particular segment, we should try and make the game as fair as possible.
2. Okay then, how long is long enough for this zerg dominance?
|
On January 05 2005 18:00 ProudCappi wrote:
2. Okay then, how long is long enough for this zerg dominance?
I want them to perform as well as the other races FOREVER excluding periods where obviously imbalanced maps are used.
|
On January 05 2005 18:02 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2005 18:00 ProudCappi wrote:
2. Okay then, how long is long enough for this zerg dominance? I want them to perform as well as the other races FOREVER excluding periods where obviously imbalanced maps are used.
Pro-terran maps have been used lately...
|
On January 05 2005 18:04 ProudCappi wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2005 18:02 Mindcrime wrote:On January 05 2005 18:00 ProudCappi wrote:
2. Okay then, how long is long enough for this zerg dominance? I want them to perform as well as the other races FOREVER excluding periods where obviously imbalanced maps are used. Pro-terran maps have been used lately...
Lately, the maps as a whole have been pretty good for zerg. Look at kt-ktf. Luna, Arizona and Nostalgia, and requiem. They're all pretty good. Namja and Nostalgia have been in quite a few leagues recently, and I know most zergs like (love even) those maps.
|
Russian Federation4447 Posts
ProudCappi and mindcrime
You guys are arguing semantics here. Get back to the point.
|
On January 05 2005 18:33 Tien wrote:
ProudCappi and mindcrime
You guys are arguing semantics here. Get back to the point.
I believe that slower building bunk would be just dandy. good enough?
|
Yes! We got a fucking zerg player who sucks and cant beat terran coming over there whinning the fuck outta everything mindcrime shut up please maybe if you were good you wouldnt have to complain
|
On January 05 2005 18:33 Tien wrote:
ProudCappi and mindcrime
You guys are arguing semantics here. Get back to the point.
He thinks the game is imba but it's really the maps, as any trend would show.
He also ignores the semi-pro scene's extreme zerg dominance, which would be magnified if zerg is changed.
I don't know how to argue with someone who wants a 150 min pool >.<
|
Russian Federation4447 Posts
Well I want a 100 mineral pool.
Im settling for no less.
|
On January 05 2005 18:40 LetMeBeWithYou wrote:
Yes! We got a fucking zerg player who sucks and cant beat terran coming over there whinning the fuck outta everything mindcrime shut up please maybe if you were good you wouldnt have to complain
Again, zvt is one of my top 2 matchups. If I were going to bitch about a matchup I have trouble winning, it would be zvp.
|
Russian Federation4447 Posts
But no seriously.
Im arguing for slightly higher bunker building time. Im also saying maps dont really matter all that much because the majority of the maps have starting location distances that are very similar to like lost temple 6 and 3 positions, which can still be raped by 8 rax bunker rush.
Well in my oppinion there is a dominance of both zerg and terran players equally at the semi-pro level.
Semi protoss players are just getting eaten up by zergs. This is for another thread though.
|
On January 05 2005 18:51 ProudCappi wrote:
I don't know how to argue with someone who wants a 150 min pool >.<
Honestly, did you play during 1.07? 4pool/6pool were popular back then, but I rarely if ever lost to them. In 1.07, on nearly every position on lt except 12/3, if you 10gated, your first zeal would finish just as 6 lings arrived. Zeal/probe fared quite well. I dunno though, my experience may be irrelevant considering the caliber of players that pool'd me. But, it's not like I was good anyhow.
|
Terran shoul be starting with 3 SCV that wold be gr8 )
|
On January 05 2005 19:01 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2005 18:51 ProudCappi wrote:
I don't know how to argue with someone who wants a 150 min pool >.< Honestly, did you play during 1.07? 4pool/6pool were popular back then, but I rarely if ever lost to them. In 1.07, on nearly every position on lt except 12/3, if you 10gated, your first zeal would finish just as 6 lings arrived. Zeal/probe fared quite well. I dunno though, my experience may be irrelevant considering the caliber of players that pool'd me. But, it's not like I was good anyhow.
