|
Why it is too early to make far-reaching balance changes
Preface
I have a lot to say about this topic and these are my credentials. I'm a 700 to 800 points mid diamond random player on Europe and according to sc2ranks.com I hold a top 300 region race rank position. I know that the points system is flawed and experienced that by myself, but if I tell you that I'm a decent player, you would probably agree.
I was very shocked when I saw the situation report and the proposed balance changes.
Let me discuss a few points.
Reapers
I don't understand the rioting about this unit at all. It is an option to do some early game action. Terrans need this to put their enemy under pressure. In the old PvZ, players sometimes engaged during the early game with a few zealots just for the sole purpose of forcing the enemy to build a sunken colony which ultimately hurt their economy.
Countering reapers isn't as hard as many people think. Spread the creep carefully. Fly your overlords to key-positions, so that your defence force can welcome the reapers. The queens have to be controlled very tightly, so that they don't run into their doom. You must have some practice and a good countering build order, though. Speed is obligatory but if the enemy accumulates considerable masses of reapers, only roaches will be able to fend them off. If done well, the threat will finally be fully neutralized by hydras, roach speed or mutas. In that case the game transitions into follow-ups and the Zerg might already have an advantage, because the Terran sunk tons of gas into reapers, which possess only a very low amount of hit-points.
At this stage everyone could argue a lot about the damage to the Zerg economy or the Terran strength of switching to marauders. Probably someone could write whole guides just about this particular TvZ constellation. But most of these games, that I saw, were decided by many small mistakes considering micro and positioning of the Zerg, who became nervous probably due to a lack of concentration and practice vs this opening. In that case, it's game over, like it's game over when you, after 500 games, forget to build a detector vs a dark templar rush. At the moment reapers mainly serve their purpose in some TvZ openings.
And by the way, the reaper's path-finding AI is so horribly broken and regularly causes some terrible, terrible damage to my nerves. I don't understand, why a game with such cunning controls allows such blunders.
Evolution in strategies and tactics
The speed at which the style of play is transitioning into new ones, is huge. The supply of high quality commentaries and other sources just exploded with the beginning of the beta. Newly discovered control tricks are constantly being distributed by forums posts or Youtube videos. Strategies become popular quite fast, often through tournaments.
A few weeks ago the Terran hard counter to mass mutas was humiliated by showing how mutas will escape their splash damage. At the moment sling/bling/muta may be the way to go vs Terrans. Many Terrans are currently experimenting around with ghosts. New mainstream strategies could easily emerge from that. Such strategies will from the start be overly successful and achieve higher win rates, when the every day life of a committed strategist becomes interrupted by the unforeseen and unusual.
Once a new strategy appears, a process of fermentation sets in. It should not be allowed to judge the whole balance of the game or a unit while this process is still going on. Everyone should wait until proper counters are forged and practised. This may take two to three weeks, I guess.
Possible shift in success
Recent tournaments have shown that Terrans might be losing their pole positions. The MLG was dominated by three Protoss players. Nevertheless, it has been reported in another thread that there definitely is a large crowd of Terrans in the highest ranks. Why is that so?
Map imbalances
In Broodwar the structure of a map was such an important factor, so that many spoke of map imbalances instead of calling the game itself imbalanced. The same is true for Starcraft 2. Large plateaus influence scouting behaviour, back doors limit the value of static defences and propel well-timed attacks to higher heights. Cliffs can translate into huge advantages for certain units. There are unique and special strategies a player can only pull off on one particular map.
My own statistics indicate that their are huge imbalances on a few maps for a few match-ups. This leads me to the next point.
Blizzard hasn't done it's homework
In order to be able to accurately judge if a map is skewed in favour of one race, data is required. The individual is already supplied by the community with a large array of tools like sc2gears, sc2ranks, yabot, sc2rar and so on. They are great. They are awesome sometimes. But they can't make up for the lack of data supplied by the battle.net.
Instead of showing sophisticated analyses, the whole character profile pages are full of flashy non-sense. I can't look up what the race win percentages on the ladder maps are, but I know that once some freaking medivacs healed 5000 hit-points in one of my games. I'm really angry at Blizzard that I have to look for smart kid's webpages to be able to gather sufficient data.
From my own stats I know that I have two match-ups with a win-rate of just 40%. There seem to be match-ups, which are imbalanced, not races. This might also just occur on particular maps. I'd like to know that.
The pawn analogy
Nerfing everything, which is too strong, is dangerous. Starcraft 2 already lacks a lot of AoE spells like plague, dark swarm or the old arbiter's skills (the mothership is rarely spotted). If every interesting unit is devalued into oblivion, Starcraft 2 will feel like chess, but where the only chess piece which is allowed, is the pawn. Noone would want a game like that. They did the same mistake with Warcraft 3. They even introduced damage caps. The result was horrible. They introduced so many special rules, so that the whole countering system became a mash.
Starcraft 2 is in danger of becoming something similar. A few units are already underused and don't serve a particular purpose in some match-ups, e.g. the carrier. That is the logical outcome if you nerf units too often, for example by higher build times. High build times really ruin strong units like the carrier, which will be scouted in time and henceforth can't be played as a response. I barely see any off carriers anymore in PvT like in the old game. Another solution should be pursued: the creation and maintenance of game mechanics, which feel overpowered, even if they only do so in special cases. If spells like plague would still rule, there wouldn't be a problem with the battlecruisers at all.
Conclusion
The proposed balance changes don't heed these points. They are the result of short-sided, overr-reacting sentiments and will cause additional damage to the depth of the game. These balance changes might even spring new imbalances and make Zerg too strong. Creating strong hard counters would serve the balance much better.
Appendixes (just because I'm posting):
1. The changes in detail
- Zealot build time and warpgate cooldown +5 seconds each:
I'd leave them alone.
- Reapers and bunkers build time +5 seconds:
I'd leave them also alone. There were no issues with the bunker at all.
- Siege tank nerf vs. light and unarmored:
My essay implies of course that this is unnecessary. It also doesn't make sense. These units should be blasted by the siege tanks all the more.
- Battlecruisers damage lowering:
Only necessary because of the lack of spells like plague.
- Ultralisk damage lowering and removal of the ram:
I completely agree on the removal. I don't think that the damage lowering will have a large impact. It's ok.
2. Things, that look patchy
- Neural parasite is broken. It adds a factor of uncertainty because the player doesn't know in which favor the situation will tip. It is also barely viable against big late game armies. Some change to its mechanics would be adorable.
- Reapers pathfinding AI. They are sometimes stuck.
- The marauder might need to lose stim. Maybe the slow-effect should in turn be improved.
- Psi storm is worse than in scbw. Not necessarily to be patched.
- Other units which might need some tweaks: corruptor with corruption. It lacks complexity when compared to the devourer. Mothership, carriers, archons are seldom used.
- Planetary fortresses are often mentioned, but are immobile, lack air-defence and don't have mules and scans. They are probably ok, as long as the player doesn't engage them with a ground force. ;-)
|
This is just screaming "Terran player, don't nerf my op race I don't want to lose games."
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On September 07 2010 14:55 StupidFatHobbit wrote:
This is just screaming "Terran player, don't nerf my op race I don't want to lose games." Basically... but he does point out Marauder + Stim is rofls. Not sure how that's never been addressed by Bliz.
|
You say top 300 by region... by rank. Well by random standards.... I mean when the max points are what, 1700 now... I'd say you might at best be decent but by no means qualified to say you are qualified enough to say what should or shouldn't actually be done.
|
Wow I'm really impressed with this post because I actually think it hits the nail on the head. I'm in the top 300 in NA and I completely agree with this.
WITH the exception of warp gates. I think warp gate cooldown is way too low right now. Adding 5 seconds to the warp gate cooldown is completely necessary, but everything else is fine (including zealots from gateways, they don't need 5 seconds added).
The tank/BC nerf is stupid. BC's are ONLY good at surprising enemies with large land armies..... So you nerf them from 8 to 6 dmg and they lose 25% of their DPS? THey will be USELESS!
This guy is right. Nerfs right now are going to make the game boring.
|
On September 07 2010 14:55 StupidFatHobbit wrote:
This is just screaming "Terran player, don't nerf my op race I don't want to lose games."
Way to take a well written, well thought-out post and attempt to make it worthless.
Anyways, I think this post focuses on a great point. This game is SO very young, and sometimes people can forget that. The "magic box" for mutas is a perfect point. In one fell swoop, Thors went from staple anti muta units to being almost worthless against them. Reapers are also starting to be seen as not AS overpowering as people thought when they saw the first 5 rax reaper rush. This game is evolving much quicker than BW, but it is still in it's infancy.
However that is not to say that balance changes are not necessary in any form yet. I'm in support of the proposed changes from blizzard, and I don't think any of them are really too severe to be included. For your argument regarding the siege tanks, that "[light units] should be blasted by the siege tanks all the more", would that mean then that armored units should have the damage against them reduced? Siege tanks, particularly in regards to the TvZ matchup, need to be changed. Zerglings should be able to better fill the role they had in SC1, pushing up close to the tank line so the bulk of the army can make a stronger assault.
There shouldn't be any huge, severe changes to any of the units just yet. But I definitely don't think the proposed changes from Blizzard fall into that category.
|
Perscienter, I think you're the one overreacting, not Blizzard.
Delaying early game tactics gives Zerg slightly more time to prepare build orders, which results in having more options, which results in more interesting games. Right now playing as Zerg for even high level players is basically trying desperately to keep your asscheeks covered, because there are so many ways you can get raped.
Quickly spreading creep and being masterful with a Queen is your solution to fast Reapers? All you have to do with Reapers is run and gun. Creating a creep tumor means that you lose 4 extra larva! Having to ruin your macro in order to spread creep early, in order to effectively hold off an extremely easy to execute rush strategy -- how is that fair? It's easy for Terran to block their ramp on almost every ramp, and most players do it by default.
The changes Blizzard is making are all welcome. It is becoming increasingly obvious that Zerg is a reactionary, weak race who currently has to rely on "tricks" (or much higher APM) to win. Once the patch is out, you'll notice that the whole game will become more interesting and enjoyable, unless you simply want Zerg to be frustrating forever.
|
On September 07 2010 14:51 Perscienter wrote:
...Countering reapers isn't as hard as many people think... The queens have to be controlled very tightly, so that they don't run into their doom. You must have some practice and a good countering build order, though...
...But most of these games, that I saw, were decided by many small mistakes considering micro and positioning of the Zerg...
Isn't that a bit the problem? If Zerg has the exact reactive build order to counter AND micro's perfectly, he can come out even. Maybe ahead, I'm not good enough to make that distinction.
However, if he makes a mistake, he outright looses. FE hatch destroyed pretty much equals gg.
If the Terran makes a micro mistake and looses too many reapers, no real counter attack is possible. Speedlings won't make it past the wall. Roaches might, but there are already plenty of baracks with tech labs on them, so marauders are an easy follow up for defense.
From the VODS I've seen it feels like the siege damage on the reapers is the real problem. Reapers could still harass the drones in the mineral and would still pressure Zerg to make units/crawlers to counter them. However, they would be less of a "micro-mistake-haha-I-win unit", as they could not destroy the hatchery or tech buildings so easily. I think it would make for a more interesting dynamic that way. Reaper to me feels like the first real victim of Blizzard's "Let's make every unit as cool as possible" design methodology.
Also, Chess with only pawns = Checkers 
|
I agree in spirit.
At the same time, I think the game is young and we can look at with fresh, theory-crafted eyes. Right now, we can question, "is it okay that X beats X?" In the future, that will just be how things are and all discussion will be based on how to deal with it. Think about how obnoxious it would be if someone started questioning the basis of a certain matchup for Brood War now.
My biggest concern is that, since its easier, only a few playstyles will end up being viable in each matchup and Blizzard will work to maintain a 50% win ratio. That means, if Protoss is winning 50% of the game versus Terran, no way units that don't currently get used in that matchup will get buffed-- don't want to ruin that perfect 50%! I mean, look at Ultralisks, they got buffed to high heaven because Zerg was losing. Carriers suck worse than Ultralisks ever did, and they never got buffed because Protoss has always been strong.