Show me a rep.
|
On January 05 2005 20:35 ProudCappi wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2005 19:01 Mindcrime wrote:On January 05 2005 18:51 ProudCappi wrote:
I don't know how to argue with someone who wants a 150 min pool >.< Honestly, did you play during 1.07? 4pool/6pool were popular back then, but I rarely if ever lost to them. In 1.07, on nearly every position on lt except 12/3, if you 10gated, your first zeal would finish just as 6 lings arrived. Zeal/probe fared quite well. I dunno though, my experience may be irrelevant considering the caliber of players that pool'd me. But, it's not like I was good anyhow. Show me a rep.
did you just ask for a 1.07 rep --"
nvm he got banned =x
|
Mindcrime, your disdain for semipros is absolutely ridiculous. Most semipros are within a few games reach of becoming full-fledged professionals - and some professionals can't surpass semi-pros in leagues and televisted matches. Look at CuPiD[S.G], often listed in Challenge League qualifiers. This guy destroys every Terran he goes up against, but the instant he's pitched against a Zerg, regardless of how high their level, he's out.
|
For once i agree with tien.
Slightly increased bunker building times.
And really focused map-balancing by pro map makers.
those are the only changes that are needed.
----
i wouldn't mind seeing units that are hardly used be made more powerful. However, this would be very very hard to do, if not impossible, and would effect the overall balance of the game.
|
actually, i dont think it would be a totally bad idea to beef drones. It's pretty much impossible the throw drones around like NTT did with his scv and abuse the fact that miners are so powerful.
|
Norway28674 Posts
On January 05 2005 13:46 Tal wrote:
1: How fucking hard SCV's are to kill even AFTER the early game. If a terran breaks into one of my expansions with a half-dozen units or so (call it 4 vultures and 2 tanks), I will lose pretty much every probe there even if reinforcements are 10 seconds away. If I break into a terran expansion with a similar/superior force, (say 4 zeals 4 goons), I could actually lose my force to the scv's, or at best kill 5-10 before being killled by terran reinforcements.
This sucks ^_^
that has a lot (more than the scvs anyway) to do with tanks/vults being far better peonkillers than goons/zealots are
good luck killing 4 vult 2 tank with your scvs. it's doable sure, but it's going to cost you a fuckload.
and besides you can't really kill goon/zealot combo that well with scvs. pure goon yes, but when there's a combination it becomes much harder. :O
|
Yeah SCVs suck. You can like do a reaver drop and get off 2 massive reaver shots, and they still have double the probes you have. I say we just take them out of the game
|
On January 05 2005 20:10 FalliNinLove wrote:Terran shoul be starting with 3 SCV that wold be gr8 )
You must be kidding!
|
It is possible to beat 8rax build with 12 hatch build. If yes write counter.
It is possible to beat 8rax buil with 10 hatch 10 pool build. If yes write counter.
what chance to win game have zerg with 12 pool, hatch hatch build?
what chance to win game have zerg with 12 pool hatch build?
I dont know so much about this and this is the most important to balance game. If z have no chance to win with other than 12 hatch build, we need balance change.
|
Russian Federation4447 Posts
Its not that z has no chance, its that they are at a disadvantage if they dont have an early expo.
That means it takes a near perfect game from the zerg to win.
|
Tien is right, its not that Z can't stop bunker rush, its that its so hard to stop and so cheap and costs so little for the terran.
9 pool getting defended by T results in major T advantage
bunk rush getting defended by Z results in minor Z advantage.
|
The argument is going in circles...
Anyway, the longer bunk construction time seems to be the best idea of the bunch, and it isn't hard at all to implement. It doesnt hurt tvp at all.
ZvP needs to be fixed a bit, but there are other threads discussing this already
|
Believe me, one micro mistake from t side and t dies. Can anyone answer and write me that counters, coz I play Z too.
On January 06 2005 09:05 Tien wrote:
Its not that z has no chance, its that they are at a disadvantage if they dont have an early expo.
That means it takes a near perfect game from the zerg to win.
And is it so big disadvantage? Coz I have normaly swarms with 12 pool hatch hatch build. Only one threat on this strategy is fast drop, but one sunken will save it. If drop deads, t is in the shit.
|
i dont see why pvz would need to be fixed, its balanced pretty perfectly on almost all maps.
its dumb on lt tho, and dumb on islands too, but i think that has to do with the fact that all non-top zerg players have no idea how to play islands because they never want to.
|
On January 06 2005 08:38 thelucas wrote:
It is possible to beat 8rax build with 12 hatch build. If yes write counter.
It is possible to beat 8rax buil with 10 hatch 10 pool build. If yes write counter.
what chance to win game have zerg with 12 pool, hatch hatch build?
what chance to win game have zerg with 12 pool hatch build?