I guess its kinda hard to make my point but, in essence: While the game is young we NEED to try and examine the game's balance and push it in a positive direction. Obviously we need to accept that the Standard Phoenix/Void Ray opening of 2011 will make Marauders completely useless and anything but OP, but that doesn't change us from trying to think, look, and theorcrafy as best as we can while the game is still in flux.
Brood War had an accepted balance of lots of OP things balancing each other out. Lots of you like that. I don't. I would like to see lots of different strategies and unit compositions work in various match ups and situations. That doesn't mean I want Void rays to no longer pwn buildings or Marauders to no longer pwn everything on the ground ( ), but I want units that don't see any play to get looked at before they get forgotten.
|
On September 07 2010 14:51 Perscienter wrote:
Map imbalances
In Broodwar the structure of a map was such an important factor, so that many spoke of map imbalances instead of calling the game itself imbalanced. The same is true for Starcraft 2. Large plateaus influence scouting behaviour, back doors limit the value of static defences and propel well-timed attacks to higher heights. Cliffs can translate into huge advantages for certain units. There are unique and special strategies a player can only pull off on one particular map.
My own statistics indicate that their are huge imbalances on a few maps for a few match-ups. This leads me to the next point.
I would say that most of the maps make it hard for the whining Zerg to fully utilize their potential, since the race needs a good economy to be effective and once they have it they become very powerful or maybe even OP. To "help" the Zerg we need to make sure that they do not get harrassed as early as they are atm and there are two ways of doing it:
- nerf the units by increasing their production time OR
- increase the size of the maps.
Sadly Blizzard has taken the easy but wrong approach (changing a few numbers for units is wayy quicker than making 6-10 bigger maps).
Map size - not even the terrain features themselves - matters A LOT, because as a Zerg you NEED a big and open center to use your own mobility to surround an enemy army and a big map is needed to make the "immobility disadvantage" to actually be a disadvantage that has an impact on the game.
The actual balance or imbalance of a unit can be seen in direct battles of comparable armies, but it relies heavily on unit composition. Yesterday on GSL one Terran used a fast Battlecruiser tactic to beat a Protoss (who had mostly Zealots and only few Stalkers and Sentries) and Artosis used this as to justify a nerf to the Battlecruiser damage. That is not how you go about it, because a helium balloon which keeps you afloat and a bag of rocks allows you to kill a Zealot without danger. Build the wrong stuff and you lose and that is no justification to start whining.
On September 07 2010 14:51 Perscienter wrote:
Blizzard hasn't done it's homework
Well my approach is: Blizzard doesnt want to admit their tiny maps are the heart of the problem.
A big indicator for maps which are fair for Zerg is Scrap Station. Very long rushing distance, relatively small cliff to jump into the main base. Even the double-destructible rock path is something the Zerg could easily do with a Nydus worm on a really large map. Sadly Blizzard sticks to nerfs instead of truly caring about balanced maps.
|
It's not too early...
It's too late for my taste, Blizzard can't be that ignorant and not see that:
- Reapers and Marauders are heavily overpowered.
- Almost any kind of early timing-push (or 4-gateway-timing-push) is extremely hard for Zerg to hold (they have to sacrifice their economy basically).
- Structural defense is underpowered (cuz stuff like Marauders and Reapers deal ridiculous DMG).
- Zerg has too less options early on and their basic Unit (Zergling) is by far the weakest compared to Zealot/Marine.
- Terran Upgrades like Nitro Packs, Blue-Flames for Hellions and Stim Packs are too cheap and good, while Zergs Upgrades are too expensive and bad (Adrenalin-Upgrade for Zerglings)
- Tech Lab is too cheap, builds too fast and opens up too many Options for Terran.
- The Creep-Mechanic is totally f'd up...
- Several Skills like Neural parasite, 250mm Cannon and HSM have been nerfed to death with no apparent reason.
- THEIR MAPS FKN SUCK!
None of the changes Blizzard mentioned so far won't do anything to make the game more balanced. I mean: 5 sec's more on the reapers? With 5-rax-reapers, you can't build Reapers out of all raxes at any time anyways until the expansion is fully up- and running, so absolutely no harm done there. zealot -5 sec? Who cares if all the other Warpgate-Units still have a much too short cooldown for Zerg to hold without saccing their economy (while Protoss can pump Probes and even expand...). BC-change is ridiculous and the Siege-Tank-nerf will only make Tanks less viable in TvP, but everyone uses Bio in TvP anyways, so who cares?... rly, it's like Blizzard randomly throws dart at the wall with different Units and Stat-buff's/nerf and then implements them into the game - how can they be so oblivious?
|
I dont get op really..
I mean we played ages with that beta patch like 6weeks+ ? And the last betapatch already had the +5s on zealots and bunkers and it was really a good patch also according to some top players like Idra(just to mention one).
There is no more testing needed. There is no secret way to get zergling speed faster or to magically get a defense up for reaper/bunker rushes.. Its just like that.
Also Zealots are about the same. We even saw players like Dimaga loosing to the first 2 Zealots of Socke once. Its just one small mistake instantly lets you loose the game.
Its not possible to play hatch first builds or even 14 gas build are not working vs close pos P.
Saying that there is no issue with bunkers at all is showing the lack of understanding of Op regarding some of the matchups.
But yea nerfing siege tanks makes no sense because they should blast unarmored and light units.. I felt trolled reading through some that.. seriously.
|
When people claim their rank and race and skill as merit for what there saying they should have to post there battle.net profile for proof cause anyone can claim there top 300 and random but he could very well be a silver terran the way he defends everything terran except rauders, but then says slows should be improved, not saying its true just reeks of terran, BTW mine profile is http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/profile/414614/1/MIKEHUNTEASY/
|
On September 07 2010 14:51 Perscienter wrote:
Why it is too early to make far-reaching balance changes
Countering reapers isn't as hard as many people think. Spread the creep carefully. Fly your overlords to key-positions, so that your defence force can welcome the reapers. The queens have to be controlled very tightly, so that they don't run into their doom. You must have some practice and a good countering build order, though. Speed is obligatory but if the enemy accumulates considerable masses of reapers, only roaches will be able to fend them off. If done well, the threat will finally be fully neutralized by hydras, roach speed or mutas. In that case the game transitions into follow-ups and the Zerg might already have an advantage, because the Terran sunk tons of gas into reapers, which possess only a very low amount of hit-points.
I can't agree. Everything I quoted here is an insult to any professional Zerg player. What you are saying is that with enough amount of practice you can defend off a 5 rax reaper opening and have the economical advance as Zerg. Do you even watch Starcraft II sometimes? Your post is an insult.
I also find it disturbing that every time a well written post appears people are praising the OP for the fact that the wall of text is so well written that they forget to really read what he is saying.
You claim to have followed MLG, or you use MLG as an example that protoss can beat Terran, but did you see any TvZ? Sometimes it is not enough to see only the result of the tournament, sometimes you should also see some actual matches.
You do not see the problem with reapers at this moment? Try to watch some TvZ.
|
On September 07 2010 15:38 kickinhead wrote:
It's not too early...
It's too late for my taste, Blizzard can't be that ignorant and not see that:
- Reapers and Marauders are heavily overpowered.
- Almost any kind of early timing-push (or 4-gateway-timing-push) is extremely hard for Zerg to hold (they have to sacrifice their economy basically).
- Structural defense is underpowered (cuz stuff like Marauders and Reapers deal ridiculous DMG).
- Zerg has too less options early on and their basic Unit (Zergling) is by far the weakest compared to Zealot/Marine.
- Terran (mostly) Infantry Upgrades like Nitro Packs and Stim Packs are too cheap and good, while Zergs Upgrades are too expensive and bad.
- Tech Lab is too cheap, builds too fast and opens up too many Options for Terran.
- The Creep-Mechanic is totally f'd up...
- THEIR MAPS FKN SUCK!
None of the changes Blizzard mentioned so far won't do anything to make the game more balanced. I mean: 5 sec's more on the reapers? With 5-rax-reapers, you can't build Reapers out of all raxes at any time anyways until the expansion is fully up- and running, so absolutely no harm done there. zealot -5 sec? Who cares if all the other Warpgate-Units still have a much too short cooldown for Zerg to hold without saccing their economy (while Protoss can pump Probes and even expand...). BC-change is ridiculous and the Siege-Tank-nerf will only make Tanks less viable in TvP, but everyone uses Bio in TvP anyways, so who cares?... rly, it's like Blizzard randomly throws dart at the wall with different Units and Stat-buff's/nerf and then implements them into the game - how can they be so oblivious?
i agree with everything he said except the techlab and creep mechanic.
did op not watch morrow 5 reaper vs. zerg everygame and winning?? Hello .. he beat idrA in a lan
OP too noob to understand balance. He doesn't see how PvP allin zealot warpin is unstoppable. Battlecruisers are unstoppable against ground and when unexpected. (toomuch for it's cost) and so are ultralisks
you need to keep up with the metagame. I suggest watching TLO replays or events like IEM
|
I don't think it's too early to make changes, the game is clearly not balanced right now, so what's the point of waiting? Sure the game evolves, but you won't achieve "perfect" balance if you wait 6 months between each patches.
|
On September 07 2010 15:05 AJMcSpiffy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 14:55 StupidFatHobbit wrote:
This is just screaming "Terran player, don't nerf my op race I don't want to lose games." Way to take a well written, well thought-out post and attempt to make it worthless. Anyways, I think this post focuses on a great point. This game is SO very young, and sometimes people can forget that. The "magic box" for mutas is a perfect point. In one fell swoop, Thors went from staple anti muta units to being almost worthless against them. Reapers are also starting to be seen as not AS overpowering as people thought when they saw the first 5 rax reaper rush. This game is evolving much quicker than BW, but it is still in it's infancy. However that is not to say that balance changes are not necessary in any form yet. I'm in support of the proposed changes from blizzard, and I don't think any of them are really too severe to be included. For your argument regarding the siege tanks, that "[light units] should be blasted by the siege tanks all the more", would that mean then that armored units should have the damage against them reduced? Siege tanks, particularly in regards to the TvZ matchup, need to be changed. Zerglings should be able to better fill the role they had in SC1, pushing up close to the tank line so the bulk of the army can make a stronger assault. There shouldn't be any huge, severe changes to any of the units just yet. But I definitely don't think the proposed changes from Blizzard fall into that category.
I'm sorry, almost worthless? Have you played against a Marine, Hellion, and a thor or two army? Magic box isn't some magical strategy that completely nullfies thors. It forces the zerg fly directly above the Terran army. And nowadays people are smart about not just making marines against banelings and getting preigniter hellions. Normally, I think mutas would be a lot better at clearing the hellions up front, but they simply can't because the thor is right behind.
|
I agree with the OP but there are times when there is a feeling that a unit or strategy is too strong. for instance: marauder stim 
|
On September 07 2010 16:20 Sprouter wrote:I agree with the OP but there are times when there is a feeling that a unit or strategy is too strong. for instance: marauder stim
Way to contradict yourself....
U think it should stay imba or what?
|
Balance should have happened more actively during Beta and using the opinions of pro gamers instead of stats. They really really blew that opportunity and now that the game has been released and with GSL started, they won't be able to release changes too rapidly.
The changes they have proposed don't make much sense and really don't address the core issues. In any case, that would be better saved for another discussion.
Just to give my 2cents on a few points already made.
@AJMcSpiffy
RE: muta magic box
This isn't really the breakthrough that people make it out to be since it assumes your enemy has Thor's sitting out there on their own and that all the while your Zerg army is massing mutas you are no longer harrassing. This is down to poor scouting and decision making by Terran more so than some neat trick that Zerg have to own Thors. About the only thing it changed was the notion that if Terran spots Mutas, they can hard counter with Thor. Thors are still potent against mutas, especially cost for cost.
RE: 5 rax reaper
The problem isn't that it can't be beat, the problem is that the economic harrassment is too punishing and all the while the Terran opponent has time to expand. For a strategy with the devastating effectiveness of an all-in to also have a viable follow up strategy is one of the main issues, the other being the multitude of openings possible.
Reapers already have superior mobility, yet they get a cheap upgrade to get superior move speed as well. If that weren't enough, they have the ability to destroy buildings quite easily rendering static defense impotent. Instead of a 5 second increase to build time, they should have nitro packs cost 100/100 like ling speed and remove their building damage.
@Rabiator
Maps are a problem, but large maps won't solve all the problems either. A good surround would make things a little easier, but without units able to effectively destroy a bio ball at reasonable cost the followup is pretty much nonexistent.
Recall the Dimaga v Tarson match at IEM on Metalopolis. Day9 and Apollo were constantly amazed at how Tarson always came out ahead of Dimaga in food count whenever they clashed... I just sat there with a big fat "DUH" expression on my face. Banelings are a 1 time use unit. So of course if Dimaga has to blow up a bunch of banelings he is going to wind up with less food. The fact that the number of units needed to destroy that army was greater in food count shows how ineffective the Zerg units are even on a map like metalopolis where you can usually get multiple flanking positions. With the improved unit pathing it becomes even easier to use marauders as shields.
|
English must not be your first language, command of idioms comes later.
Its short-sighted, not "short-sided". Helpful note.
Other than that, a good post. I disagree with your opinion, but I'm impressed by the articulation of said opinion.
|
Looking at it now, I am surprised Marauders were ever allowed to be so powerful/inexpensive/quick to build (depending on how you look at it) to begin with.
Firebats required a whole new building, and were short range specialists. Marauders only need one little add-on, which is massively useful, fast, cheap, can be swapped with multiple buildings(!) Yes, it means you can only produce Marauders from those Barracks which have the Tech Lab, rather than unlocking tech everywhere with a single building, but when they're so cheap and easy to get, and so terribly useful, it doesn't even feel like a strategic choice, it's just obvious and easy.
Anyway, the "Zerg problem" is obvious a matter of having so terribly few options, and such a demanding tech tree, building whole new buildings for (practically) every unit, and needing to research at each of them before the unit becomes even respectable in the field. No wonder early game suffers for them, and ironically they're the ones who have the worst static defense by far, no way to block their ramps. Delaying the ass-pounding is a good start to fixing the issue.
|
I guess your right, man oh man IdrA must be horrible because he just can't spread his creep enough and defend such a simple thing like reaper rush! Well I guess we gotta practice 12 more hours a day so that we can be as good as those terran players!
|
While there may be balance once the game shifts towards new strategies, we can't rely on any sort of arbitrary time to make those balance changes. Because SC2 is a relatively new game, how long should we wait before trends start to stabilize? Months? One Year? Five Years?
Much better is to make small tweaks along the way and see how things change. The changes outlined in the patch notes are by no means gamebreaking and I for one am glad to see how things will pan out (although I don't think some of the fundamental issues are addressed).
|
Yeah I think the title of this thread is totally misleading, come to think of it. It's suggesting that the balance changes are "severe".
|
just hope that by balance one match up they dont mess up another. id prefer buffs to units rather then nerfs.
|
I don't like the reaper change at all. Reapers are used only early game for one build in one matchup(and the odd scout) and what they are doing is even further restricting the reapers to that specific build and nothing else. They just need to be available later, but with better stats.
|
It's definitely not too early to make balance changes. After reading your whole post I am convince that you need to spend some time thinking about these things rather than just typing up all this misinformed nonsense. I'd address each point individually but it's just wayy too much wrongness to spend my time on.
|
On September 07 2010 17:04 lololol wrote:
I don't like the reaper change at all. Reapers are used only early game for one build in one matchup(and the odd scout) and what they are doing is even further restricting the reapers to that specific build and nothing else. They just need to be available later, but with better stats.
That's why I think the changes aren't severe enough: Blizz just needs to totally revamp certain units like reaper and marauder. Instead, they add 5 secs to a 40-sec build time?
HISTERICAL!
|
ooh, so instead of balancing the game as the problems surface lets wait unspecified amount of time in hope they will clear themselves while new ones emerge, great idea, i totally get it
blizz is already erring on the side of caution _tad_ too much for my liking
|
On September 07 2010 15:05 AJMcSpiffy wrote:
In one fell swoop, Thors went from staple anti muta units to being almost worthless against them.
Worthless, as in 'no longer completely hilarious, but still good value'?
10 muta is 1000 gas and 1000 minerals, 3 thors plus 10 marines is 600 gas, 1400 mineral. Even when taking muta mobility into consideration, calling that 'almost worthless' is a huge joke.
|
On September 07 2010 16:24 hdkhang wrote:
RE: 5 rax reaper
The problem isn't that it can't be beat, the problem is that the economic harrassment is too punishing and all the while the Terran opponent has time to expand. For a strategy with the devastating effectiveness of an all-in to also have a viable follow up strategy is one of the main issues, the other being the multitude of openings possible.
Reapers already have superior mobility, yet they get a cheap upgrade to get superior move speed as well. If that weren't enough, they have the ability to destroy buildings quite easily rendering static defense impotent. Instead of a 5 second increase to build time, they should have nitro packs cost 100/100 like ling speed and remove their building damage.
I don't even understand the thinking behind the reaper by Blizzard other than its 'cool'. So it's an early game harassment unit, ok so far (although Hellion seems to share the role anyway). But it can go up cliffs... has a speed upgrade AND can destroy buildings at a ridiculous speed? That would be fine if Zerg had actually got anything new that was useful since BW. If you put things in the context of BW, the Hellion replaces the firebat/vulture. So what does the reaper replace? If you put the reaper into BW it would be just as ridiculous as it is in SC2 considering they got hardly anything extra to help with it. Not to mention it breaks teamplay completely. An important part of BW 2v2 or 3v3 Hunters was holding chokes, but oh now you have units which can completely bypass chokes early-game so its irrelevant.
|
On September 07 2010 16:24 hdkhang wrote:
@Rabiator
Maps are a problem, but large maps won't solve all the problems either. A good surround would make things a little easier, but without units able to effectively destroy a bio ball at reasonable cost the followup is pretty much nonexistent.
Recall the Dimaga v Tarson match at IEM on Metalopolis. Day9 and Apollo were constantly amazed at how Tarson always came out ahead of Dimaga in food count whenever they clashed... I just sat there with a big fat "DUH" expression on my face. Banelings are a 1 time use unit. So of course if Dimaga has to blow up a bunch of banelings he is going to wind up with less food. The fact that the number of units needed to destroy that army was greater in food count shows how ineffective the Zerg units are even on a map like metalopolis where you can usually get multiple flanking positions. With the improved unit pathing it becomes even easier to use marauders as shields.
Now you have me "duh-ing" ... cough cough ... Baneling is not able to destroy a bioball? What more do you want? Being unable to put Marauders in front of your Marines (because you cant surround your whole army with Marauders and still be effective) is actually the only thing you need to nerf their "shielding".
The food numbers do not mean anything for Zerg (meaning you cant compare them to Terrans in a Baneling battle), because you can also reproduce much faster. For a Terran to produce masses you really need a lot of production facilities and getting these takes a ton of time (especially building lots of Reactors).
|
If reapers were only that good against light units so that it fell into a harassment niche I would dislike it much less. The speed of which they can take out a hatch is completely disgusting.
|
On September 07 2010 17:10 Ghad wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 15:05 AJMcSpiffy wrote:
In one fell swoop, Thors went from staple anti muta units to being almost worthless against them. Worthless, as in 'no longer completely hilarious, but still good value'? 10 muta is 1000 gas and 1000 minerals, 3 thors plus 10 marines is 600 gas, 1400 mineral. Even when taking muta mobility into consideration, calling that 'almost worthless' is a huge joke.
Thors become a joke once the Zerg stops trying to kill them with Mutas and instead kills the bases when the Thors have left. Thats the whole point of the game ... destroying the opponents bases & economy and you have automatically won. Armies only matter if they threaten you. The mobile Mutas can also determine when they engage the Thors, so the lumbering giant hulks of steel ARE a joke unless the Mutas suicide into them.
|
Reapers deny zerg doing any fast expansion. So the only option zerg can do is fast speed. Even then its hard to tell if reapers are coming out because a tech lab on barracks can be either reapers hellions with flame or banshees. and those are just the standard builds. I like that BC build that guy did in the GOM match. Too hard to scout and thats why you see most zergs going early gas fast ling speed. Zerg used to atleast have the option to FE vrs t but now were stuck one basing until we have 20 speedlings and 18 drones lol.
they need to be fixed.
EDIT: for top. Missle Turrets destroy air. Get a few in your mineral line and mutalisks are useless.
|
On September 07 2010 15:38 kickinhead wrote:
It's not too early...
It's too late for my taste, Blizzard can't be that ignorant and not see that:
- Reapers and Marauders are heavily overpowered.
- Almost any kind of early timing-push (or 4-gateway-timing-push) is extremely hard for Zerg to hold (they have to sacrifice their economy basically).
- Structural defense is underpowered (cuz stuff like Marauders and Reapers deal ridiculous DMG).
- Zerg has too less options early on and their basic Unit (Zergling) is by far the weakest compared to Zealot/Marine.
- Terran Upgrades like Nitro Packs, Blue-Flames for Hellions and Stim Packs are too cheap and good, while Zergs Upgrades are too expensive and bad (Adrenalin-Upgrade for Zerglings)
- Tech Lab is too cheap, builds too fast and opens up too many Options for Terran.
- The Creep-Mechanic is totally f'd up...
- Several Skills like Neural parasite, 250mm Cannon and HSM have been nerfed to death with no apparent reason.
- THEIR MAPS FKN SUCK!
None of the changes Blizzard mentioned so far won't do anything to make the game more balanced. I mean: 5 sec's more on the reapers? With 5-rax-reapers, you can't build Reapers out of all raxes at any time anyways until the expansion is fully up- and running, so absolutely no harm done there. zealot -5 sec? Who cares if all the other Warpgate-Units still have a much too short cooldown for Zerg to hold without saccing their economy (while Protoss can pump Probes and even expand...). BC-change is ridiculous and the Siege-Tank-nerf will only make Tanks less viable in TvP, but everyone uses Bio in TvP anyways, so who cares?... rly, it's like Blizzard randomly throws dart at the wall with different Units and Stat-buff's/nerf and then implements them into the game - how can they be so oblivious?
This guy pretty much summed my thoughts too. Just wanna add few things:
Zergling's AI should be improved or changed completely. It would wise to change it to so they attack their closest target. This would make countering thor pushes with repairing scvs a bit easier. There is probably some kind trick to this too (like letting zerglings run around thor and hitting hold position), but making this AI change would make them a lot better harassing units when killing enemy workers.
Creep should be a bonus, not a thing that you are forced to spread or you lose. (atleast in early game against T)
Currently 2-Proxy-Gateways feels way too strong against zerg, if zerg is going standard (13-14 pool etc.).
Also I don't really accept that protoss can just warp in more units reinforcing their attacks immediately. Where is defender's advantage?
And about reapers... I don't really know are they THAT good. I pretty much always go 14 pool 15 hatch against T and I can hold reapers just fine. Could be that I haven't played against good T with reapers yet. Ofc they do damage even though they don't kill anything, which is kinda stupid.
|
On September 07 2010 17:20 Ghad wrote:
If reapers were only that good against light units so that it fell into a harassment niche I would dislike it much less. The speed of which they can take out a hatch is completely disgusting.
Yepp - I've punched a wall or two cuz my buildings got assraped within seconds by Reapers... Marauders are not better...
Why would they need that high Anti-Building-DMG?
|
They are base-raiders, plain and simple. The problem is that fucking Tech Lab that unlocks EVERYTHING.
Make them build a seperate god damn building for Mauraders and Reapers, the same way you need to for the Ghost Academy. Call it the Merc Post and put the upgrades for the units in there instead of the Tech Lab. That's what they were going to do, but then they were like, "no let's make it easier so they can rush these units, but let's not give any half-decent equivalent to Zerg, even though Protoss can warp units anywhere they want."
Really, with the Reaper/Marauder rape advantage, this all boils down to the Terran tech tree being so ridiculously flexible and advantageous, whereas Zerg has to build a new building for every unit and then research the upgrades if they dont want them to suck balls.
|
On September 07 2010 17:28 Kelekkis wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 15:38 kickinhead wrote:
It's not too early...
It's too late for my taste, Blizzard can't be that ignorant and not see that:
- Reapers and Marauders are heavily overpowered.