I dont know so much about this and this is the most important to balance game. If z have no chance to win with other than 12 hatch build, we need balance change.
Pls I need answers, nothing less nothing more.
|
|
|
I am asking about this, you go normal strat, he goes 8 rax, u let him buil bunker, cancel hatch, goes as fast as possible lurkers, build ling and buil hatchery on the cliff.
I saw someone play this conter on Nada's 8 rax and he killed nada, but he scouted with 9 drone.
Can help zerg to scout with 5th drone? I used to scout with 5th scv on random players and it is very usefull.
|
One thing that bothered me for a long time and I ask this questions to terran players:
Do sometimes your medics runs out of mana healing your infantry?
Because for now medics seems to have infinite mana against zergs. As it is for now reduce medics healing effectivness or put infinite mana because for now there is no difference with 1mana/1hp and infinite mana.
|
On January 03 2005 18:57 Day[9] wrote:So, alot of people have been saying terrans are a bit too powerful (such as yellow after his 0-3 to boxer) i think this is a really simple balance change that one of my friends thought of: Drop SCV health to 45 I think this is a great idea because, alot of times, bunker rushes are only really effective when a bunch of SCVs are brought along. Also, Protoss could be a bit more intimidating to terrans early on since SCV's are alot weaker. with 45 health, dragoons could SCVs in one less shot (making for a slightly scarier dragoon rush) and terrans would have only a slightly more difficult job holding early expansions. Overall, i think its a pretty brilliant change, since it allows for a SLIGHTLY weaker early game terran, but not alot thoughts? i like it
Day, as much as I love you for not smoking at WCG Chicago and choosing instead to get wired on Red Bull -- that is a horrrrible idea. SCV's need 60 hit points when they make buildings as they get harassed by Probes (and to a lesser extent Drones on occassion).
Plus, especially on LT on how the map plays out as far as expanding and such, Terran is generally held to a particular part of the map unless you have a unique style (e.g. Elky). Protoss especially can spit out probes and units and expand like no other, while Terran especially verse Zerg is kind of stuck at there main and natural for most of the game. We need our resistance to Reavers better. Plus what happens if Lurkers get +3 grades, then you'll be raping my shit in 2 shots ;P
|
On January 06 2005 13:54 Bladox wrote:
One thing that bothered me for a long time and I ask this questions to terran players:
Do sometimes your medics runs out of mana healing your infantry?
Because for now medics seems to have infinite mana against zergs. As it is for now reduce medics healing effectivness or put infinite mana because for now there is no difference with 1mana/1hp and infinite mana.
Yes medics do run out of mana, if u have too few of them healing too many rines.
Occasionally i'll watch a ZvsT pro rep and find 20 non-upgrade lings pwning say 14M&M and thinking wtf? But its because the meds cant heal, so its just like facing 12 rines back in vanilla.
Your idea is too radical and would discourage M&M in TvsP even more so.
|
On January 06 2005 14:37 IronMentality wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2005 18:57 Day[9] wrote:So, alot of people have been saying terrans are a bit too powerful (such as yellow after his 0-3 to boxer) i think this is a really simple balance change that one of my friends thought of: Drop SCV health to 45 I think this is a great idea because, alot of times, bunker rushes are only really effective when a bunch of SCVs are brought along. Also, Protoss could be a bit more intimidating to terrans early on since SCV's are alot weaker. with 45 health, dragoons could SCVs in one less shot (making for a slightly scarier dragoon rush) and terrans would have only a slightly more difficult job holding early expansions. Overall, i think its a pretty brilliant change, since it allows for a SLIGHTLY weaker early game terran, but not alot thoughts? i like it Day, as much as I love you for not smoking at WCG Chicago and choosing instead to get wired on Red Bull -- that is a horrrrible idea. SCV's need 60 hit points when they make buildings as they get harassed by Probes (and to a lesser extent Drones on occassion). Plus, especially on LT on how the map plays out as far as expanding and such, Terran is generally held to a particular part of the map unless you have a unique style (e.g. Elky). Protoss especially can spit out probes and units and expand like no other, while Terran especially verse Zerg is kind of stuck at there main and natural for most of the game. We need our resistance to Reavers better. Plus what happens if Lurkers get +3 grades, then you'll be raping my shit in 2 shots ;P
thats wut happen to toss -_-
|
Stimpack used by 10 marines needs 50 mana, and hit by lurker need 35 mana. Count it and dont say stupid things.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