- Almost any kind of early timing-push (or 4-gateway-timing-push) is extremely hard for Zerg to hold (they have to sacrifice their economy basically).
- Structural defense is underpowered (cuz stuff like Marauders and Reapers deal ridiculous DMG).
- Zerg has too less options early on and their basic Unit (Zergling) is by far the weakest compared to Zealot/Marine.
- Terran Upgrades like Nitro Packs, Blue-Flames for Hellions and Stim Packs are too cheap and good, while Zergs Upgrades are too expensive and bad (Adrenalin-Upgrade for Zerglings)
- Tech Lab is too cheap, builds too fast and opens up too many Options for Terran.
- The Creep-Mechanic is totally f'd up...
- Several Skills like Neural parasite, 250mm Cannon and HSM have been nerfed to death with no apparent reason.
- THEIR MAPS FKN SUCK!
None of the changes Blizzard mentioned so far won't do anything to make the game more balanced. I mean: 5 sec's more on the reapers? With 5-rax-reapers, you can't build Reapers out of all raxes at any time anyways until the expansion is fully up- and running, so absolutely no harm done there. zealot -5 sec? Who cares if all the other Warpgate-Units still have a much too short cooldown for Zerg to hold without saccing their economy (while Protoss can pump Probes and even expand...). BC-change is ridiculous and the Siege-Tank-nerf will only make Tanks less viable in TvP, but everyone uses Bio in TvP anyways, so who cares?... rly, it's like Blizzard randomly throws dart at the wall with different Units and Stat-buff's/nerf and then implements them into the game - how can they be so oblivious? This guy pretty much summed my thoughts too. Just wanna add few things: Zergling's AI should be improved or changed completely. It would wise to change it to so they attack their closest target. This would make countering thor pushes with repairing scvs a bit easier. There is probably some kind trick to this too (like letting zerglings run around thor and hitting hold position), but making this AI change would make them a lot better harassing units when killing enemy workers. Creep should be a bonus, not a thing that you are forced to spread or you lose. (atleast in early game against T)Currently 2-Proxy-Gateways feels way too strong against zerg, if zerg is going standard (13-14 pool etc.). Also I don't really accept that protoss can just warp in more units reinforcing their attacks immediately. Where is defender's advantage? And about reapers... I don't really know are they THAT good. I pretty much always go 14 pool 15 hatch against T and I can hold reapers just fine. Could be that I haven't played against good T with reapers yet. Ofc they do damage even though they don't kill anything, which is kinda stupid.
The post you quoted is great, but your comments seem like the comments of a gold level player. Try playing a few games vs 1400+ level terran players and then come back w/ what you have to say about reapers
Edit) Bolded especially misinformed comments
|
I think trying to change things around and patch various units is good. There's nothing special about the damages and hit points and build times of the units right now, that's just what blizzard decided would be balanced so far. If something seems overpowered, sure go ahead and patch it. While I would agree that something like a patch every week is ridiculous, I think that while the game is new, patching it every month or six weeks or so for the first few months is the way to go. There's no reason to cling on to the game how it is right now, because it's most surely not perfect
Also, I've been seeing these thread basically ever since the release of the game (and even during the beta too). For a while I agreed that it was "too early to judge the balance" but now that the game has been out for over a month, I think the people who have been playing consistently for the last month have a pretty good idea of how units interact and what units could be overpowered/underpowered.
|
The problem stems from diversity in skill level and the limited amount of time the game has been live for. This is the population of players who have the capability utilize everything available to them in order to produce positive outcomes for themselves in matches:
|-|
These players should be paid more attention when discussing the balance of the game.
The amount of idiots and players who simply do not have the skill and understanding of the game to produce positive outcomes for themselves looks like this:
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
These people should not comment on the balance of the game. You have no business in dictating how a delicate system of balance should operate if you cannot understand it.
Which brings up an interesting point. Considering Blizzard made WoW a lot easier and catered for the casual player base; do you think it is possible that Blizzard will "dumb down" Sc2 so to speak, and allow the casual/mediocre players to compete with greater ease; as opposed to keeping the game balanced whilst requiring a higher skill cap to perform and achieve balance.
I presume this is where the ranking system comes in. However, I do not feel this negates the point.
|
On September 07 2010 17:38 Cade wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 17:28 Kelekkis wrote:On September 07 2010 15:38 kickinhead wrote:
It's not too early...
It's too late for my taste, Blizzard can't be that ignorant and not see that:
- Reapers and Marauders are heavily overpowered.
- Almost any kind of early timing-push (or 4-gateway-timing-push) is extremely hard for Zerg to hold (they have to sacrifice their economy basically).
- Structural defense is underpowered (cuz stuff like Marauders and Reapers deal ridiculous DMG).
- Zerg has too less options early on and their basic Unit (Zergling) is by far the weakest compared to Zealot/Marine.
- Terran Upgrades like Nitro Packs, Blue-Flames for Hellions and Stim Packs are too cheap and good, while Zergs Upgrades are too expensive and bad (Adrenalin-Upgrade for Zerglings)
- Tech Lab is too cheap, builds too fast and opens up too many Options for Terran.
- The Creep-Mechanic is totally f'd up...
- Several Skills like Neural parasite, 250mm Cannon and HSM have been nerfed to death with no apparent reason.
- THEIR MAPS FKN SUCK!
None of the changes Blizzard mentioned so far won't do anything to make the game more balanced. I mean: 5 sec's more on the reapers? With 5-rax-reapers, you can't build Reapers out of all raxes at any time anyways until the expansion is fully up- and running, so absolutely no harm done there. zealot -5 sec? Who cares if all the other Warpgate-Units still have a much too short cooldown for Zerg to hold without saccing their economy (while Protoss can pump Probes and even expand...). BC-change is ridiculous and the Siege-Tank-nerf will only make Tanks less viable in TvP, but everyone uses Bio in TvP anyways, so who cares?... rly, it's like Blizzard randomly throws dart at the wall with different Units and Stat-buff's/nerf and then implements them into the game - how can they be so oblivious? This guy pretty much summed my thoughts too. Just wanna add few things: Zergling's AI should be improved or changed completely. It would wise to change it to so they attack their closest target. This would make countering thor pushes with repairing scvs a bit easier. There is probably some kind trick to this too (like letting zerglings run around thor and hitting hold position), but making this AI change would make them a lot better harassing units when killing enemy workers. Creep should be a bonus, not a thing that you are forced to spread or you lose. (atleast in early game against T)Currently 2-Proxy-Gateways feels way too strong against zerg, if zerg is going standard (13-14 pool etc.). Also I don't really accept that protoss can just warp in more units reinforcing their attacks immediately. Where is defender's advantage? And about reapers... I don't really know are they THAT good. I pretty much always go 14 pool 15 hatch against T and I can hold reapers just fine. Could be that I haven't played against good T with reapers yet. Ofc they do damage even though they don't kill anything, which is kinda stupid. The post you quoted is great, but your comments seem like the comments of a gold level player. Try playing a few games vs 1400+ level terran players and then come back w/ what you have to say about reapers Edit) Bolded especially misinformed comments
Not a gold player (~900 diamond), but like I said that it could be that I haven't played against good T yet.
Creep thing might be a bit over exaggerated, but it is currently how I feel. :p
|
I think that you're missing a very big point, OP. Even top Terran players like Morrow think that terran is a bit too strong against zerg. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=145594, that's the IEM interview with Morrow after he got out of his group stage. Towards the end he comments a little bit about balance between terran and zerg.
And as far as protoss stacking the top ranking at MLG? The main reason that that happened was because all of the terran players mostly practiced TvT rather than TvP; they knew that that matchup was simply more important, so they put more focus into it. It was stated in, I believe, one of the Weapon of Choice casts. The fact that the protoss pulled through there makes me think that TvP is fairly close balance-wise. But the fact that terran players were focusing on TvT says volumes about what they feel is a threat to their chances. Hint: it wasn't protoss or zerg.
They aren't making severe balance changes. Five seconds longer on a build time is not severe. And nowhere did anyone say "this is permanent and will be like this forever." Really, the only point I agree with the OP on, is nerfing everything is a bad way to balance.
It's a good thing we haven't seen the entire list of balance changes, because only a handful seem to be more than enough to make people go nuts. And just because you're a random player doesn't make you more qualified to talk on balance than anyone else. It (theoretically) makes you less biased, yes. But more qualified? Absolutely not.
|
Broodwar got patched. SC2 has glaring imbalances that are waiting to happen and appear already. We don't need to wait as long as in BW.
edit: While i agree that it still needs some time to fully show the problems and things that actually work well, it just seems that you seem to have added a little bias to this. Of blizzards changes, the only one you agree with is the Zerg nerf? That's what's confusing. Marauder stim should be changed, whether it's fire rate, lose mor health, i don't know, but 5 seconds on a reaper shouldn't make too much of a difference, but it can make enough.
|
Idra is a great player but stop pointing out the IEM finals to support reaper imbalance. Idra had no ideea how to defend properly against a rather new build put in practice PERFECTLY by Morrow. I know that zerg players have the impression that reapers move around by themselves but if you look at TvZ reaper plays the terran uses more apm than the zerg.
I dont want to insult any1 but this reaper crap is just a fucking l2p issue...Watch the replay below of FruitSeller vs AugustWerra (ye its a 5 rax reaper). Look at the economy of both players and nr of drones. If you saw that at the finals of IEM now Blizzard would nerf the zergling build time or something like that.
http://www.sc2rep.com/replays/show/id/873
|
On September 07 2010 18:25 sadyque wrote:Idra is a great player but stop pointing out the IEM finals to support reaper imbalance. Idra had no ideea how to defend properly against a rather new build put in practice PERFECTLY by Morrow. I know that zerg players have the impression that reapers move around by themselves but if you look at TvZ reaper plays the terran uses more apm than the zerg. I dont want to insult any1 but this reaper crap is just a fucking l2p issue...Watch the replay below of FruitSeller vs AugustWerra (ye its a 5 rax reaper). Look at the economy of both players and nr of drones. If you saw that at the finals of IEM now Blizzard would nerf the zergling build time or something like that. http://www.sc2rep.com/replays/show/id/873
reaper a lsp issue? and your argument is: terran player uses more apm when microing reapers than a zerg trying to defend? that's just weak. Why would a zerg spam click on the same location if a single correct click will do the job. The reaper, on the other hand, has much more potential for micro than zerglings and queen that is trying to hold them off. If faster micro will enbale me to shut-down reapers easier, then no doubt you would find zergs having very high apm when dealing with reapers.
Top terrans have repeatedly stated that zerg is behind (i.e. terran is ahead) just by a zerg being forced to stay on one base if a T gets early reapers. You are clearly relatively inexperienced, and does not play zerg at a serious level, please know what you are on about before telling zergs to l2p.
|
On September 07 2010 18:25 sadyque wrote:Idra is a great player but stop pointing out the IEM finals to support reaper imbalance. Idra had no ideea how to defend properly against a rather new build put in practice PERFECTLY by Morrow. I know that zerg players have the impression that reapers move around by themselves but if you look at TvZ reaper plays the terran uses more apm than the zerg. I dont want to insult any1 but this reaper crap is just a fucking l2p issue...Watch the replay below of FruitSeller vs AugustWerra (ye its a 5 rax reaper). Look at the economy of both players and nr of drones. If you saw that at the finals of IEM now Blizzard would nerf the zergling build time or something like that. http://www.sc2rep.com/replays/show/id/873
so a non zerg player(i can only presume you dont play zerg) is telling all zerg players to learn to play?
wait perhaps the answer to beating the 5 rax reaper build is nydus worms?
just because you can show 1 replay of the 5 rax reaper not demolishing a zerg player doesn't mean anything.
BUT WAIT idra only lost 2 times from the 3 times morrow used reapers on him so there must be no problem at all.
|
On September 07 2010 18:43 TyrantPotato wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 18:25 sadyque wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Idra is a great player but stop pointing out the IEM finals to support reaper imbalance. Idra had no ideea how to defend properly against a rather new build put in practice PERFECTLY by Morrow. I know that zerg players have the impression that reapers move around by themselves but if you look at TvZ reaper plays the terran uses more apm than the zerg. I dont want to insult any1 but this reaper crap is just a fucking l2p issue...Watch the replay below of FruitSeller vs AugustWerra (ye its a 5 rax reaper). Look at the economy of both players and nr of drones. If you saw that at the finals of IEM now Blizzard would nerf the zergling build time or something like that. http://www.sc2rep.com/replays/show/id/873 so a non zerg player(i can only presume you dont play zerg) is telling all zerg players to learn to play? wait perhaps the answer to beating the 5 rax reaper build is nydus worms? just because you can show 1 replay of the 5 rax reaper not demolishing a zerg player doesn't mean anything. BUT WAIT idra only lost 2 times from the 3 times morrow used reapers on him so there must be no problem at all.
Again with the Idra matches. Thats all you have? One set? Just one set? Thats all the proof you need? Has any of you considered that morrow won cuz he (at least in those games) was actually THE BETTER player? I seem to recall that he beat Idra in one macro game too on Idra's turf. And its not just one replay. Check the latest tvz's and you will see many zerg players easily countering reapers and even getting ahead of the Terran.
So Morrow said reapers are op after the matches. So thats one man's opionion. Contrary to popular belief if 1-2 pros state that something is OP it isnt necessarily true....
|
On September 07 2010 18:52 sadyque wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 18:43 TyrantPotato wrote:On September 07 2010 18:25 sadyque wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Idra is a great player but stop pointing out the IEM finals to support reaper imbalance. Idra had no ideea how to defend properly against a rather new build put in practice PERFECTLY by Morrow. I know that zerg players have the impression that reapers move around by themselves but if you look at TvZ reaper plays the terran uses more apm than the zerg. I dont want to insult any1 but this reaper crap is just a fucking l2p issue...Watch the replay below of FruitSeller vs AugustWerra (ye its a 5 rax reaper). Look at the economy of both players and nr of drones. If you saw that at the finals of IEM now Blizzard would nerf the zergling build time or something like that. http://www.sc2rep.com/replays/show/id/873 so a non zerg player(i can only presume you dont play zerg) is telling all zerg players to learn to play? wait perhaps the answer to beating the 5 rax reaper build is nydus worms? just because you can show 1 replay of the 5 rax reaper not demolishing a zerg player doesn't mean anything. BUT WAIT idra only lost 2 times from the 3 times morrow used reapers on him so there must be no problem at all. Again with the Idra matches. Thats all you have? One set? Just one set? Thats all the proof you need? Has any of you considered that morrow won cuz he (at least in those games) was actually THE BETTER player? I seem to recall that he beat Idra in one macro game too on Idra's turf. And its not just one replay. Check the latest tvz's and you will see many zerg players easily countering reapers and even getting ahead of the Terran. So Morrow said reapers are op after the matches. So thats one man's opionion. Contrary to popular belief if 1-2 pros state that something is OP it isnt necessarily true....
but this time it is...
'nuff said!
|
On September 07 2010 18:52 sadyque wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 18:43 TyrantPotato wrote:On September 07 2010 18:25 sadyque wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Idra is a great player but stop pointing out the IEM finals to support reaper imbalance. Idra had no ideea how to defend properly against a rather new build put in practice PERFECTLY by Morrow. I know that zerg players have the impression that reapers move around by themselves but if you look at TvZ reaper plays the terran uses more apm than the zerg. I dont want to insult any1 but this reaper crap is just a fucking l2p issue...Watch the replay below of FruitSeller vs AugustWerra (ye its a 5 rax reaper). Look at the economy of both players and nr of drones. If you saw that at the finals of IEM now Blizzard would nerf the zergling build time or something like that. http://www.sc2rep.com/replays/show/id/873 so a non zerg player(i can only presume you dont play zerg) is telling all zerg players to learn to play? wait perhaps the answer to beating the 5 rax reaper build is nydus worms? just because you can show 1 replay of the 5 rax reaper not demolishing a zerg player doesn't mean anything. BUT WAIT idra only lost 2 times from the 3 times morrow used reapers on him so there must be no problem at all. Again with the Idra matches. Thats all you have? One set? Just one set? Thats all the proof you need? Has any of you considered that morrow won cuz he (at least in those games) was actually THE BETTER player? I seem to recall that he beat Idra in one macro game too on Idra's turf. And its not just one replay. Check the latest tvz's and you will see many zerg players easily countering reapers and even getting ahead of the Terran. So Morrow said reapers are op after the matches. So thats one man's opionion. Contrary to popular belief if 1-2 pros state that something is OP it isnt necessarily true....
you obvoiusly misread my post. i never claimed idras game is the proof to reaper imbalance. but wait is that all you have? when ever some one even mentions IDRA you go on the attack. thinking if i keep attacking and attacking they wont nerf my race.
check all the latest zvt replays. dont claim something unless you provide links. all these zvt replays where zergs already have the answer to 5 rax reapers that have mysteriously avoided all the zerg players who are looking for them yet you one person has access to them all?
hmmm tell me, are we going to take the word of people who play the game FOR A LIVING, or you, someone who is telling us to l2p? if a professional says something is OP, even after themselves using it, obvoiusly something must be up, otherwise they would be saying it.
but again, where are the links to all these hidden ZvT replays where Reapers are no longer a problem to zerg?
|
Why it is too early to make far-reaching balance changes
I don't see anything on that list that could reasonably be described as "far-reaching". All of the changes are small and subtle. None of them are "severe" in any way.
Instead of showing sophisticated analyses, the whole character profile pages are full of flashy non-sense. I can't look up what the race win percentages on the ladder maps are, but I know that once some freaking medivacs healed 5000 hit-points in one of my games. I'm really angry at Blizzard that I have to look for smart kid's webpages to be able to gather sufficient data.
Do you honestly believe that Blizzard is working off of that kind of data, rather than looking at internally gathered data that they're not making public?
High build times really ruin strong units like the carrier, which will be scouted in time and henceforth can't be played as a response. I barely see any off carriers anymore in PvT like in the old game.
I don't see carriers being used in SC1 very much either. You occasionally see someone go 2-base Carrier in PvT, but this is generally a pretty all-in-ish move. It's hardly standard play. Not since Flash taught all the Terrans how to absolutely wreck Carriers.
Basically... but he does point out Marauder + Stim is rofls
I actually don't mind Marauder+Stim. Terrans are all about throwing down massive damage. What I mind is the cost of the Marauder and its Hp. Bump it up to 125/50 or drop its HP down to 75, and you'd have a fine unit. It would still be useful, but it wouldn't be as... suppressing as it currently is.
|
so using this logic why was zerg nerfed in the first place?
rofl i just read your comments on the patch notes. wow youre retarded.
Disagree with all nerfs except for the zerg one.
Why such troll threads are allowed to stay up? Jeez.
|
The thing is that might as well cahnge it now and if it was wring when other strats evolve they can bring it back ..
|
On September 07 2010 19:00 TyrantPotato wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 18:52 sadyque wrote:On September 07 2010 18:43 TyrantPotato wrote:On September 07 2010 18:25 sadyque wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Idra is a great player but stop pointing out the IEM finals to support reaper imbalance. Idra had no ideea how to defend properly against a rather new build put in practice PERFECTLY by Morrow. I know that zerg players have the impression that reapers move around by themselves but if you look at TvZ reaper plays the terran uses more apm than the zerg. I dont want to insult any1 but this reaper crap is just a fucking l2p issue...Watch the replay below of FruitSeller vs AugustWerra (ye its a 5 rax reaper). Look at the economy of both players and nr of drones. If you saw that at the finals of IEM now Blizzard would nerf the zergling build time or something like that. http://www.sc2rep.com/replays/show/id/873 so a non zerg player(i can only presume you dont play zerg) is telling all zerg players to learn to play? wait perhaps the answer to beating the 5 rax reaper build is nydus worms? just because you can show 1 replay of the 5 rax reaper not demolishing a zerg player doesn't mean anything. BUT WAIT idra only lost 2 times from the 3 times morrow used reapers on him so there must be no problem at all. Again with the Idra matches. Thats all you have? One set? Just one set? Thats all the proof you need? Has any of you considered that morrow won cuz he (at least in those games) was actually THE BETTER player? I seem to recall that he beat Idra in one macro game too on Idra's turf. And its not just one replay. Check the latest tvz's and you will see many zerg players easily countering reapers and even getting ahead of the Terran. So Morrow said reapers are op after the matches. So thats one man's opionion. Contrary to popular belief if 1-2 pros state that something is OP it isnt necessarily true.... you obvoiusly misread my post. i never claimed idras game is the proof to reaper imbalance. but wait is that all you have? when ever some one even mentions IDRA you go on the attack. thinking if i keep attacking and attacking they wont nerf my race. check all the latest zvt replays. dont claim something unless you provide links. all these zvt replays where zergs already have the answer to 5 rax reapers that have mysteriously avoided all the zerg players who are looking for them yet you one person has access to them all? hmmm tell me, are we going to take the word of people who play the game FOR A LIVING, or you, someone who is telling us to l2p? if a professional says something is OP, even after themselves using it, obvoiusly something must be up, otherwise they would be saying it. but again, where are the links to all these hidden ZvT replays where Reapers are no longer a problem to zerg?
I dont tell people to l2p based on my play skills. Im a 900pts diamond terran. That doesnt justify me telling people to do shit .
On the other hand i watch all ...and i do mean ALL (at least all i can find :D) replays from 3-4 rep sites and TL for every TvX games. Surprisingly lately i see games starting with 3rax reapers 5 rax reapers countered and pwned. The replay i linked was one i rememberd of the top of my head cuz i watched it last night.
And dont say that people who play for a living said that reapers are op. Its just Morrow who said that. And i dont remember anyone annointing him the god of Stracraft or something...Oh ya...Tarson said that reapers are Op too...also at the IEM but he got his ass kicked every time he used them..
|
On September 07 2010 18:25 sadyque wrote:
I dont want to insult any1 but this reaper crap is just a fucking l2p issue...
now you say
On September 07 2010 19:23 sadyque wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 19:00 TyrantPotato wrote:On September 07 2010 18:52 sadyque wrote:On September 07 2010 18:43 TyrantPotato wrote:On September 07 2010 18:25 sadyque wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Idra is a great player but stop pointing out the IEM finals to support reaper imbalance. Idra had no ideea how to defend properly against a rather new build put in practice PERFECTLY by Morrow. I know that zerg players have the impression that reapers move around by themselves but if you look at TvZ reaper plays the terran uses more apm than the zerg. I dont want to insult any1 but this reaper crap is just a fucking l2p issue...Watch the replay below of FruitSeller vs AugustWerra (ye its a 5 rax reaper). Look at the economy of both players and nr of drones. If you saw that at the finals of IEM now Blizzard would nerf the zergling build time or something like that. http://www.sc2rep.com/replays/show/id/873 so a non zerg player(i can only presume you dont play zerg) is telling all zerg players to learn to play? wait perhaps the answer to beating the 5 rax reaper build is nydus worms? just because you can show 1 replay of the 5 rax reaper not demolishing a zerg player doesn't mean anything. BUT WAIT idra only lost 2 times from the 3 times morrow used reapers on him so there must be no problem at all. Again with the Idra matches. Thats all you have? One set? Just one set? Thats all the proof you need? Has any of you considered that morrow won cuz he (at least in those games) was actually THE BETTER player? I seem to recall that he beat Idra in one macro game too on Idra's turf. And its not just one replay. Check the latest tvz's and you will see many zerg players easily countering reapers and even getting ahead of the Terran. So Morrow said reapers are op after the matches. So thats one man's opionion. Contrary to popular belief if 1-2 pros state that something is OP it isnt necessarily true.... you obvoiusly misread my post. i never claimed idras game is the proof to reaper imbalance. but wait is that all you have? when ever some one even mentions IDRA you go on the attack. thinking if i keep attacking and attacking they wont nerf my race. check all the latest zvt replays. dont claim something unless you provide links. all these zvt replays where zergs already have the answer to 5 rax reapers that have mysteriously avoided all the zerg players who are looking for them yet you one person has access to them all? hmmm tell me, are we going to take the word of people who play the game FOR A LIVING, or you, someone who is telling us to l2p? if a professional says something is OP, even after themselves using it, obvoiusly something must be up, otherwise they would be saying it. but again, where are the links to all these hidden ZvT replays where Reapers are no longer a problem to zerg? I dont tell people to l2p based on my play skills . Im a 900pts diamond terran. That doesnt justify me telling people to do shit .
if you are going to argue. keep consistant.
btw how did i guess you were terran
|
Replays where a zerg actually defeats 5rr is of course gonna be uploaded, what would the point be in uploading the 95% of matches where the reaper cheese runs over the zergs on a daily basis.
Terran players asking zerg players to ltp is frankly just pathetic.. why is such trolling even allowed?
|
Let's try taking a different tack in terms of "balance", OP. To be precise, let's throw balance out the window and say that what's important is that the game is fun. Right now, the game isn't fun for many Zerg players. It isn't fun to have your base raped by Reapers and be forced to play perfectly to counter it. It isn't fun to have to prepare for a thousand and one harassment and early pressure strategies. It isn't fun to manage an excellent economy and have your army killed by much simpler compositions with much lower control. From my one-game experience as Terran, I can also say that it isn't fun to just mass Marauders and win, but I'm not experienced enough with them to make serious judgment calls.
In order for Starcraft II to succeed, it needs to be played for a long time. In order for it to be played for a long time, it needs to be fun and interesting to watch. 5rax Reaper is anything but. The thing that made BW such a fucking INCREDIBLE game was that all races were fun and interesting to watch. You watch ZvT in BW, it's pressure with lings into counterpressure with MM ball into counterpressure with Mutas into counterpressure with Science Vessels into an endgame with Defilers, Cracklings, and Ultras. Every race has its period of aggression, and they can always be aggressive back with a little bit of Muta harass or an MM push into a third. That's pretty exciting. SC2 ZvT? 1rax Reaper aggression into 3rax Reaper aggression into 5rax Reaper aggression with an expo into 5rax Marauder aggression possibly into counterpressure with Mutas, and over half the time the games don't get past that point. That's BORING. Having all the core decisions and initiative lie with one player is a recipe for dull, solitaire-esque games. That needs to be fixed.
|
On September 07 2010 19:28 TyrantPotato wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 18:25 sadyque wrote:
I dont want to insult any1 but this reaper crap is just a fucking l2p issue...
now you say Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 19:23 sadyque wrote:On September 07 2010 19:00 TyrantPotato wrote:On September 07 2010 18:52 sadyque wrote:On September 07 2010 18:43 TyrantPotato wrote:On September 07 2010 18:25 sadyque wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Idra is a great player but stop pointing out the IEM finals to support reaper imbalance. Idra had no ideea how to defend properly against a rather new build put in practice PERFECTLY by Morrow. I know that zerg players have the impression that reapers move around by themselves but if you look at TvZ reaper plays the terran uses more apm than the zerg. I dont want to insult any1 but this reaper crap is just a fucking l2p issue...Watch the replay below of FruitSeller vs AugustWerra (ye its a 5 rax reaper). Look at the economy of both players and nr of drones. If you saw that at the finals of IEM now Blizzard would nerf the zergling build time or something like that. http://www.sc2rep.com/replays/show/id/873 so a non zerg player(i can only presume you dont play zerg) is telling all zerg players to learn to play? wait perhaps the answer to beating the 5 rax reaper build is nydus worms? just because you can show 1 replay of the 5 rax reaper not demolishing a zerg player doesn't mean anything. BUT WAIT idra only lost 2 times from the 3 times morrow used reapers on him so there must be no problem at all. Again with the Idra matches. Thats all you have? One set? Just one set? Thats all the proof you need? Has any of you considered that morrow won cuz he (at least in those games) was actually THE BETTER player? I seem to recall that he beat Idra in one macro game too on Idra's turf. And its not just one replay. Check the latest tvz's and you will see many zerg players easily countering reapers and even getting ahead of the Terran. So Morrow said reapers are op after the matches. So thats one man's opionion. Contrary to popular belief if 1-2 pros state that something is OP it isnt necessarily true.... you obvoiusly misread my post. i never claimed idras game is the proof to reaper imbalance. but wait is that all you have? when ever some one even mentions IDRA you go on the attack. thinking if i keep attacking and attacking they wont nerf my race. check all the latest zvt replays. dont claim something unless you provide links. all these zvt replays where zergs already have the answer to 5 rax reapers that have mysteriously avoided all the zerg players who are looking for them yet you one person has access to them all? hmmm tell me, are we going to take the word of people who play the game FOR A LIVING, or you, someone who is telling us to l2p? if a professional says something is OP, even after themselves using it, obvoiusly something must be up, otherwise they would be saying it. but again, where are the links to all these hidden ZvT replays where Reapers are no longer a problem to zerg? I dont tell people to l2p based on my play skills . Im a 900pts diamond terran. That doesnt justify me telling people to do shit . if you are going to argue. keep consistant. btw how did i guess you were terran
You guessed from my scv icon? .....And read the rest of the post too not just the 1st 2 sentences.
I dont defend the terran race so that blizz wont nerf them. I seriously doubt blizz reads this forum and if they did im pretty sure they wont be "enlightened" by my posts or yours for that matter.
Im actually happy with the 5s reaper+bunker nerf. It does what its supposed to. Nerf the reaper+bunker rush wich forced the zerg to one base a lot longer than they should.
This nerf does not affect 5 rax reapers in the slightest and it shouldnt...
|
On September 07 2010 19:38 sadyque wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 19:28 TyrantPotato wrote:On September 07 2010 18:25 sadyque wrote:
I dont want to insult any1 but this reaper crap is just a fucking l2p issue...
now you say On September 07 2010 19:23 sadyque wrote:On September 07 2010 19:00 TyrantPotato wrote:On September 07 2010 18:52 sadyque wrote:On September 07 2010 18:43 TyrantPotato wrote:On September 07 2010 18:25 sadyque wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Idra is a great player but stop pointing out the IEM finals to support reaper imbalance. Idra had no ideea how to defend properly against a rather new build put in practice PERFECTLY by Morrow. I know that zerg players have the impression that reapers move around by themselves but if you look at TvZ reaper plays the terran uses more apm than the zerg. I dont want to insult any1 but this reaper crap is just a fucking l2p issue...Watch the replay below of FruitSeller vs AugustWerra (ye its a 5 rax reaper). Look at the economy of both players and nr of drones. If you saw that at the finals of IEM now Blizzard would nerf the zergling build time or something like that. http://www.sc2rep.com/replays/show/id/873 so a non zerg player(i can only presume you dont play zerg) is telling all zerg players to learn to play? wait perhaps the answer to beating the 5 rax reaper build is nydus worms? just because you can show 1 replay of the 5 rax reaper not demolishing a zerg player doesn't mean anything. BUT WAIT idra only lost 2 times from the 3 times morrow used reapers on him so there must be no problem at all. Again with the Idra matches. Thats all you have? One set? Just one set? Thats all the proof you need? Has any of you considered that morrow won cuz he (at least in those games) was actually THE BETTER player? I seem to recall that he beat Idra in one macro game too on Idra's turf. And its not just one replay. Check the latest tvz's and you will see many zerg players easily countering reapers and even getting ahead of the Terran. So Morrow said reapers are op after the matches. So thats one man's opionion. Contrary to popular belief if 1-2 pros state that something is OP it isnt necessarily true.... you obvoiusly misread my post. i never claimed idras game is the proof to reaper imbalance. but wait is that all you have? when ever some one even mentions IDRA you go on the attack. thinking if i keep attacking and attacking they wont nerf my race. check all the latest zvt replays. dont claim something unless you provide links. all these zvt replays where zergs already have the answer to 5 rax reapers that have mysteriously avoided all the zerg players who are looking for them yet you one person has access to them all? hmmm tell me, are we going to take the word of people who play the game FOR A LIVING, or you, someone who is telling us to l2p? if a professional says something is OP, even after themselves using it, obvoiusly something must be up, otherwise they would be saying it. but again, where are the links to all these hidden ZvT replays where Reapers are no longer a problem to zerg? I dont tell people to l2p based on my play skills . Im a 900pts diamond terran. That doesnt justify me telling people to do shit . if you are going to argue. keep consistant. btw how did i guess you were terran You guessed from my scv icon? .....And read the rest of the post too not just the 1st 2 sentences. I dont defend the terran race so that blizz wont nerf them. I seriously doubt blizz reads this forum and if they did im pretty sure they wont be "enlightened" by my posts or yours for that matter. Im actually happy with the 5s reaper+bunker nerf. It does what its supposed to. Nerf the reaper+bunker rush wich forced the zerg to one base a lot longer than they should. This nerf does not affect 5 rax reapers in the slightest and it shouldnt...
>.> the reaper bunker rush is not the biggest problem, the damage that it can do can be reduced dramaticlly via being scouted. the 5 rax reaper cannot have its damage reduced whether it is scouted or not. perhaps you dont understand exactly what that build does to zerg.
it makes the zerg player HAVE to constantly make lings to defend against the reapers or else losing right there and then instead of drones, putting them back economiclly. if lings aren't sufficing Roaches are the next option, which is an undesirable tech path and wastes gas. during which the terran can take a free expo and continue to macro up taking the economic lead. blizzard has based the zerg gameplay style on being able to be a base up on the other races. yet this cant happen against the 5 rax reaper when it is executed correctly. so basiclly we zerg players are hoping the terran will miss step their reapers and claw back into the game. NO game should have one side or race rellieing on the other race to make a mistake so they can have a chance at winning the game.
|
calling for biger maps to help zerg is insane!
go play 1v1 on some of the large 6 or 8 player maps.. sure, Zerg will be 3 or even 4 base after 15 minutes, but all they can do is mutas because of the creep mechanic.
realy, all it takes is 1 detector and 2 combat units a-moving around the map and the zerg is basicly locked in to his base.
|
you're forgetting the simple fact that THERE IS A SHITTONE OF MONEY on the line, so as long as terran proves to be even slightly stronger then the other two, most of the players will switch because they want money and fame. A kinda crap game could be balanced out with maps and letting it last untill some sort of counteres are developed which probably are still a lot harder to do then to defend against, but why would you do that? Just for the sake of keeping it? WTF. Just look at the toplists or at random tournaments, top8 always is made from at least 5 terran, resulting in a tone of boring TvT, thus hurting the e-sports aspect.
I know for fact almost everybody is playing terran in Hungary who's any good, about 70%.
Patch 1.1 wont really solve things as it itroduces minor changes on units, and no game mechanics are touched (such as PF's role, repair abuse, pathfindings, AOEs, improved/nerfed spells), and the maps remain the same
Things, that look patchy:
1. True
2. reapers make no sense, they should be removed altogether instead of pathcing them, they are useless in mid or lategame, unlike any other unit
3. true
4. true
5. first part true, but archons are good, underused currently but very good
6. yeah, dont engage with ground forces, that makes perfect sense.... too bad nothing like that exist anywhere else, nor should
|
marauders without stim would be terrible.
however, i really dislike the slow effect.
|
Can you imagine? A unit specifically designed to counter zerglings and spine crawlers, which also has extremely fast unit speed and cliff jumping ability?
To say this does not need rebalancing of 'any kind' is laughable. What position or post would you make if say, zerglings had an ability to cliff jump? Combined with baneling ability to decimate smaller buildings as well - and hey, you have the 'zerg reaper'.
Would you not be annoyed to fuck regarding the mobility and potential abuse of the unit? Welcome to the world of zerg.
|
Mhm there's nothing like the smell of terran tears in the morning.
But on a seriose note, it's blizzard's game, if they feel there is need for balance changes in order for the game to maintain the high player count, they will do whatever it takes, they risk losing to many players if they don't throw out balance patches.
|
On September 07 2010 19:38 sadyque wrote:
I seriously doubt blizz reads this forum
That sounds kinda naive tbh.
|
On September 07 2010 19:56 PulseSUI wrote:
calling for biger maps to help zerg is insane!
go play 1v1 on some of the large 6 or 8 player maps.. sure, Zerg will be 3 or even 4 base after 15 minutes, but all they can do is mutas because of the creep mechanic.
realy, all it takes is 1 detector and 2 combat units a-moving around the map and the zerg is basicly locked in to his base.
Ummm ... nope ... thats what the "dump creep" mechanic of the Overlord and the Nydus worm is for. If we go by your logic then Zerg can never fight on any map, because there is no creep ... especially in the beginning. Just get an extra queen and drop 4 tumors next to each other and cover the map in minutes. With a Nydus worm or an Overlord you can start anywhere on the map and if the opponent spends his time killing these tumors he will be wasting time. You simply need to make many more tumors than the opponent cares to kill and that is quite easy.
You can also just gather your army in some Overlords and drop them into the enemies base while the Overlords start spreading creep. Since Overlords are quite resilient they are doing the same as the SCVs of Terrans do when they are pulled for an attack.
P.S.: What would YOU do to fix the game? Nerf everyone else to uselessness?
|
Russian Federation82 Posts
i think all of the changes are justified so far
1) reapers are too easy to mass and an extra 5s is going to make it slightly easier for the zerg to deal with it
2) the zealot change. not too sure about this but 2 gating is very dangerous versus Zerg and proxy 2 gating is common
3) if you've ever seen a Morrowesque push out with Turrets + Siege Tanks you would know that its almost impossible to beat specialy on small maps.
4) battlecruisers are very hard to stop as Protoss if they are rushed especially if they are being repaired. Charged voidrays is about the only thing.
|
Am I the only one that's completely sick and fucking tired of people bringing up people's race as if it's an important point of argumentation?
If you're going to disagree with somebody, don't use facts about the person. Just tear apart their arguments. It's just soooo obnoxious to keep hearing:
"Oh, that's what any Terran would say"
"Of course you play Terran"
"Oh you're just another Zerg that needs to L2P"
Etc etc etc... CUT IT OUT. Just reply to the points people make, there is no need for this ad hominem bullshit.
|
On September 07 2010 19:30 Acritter wrote:
Let's try taking a different tack in terms of "balance", OP. To be precise, let's throw balance out the window and say that what's important is that the game is fun. Right now, the game isn't fun for many Zerg players. It isn't fun to have your base raped by Reapers and be forced to play perfectly to counter it. It isn't fun to have to prepare for a thousand and one harassment and early pressure strategies. It isn't fun to manage an excellent economy and have your army killed by much simpler compositions with much lower control. From my one-game experience as Terran, I can also say that it isn't fun to just mass Marauders and win, but I'm not experienced enough with them to make serious judgment calls.
In order for Starcraft II to succeed, it needs to be played for a long time. In order for it to be played for a long time, it needs to be fun and interesting to watch. 5rax Reaper is anything but. The thing that made BW such a fucking INCREDIBLE game was that all races were fun and interesting to watch. You watch ZvT in BW, it's pressure with lings into counterpressure with MM ball into counterpressure with Mutas into counterpressure with Science Vessels into an endgame with Defilers, Cracklings, and Ultras. Every race has its period of aggression, and they can always be aggressive back with a little bit of Muta harass or an MM push into a third. That's pretty exciting. SC2 ZvT? 1rax Reaper aggression into 3rax Reaper aggression into 5rax Reaper aggression with an expo into 5rax Marauder aggression possibly into counterpressure with Mutas, and over half the time the games don't get past that point. That's BORING. Having all the core decisions and initiative lie with one player is a recipe for dull, solitaire-esque games. That needs to be fixed.
This post should have his own thread. Can't believe everyone rambles about hard to grasp stuff like "balance" and misses the essential point summed up in a gem like this post.
Respect to you sir, for putting it thus nicely.
|
About reapers. 5sec nerf is not enough to fix tvz. I'm not saying reapers need more nerfing but maybe zerg needs some tweaking to be able to handle it better. Also you have to open every single zvt with reapers in mind which puts you in a position there you can't prevent a cliff drop to deny you atleast 1gas.
It seems you don't understand the TvZ reaper build. Forcing zerg to do all the stuff they do to prevent this puts terran ahead even if he doesn't kill anything but a bunch of zerglings. By the time the zerg can move out terran has an expansion running and he's already got his production facilities up with having more scv's than zerg has drones. Forcing tumors, lings and tech while delaying expansion is basically the same thing as killing drones. Not to mention that while the sole presence of reapers accomplish that you can actually still kill drones, lings and queens.
This might sound elitist but from what I've seen terrans below 1200 can't really pull off the reaper build properly. As you're a random low diamond player the chances for you to face a proper reaper TvZ are nonexistent.
|
On September 07 2010 14:55 StupidFatHobbit wrote:
This is just screaming "Terran player, don't nerf my op race I don't want to lose games."
User was temp banned for this post.
This is also what I got from it.
Regardless, changes need to be made to allow the game to evolve.
|
I agree with the pawn analogy. Battlecruisers especially i would think needed a small buff, they are already so badly countered if spotted. Likewise I would think carriers and mothership need small buffs too, especially the carrier - the only thing going for the carrier is that it beats vikings; everything else that can shoot air pretty much owns it. Zerg t3 on the other hand is quite the force.
|
I have to say tho that i do agree with the slight reaper nerf in build time.
|
I play random myself (top100 EU random) and I disagree.
Except for the part about maps, I don't understand how one would write this post.
You completely ignored Blizzard's reasoning for the incoming changes and just wrote down what you like/dislike. Also, you don't seem to realize that siege tank balls will still roflstomp anything on the ground.
Did you ever actually build a carrier? They are insane.
|
Russian Federation82 Posts
On September 07 2010 21:57 PimpMobeel wrote:
I agree with the pawn analogy. Battlecruisers especially i would think needed a small buff, they are already so badly countered if spotted. Likewise I would think carriers and mothership need small buffs too, especially the carrier - the only thing going for the carrier is that it beats vikings. Zerg t3 on the other hand is quite the force.
battlecruiser buff?
what exactly counters battlecruisers so easily?
seeing a starport with a techlab, protoss have to get a robo incase of cloaked banshees.
no units from the robo help at all against battlecruisers
protoss simply dont have the gas to get a starport and robotics early so unless you scout the fusion core early its difficult to defend.
terran can also use the spare minerals to mass a bio army which would beat pure stalker.
|
On September 07 2010 22:03 JamieDukes wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 21:57 PimpMobeel wrote:
I agree with the pawn analogy. Battlecruisers especially i would think needed a small buff, they are already so badly countered if spotted. Likewise I would think carriers and mothership need small buffs too, especially the carrier - the only thing going for the carrier is that it beats vikings. Zerg t3 on the other hand is quite the force. battlecruiser buff? what exactly counters battlecruisers so easily? seeing a starport with a techlab, protoss have to get a robo incase of cloaked banshees. no units from the robo help at all against battlecruisers protoss simply dont have the gas to get a starport and robotics early so unless you scout the fusion core early its difficult to defend. terran can also use the spare minerals to mass a bio army which would beat pure stalker.
I was thinking more in the late game. Of course battlecruiser rushes are deadly early game if spotted late.
|
@OP : You are smoking good drugs!! I want some!
* Zealot build time and warpgate cooldown +5 seconds each:
I'd leave them alone.
Altho I agree that the gateway time isn't pretty hard to deal with, the warpgate time is totaly needed. Hell a good protoss can litteraly dump his minerals wayyyyyy too easily and for some reason the Zealot has just got better. In BW you could kill a zealot with 2 lings (maybe 3) now it takes about 6 lings. Zealots are really effective in SC2 and being able to mass them super early to pressure the fast expand is kinda urhh!
* Reapers and bunkers build time +5 seconds:
I'd leave them also alone. There were no issues with the bunker at all.
Reapers are fraeking overpowered dude. Yes it's some gaz investment but hell... you make sure that there is no early pressure and you can freely expand where the zerg fails to do it most of the time. Hell even Morrow said it was overpowered and most "top zergs" including Dimaga, IdrA, Slush, Machine.... name it fails to defend properly against it.
* Siege tank nerf vs. light and unarmored:
My essay implies of course that this is unnecessary. It also doesn't make sense. These units should be blasted by the siege tanks all the more.
I agree with you on this one, but on another hand I would nerf thors. Cause as it is right now it's not rare to see 1 thor get over 50+ kills without any real micros or tricks. this is disgusting.
* Battlecruisers damage lowering:
Only necessary because of the lack of spells like plague.
I can't comment on this one cause zerg has corruptors which obliterate cruizers
* Ultralisk damage lowering and removal of the ram:
I completely agree on the removal. I don't think that the damage lowering will have a large impact. It's ok.
I totaly agree on removing head butting but... seriously lowering damage? As it is right now ultralisks is a fail unit. Hell it's melee and with the current map pool they just get stucked everywhere. I RARELY make more than 3 of those at the same time cause it's useless to have more.
* Neural parasite is broken. It adds a factor of uncertainty because the player doesn't know in which favor the situation will tip. It is also barely viable against big late game armies. Some change to its mechanics would be adorable.
Agree... NP is just retarded
* Reapers pathfinding AI. They are sometimes stuck.
Giving more pathing to a unit that is already too good early game?? no thx
* The marauder might need to lose stim. Maybe the slow-effect should in turn be improved.
yes! please yes! or just remove bonus damage from buildings at least. Since all buildings are "armored" marauders are doing 100% damage on it. Stim and it's 52983752352 dps
* Psi storm is worse than in scbw. Not necessarily to be patched.
no need, it was too good and already nerfed it.
* Other units which might need some tweaks: corruptor with corruption. It lacks complexity when compared to the devourer. Mothership, carriers, archons are seldom used.
Agreed
* Planetary fortresses are often mentioned, but are immobile, lack air-defence and don't have mules and scans. They are probably ok, as long as the player doesn't engage them with a ground force.
They are wayyyyyyy too resilient... hell it almost takes a 200/200 army just to take one down! but they're the least of my concerns.
This week-end I went from 1100 to 750 and now back at around 900 simple cause of 3things.
Note: I know that I'm far from playing at pro level. I know I still have some trouble with my unit control and I'm not perfect but I'm playing at my level vs other players of my level.
1. Reapers harass are pretty hard to stop. I was getting murdered even with roaches and the counter push with marauders were just finishing me off.
2. 4 gates toss that were dissimating me even with 5 sunkens.
3. Super harass terran with cloacked banshees, drop hellions, clocked banshee, drop hellions, cloacked banshee, mass marine push, drop hellions, vicking OV hunter, tank push = gg!
I watched the replay in EACH games I lost and I would say that 90% of the time I was at like 150apm (and good ones I'm not spaming) and most of my lost were to 50apm dudes that were just a+moving.
|
On September 07 2010 22:08 Konsume wrote:
This week-end I went from 1100 to 750 and now back at around 900 simple cause of 3things.
Note: I know that I'm far from playing at pro level. I know I still have some trouble with my unit control and I'm not perfect but I'm playing at my level vs other players of my level.
1. Reapers harass are pretty hard to stop. I was getting murdered even with roaches and the counter push with marauders were just finishing me off.
2. 4 gates toss that were dissimating me even with 5 sunkens.
3. Super harass terran with cloacked banshees, drop hellions, clocked banshee, drop hellions, cloacked banshee, mass marine push, drop hellions, vicking OV hunter, tank push = gg!
I watched the replay in EACH games I lost and I would say that 90% of the time I was at like 150apm (and good ones I'm not spaming) and most of my lost were to 50apm dudes that were just a+moving.
perhaps you should try a nydus worm?
sarcasim. i feel your pain, its always annoying to lose. but losing to people who spend a third of the effort into the game as you do and still get completely demolished in a 1 sided fight is lame. unfortunatly the curse of the swarm, until your an idralsik or a dimagaoch your gonna get rolled on ha ha
|
Why this thread is not locked yet?
It will devolve(I think it did already) into balance whine,flame wars,not bringing anything precious to the situation of the game.You don't have the patch yet and You started to whine about it already,seriously?
Situation report did not say:
WELL WE WILL DO THAT AND THAT AND NOTHING ELSE.
|
Marauder needs to be nerfed. Tank damage should remain the same or be buffed, and just have them overkill.
|
On September 07 2010 22:03 JamieDukes wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 21:57 PimpMobeel wrote:
I agree with the pawn analogy. Battlecruisers especially i would think needed a small buff, they are already so badly countered if spotted. Likewise I would think carriers and mothership need small buffs too, especially the carrier - the only thing going for the carrier is that it beats vikings. Zerg t3 on the other hand is quite the force. battlecruiser buff? what exactly counters battlecruisers so easily? seeing a starport with a techlab, protoss have to get a robo incase of cloaked banshees. no units from the robo help at all against battlecruisers protoss simply dont have the gas to get a starport and robotics early so unless you scout the fusion core early its difficult to defend. terran can also use the spare minerals to mass a bio army which would beat pure stalker.
Welcome to the world of Zerg...
I think Terran and especially Protoss-Users are extremely spoilt because they have such an easy time scouting and have pretty strong standard-builds that have a good chance of defending against anything.
Guess what: Zerg doesn't have those Luxury's. You say it's hard cuz you have to scout the Fusion Core, this is how it is for Zerg with every building. 1 Building you scout (or not) with slow overlords or overseers that can still be outrun by Stalkers will make a huge difference:
It makes a huge difference if the opponent for example has a Robo with our without a Robo-Bay. it makes a huge difference if you see 3 or 4 Gateways, it makes a huge difference if P has a Dark Shrine or a Archive or none if you see the council - but Protoss has Observers which you should get out anyways to scout around and Terran has Reapers, floating buildings and Scans...
Zerg has such a hard time adapting to stuff like that and Protoss whines because there's 1 Unit that's kinda hard to counter? Protoss can go 4-warpgate in almost any MU and be fine, while Zerg has to adapt perfectly every game to even stand the slightest chance to not get completely raped.
Just keep playing the easy race dude...
|
On September 07 2010 21:32 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 19:56 PulseSUI wrote:
calling for biger maps to help zerg is insane!
go play 1v1 on some of the large 6 or 8 player maps.. sure, Zerg will be 3 or even 4 base after 15 minutes, but all they can do is mutas because of the creep mechanic.
realy, all it takes is 1 detector and 2 combat units a-moving around the map and the zerg is basicly locked in to his base. Ummm ... nope ... thats what the "dump creep" mechanic of the Overlord and the Nydus worm is for. If we go by your logic then Zerg can never fight on any map, because there is no creep ... especially in the beginning. Just get an extra queen and drop 4 tumors next to each other and cover the map in minutes. With a Nydus worm or an Overlord you can start anywhere on the map and if the opponent spends his time killing these tumors he will be wasting time. You simply need to make many more tumors than the opponent cares to kill and that is quite easy. You can also just gather your army in some Overlords and drop them into the enemies base while the Overlords start spreading creep. Since Overlords are quite resilient they are doing the same as the SCVs of Terrans do when they are pulled for an attack. P.S.: What would YOU do to fix the game? Nerf everyone else to uselessness?
4 tumors covering a large map in minutes? You can't have actually tried this.
I've done this on 3v3 large maps, and even with 3 of us actively creeping it took a while to cover our half of the map. Just to clarify, it was active creeping using shared control btw, so not like we sit around forgetting to do just that. Creep tumors don't spring up instantly whenever you want unless dropped by queens (which eat up 2 food btw), there is a cooldown and you have creep that needs to spread out for it to be able to replanted.
Dump creep from overlord leaves supply out in the open to be sniped. You always go on and on and on and on and on about how Zerg can replenish their armies in an instant (which is only true if you have larvae) and yet you want people to sack overlords to get yourself supply blocked?
|
The thing is, during the beta they made drastic changes very quickly which were not thoroughly able to be tested by the community before going love.
The biggest was the roach nerf, which exposed the fragile underbelly of Zerg who had relied previously on the one imbalanced unit to win.
|
Hey OP i dont agree with you on a couple of issues but tbh that is not the real issue here.
The real problem OP, and that is something that you really need to understand, is that you dont understand the hidden code.
The hidden code is something that you for some reason were oblivious to and before you deviate even further from your path i shall enlighten you.
When you first play SC2, just when you are about to play your first game, there is a moment were you have to decide your destiny.
When you look at the screen and see "Select your race" and see Terran Zerg Protoss Random, you need to understand what your option will bring forth and uleash your destiny.
If you chose Terran, it means you want to play the game.
If you chose Zerg, it means you want to go whine in the forums instead of playing.
If you chose Protoss it means you want to be a cheese factory and do everything in your power to win the game without actualy having an actual army, if it means doing a cannon rush then going for a proxy gateway then going for DT and the going VR and then when it all fails saying "Fuck you noob" and leave, so be it.....
If you chose Random, well, its like you are kinda whining on the forums but at the same time want to play the game with some cheese here and there.
And NO MATTER WHAT, you cant cross to other races territories. You CANT come whine in the forums unless you play zerg (protoss is ok right now but just because zergs are distracted with terran right now).
I will probably be banned, because this is the unspoken code, but i just had to help you, so carry on this knowledge and help others in need.
PS: Fuck mutas and fuck banelings
|
On September 07 2010 22:38 smegged wrote:
The thing is, during the beta they made drastic changes very quickly which were not thoroughly able to be tested by the community before going love.
The biggest was the roach nerf, which exposed the fragile underbelly of Zerg who had relied previously on the one imbalanced unit to win.
And of course there were some changes that absolutely weren't needed at all, like:
- Neural Parasite nerf
- 250mm Cannon nerf
- HSM nerf
And some changes ppl wanted since Phase 1 of the beta, but Blizzard didn't care, like:
- Marauder nerf
- Better Maps
- Better Upgrades for Zerg (like T3 Ling-Upgrade which is absolutely ridiculous)
- Better zerglings (literally everyone laughed and still does at how bad Zerglings are compared to BW and compared to other T1-Units)
|
It's also a matter of taste. Blizzard are authors of the game, and have the right to direct how the gameplay should look like. For example, sure, people can continue playing with reapers as they are now. It's just that it's already boring for many people to watch it and play it.
Read carefully how Blizzard word their guidelines in preliminary patch notes. They almost never talk about power imbalance; rather they talk about what they would like to see used more in the game, or used less in the game; or how they would like some game elements to be used.
Eg: They want to see tanks, but not as often as now, and not against the whole kinds of unit compositions which tanks can attack now. They prefer to see tanks used with more specific purposes, and for other cases to be challanged to use other units. That's just one example.
|
On September 07 2010 22:42 kickinhead wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 22:38 smegged wrote:
The thing is, during the beta they made drastic changes very quickly which were not thoroughly able to be tested by the community before going love.
The biggest was the roach nerf, which exposed the fragile underbelly of Zerg who had relied previously on the one imbalanced unit to win. And of course there were some changes that absolutely weren't needed at all, like: - Neural Parasite nerf - 250mm Cannon nerf - HSM nerf And some changes ppl wanted since Phase 1 of the beta, but Blizzard didn't care, like: - Marauder nerf - Better Maps - Better Upgrades for Zerg (like T3 Ling-Upgrade which is absolutely ridiculous) - Better zerglings (literally everyone laughed and still does at how bad Zerglings are compared to BW and compared to other T1-Units)
Yeah, playing zerg feels like playing a half finished race. Like, they got all of the macro done extremely well with the zerg (except they need to give a bit more flexibility with injection timings, and perhaps another 25 starting energy extra for queens) but then really stuffed up their units.
The mechanics of playing zerg is fun, even though their current unit composition is not.
The roach nerf was necessary, but other zerg units were not strengthened to compensate.
Then there is the reaper problem - they're an early game unit that forces the zerg to counter with a unit that is slaughtered by units built out of the exact same building that the first unit was built from.
It's so easy to transition from 5rax reaper into marauders if the zerg goes roaches and marauders just own roaches so hard it's not funny.
|
To everybody screaming that the Marauder needs a nerf:
Does it occur to you that TvP is currently very balanced even at the highest level? If you nerf a CORE UNIT in this matchup, it's simply going to skew the balance of the matchup in the favor of Protoss...
I don't understand you people. DURRR NERF MARAUDER DURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.
TvP is balanced. TvZ is not. Blindly nerfing units could fix one matchup while destroying another.
|
On September 07 2010 14:55 StupidFatHobbit wrote:
This is just screaming "Terran player, don't nerf my op race I don't want to lose games."
User was temp banned for this post.
No. This is screaming logic. Every point he makes is true? Makes me a sad panda to read posts like this, whenever a person makes an effort to do a post that isn't "NERF DIZ NURF DAT PLZ".
Random player here too!
Edit: I really agree that blizz needs to take a look on the maps. Go on and play the ICCup maps at bnet, it's a completely different game.
|
Ugh, I thought that was a terrible OP. After so much balance talk already and Blizzard having released the next patch notes a few weeks ago, I had hoped that this topic would bring some new perspective on the situation.
But it's the same tired argument we've seen far too many times.
"It's too early for patches because it's just too early and Blizzard doesn't know what they're doing."
To me, this belongs in a blog, though honestly, I've seen more insightful blog rants on balance. This is nothing new, not in the slightest.
|
Most idiotic OP I have read in a long time.
Have you even seen 5rax reaper versus zerg?
Have you seen siege tanks versus ANY ground army?
Nothing made sense except:
Neural parasite is broken..... ....It is also barely viable against big late game armies. Some change to its mechanics would be adorable.
The marauder might need to lose stim.
Other units which might need some tweaks: corruptor with corruption. It lacks complexity when compared to the devourer. Mothership, carriers, archons are seldom used.
Honestly everything else sounds like someone who has never even watched a game of starcraft 2.
Everyone on this forum is now more stupid for reading the OP. You are awarded no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
|
On September 07 2010 23:01 TLOBrian wrote:
The marauder might need to lose stim.
Absurd.
If the marauder lost stim, it would COMPLETELY BREAK TvP. Completely. Protoss would simply win the game once they got Colossi or Templar. End. It's already a close, balanced matchup. If you gave a huge nerf like that to the marauder, there would be nothing you could do to stop the onslaught of second tier Protoss.
And the problem people have with the Reaper, Brian, is that it's only useful in one specific build in one specific matchup, or for scouting.
THAT'S IT. It's a broken unit. Just "nerfing it" isn't really good enough. It needs to be REVAMPED. A straight nerf and it will just end up as a unit that never gets used, ever. People don't seem to be using their brains very much in this thread.
|
On September 07 2010 23:06 ltortoise wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 23:01 TLOBrian wrote:
The marauder might need to lose stim. Absurd. If the marauder lost stim, it would COMPLETELY BREAK TvP. Completely. Protoss would simply win the game once they got Colossi or Templar. End. It's already a close, balanced matchup. If you gave a huge nerf like that to the marauder, there would be nothing you could do to stop the onslaught of second tier Protoss. And the problem people have with the Reaper, Brian, is that it's only useful in one specific build in one specific matchup, or for scouting. THAT'S IT. It's a broken unit. Just "nerfing it" isn't really good enough. It needs to be REVAMPED. A straight nerf and it will just end up as a unit that never gets used, ever. People don't seem to be using their brains very much in this thread.
1) Maybe make some tier 2 units? Ghost which have OP emp, Tanks which have OP siege mode, helions which have OP blue flame for zealots.
2) Marauders shrug off storm like no tomorrow.
3) The fact that you can LOL STIM and take down 4 collossi with a couple volleys and then kite the rest of the army with concussive shells guaranteeing your retreat is bullshit.
4) The matchup is not close to balance in any way with marauders having stim AND concussive shells. One of them needs to go, or have a huge drawback to making it balanced. 30 HP every stim for marauders maybe, or every other hit slowing, or even the marauder cannot move after firing a volley with concussive shells. Something along those lines to make it so you cannot mow down half a protoss army if they make the wise decision and try to retreat. You simply CANNOT retreat against a bio terran now, It's like here, heres two upgrades for less than 200/200 that BREAKS the game. The combination of stim AND concussive shells on the marauder makes them BROKEN. END OF STORY. IN EVERY MATCHUP. When you can drop 4 of any unit thats not tier 3, well a unit more effective at killing bases than a tier 3, and have to worry about your entire base being wiped out, that makes me a sad sad panda.
5) God forbid the terran has to actually position his army or get vikings against collossi, which come two at a time from a building that is easily produced and cheapily doubles its production capacity with a simple addon that doesn't take that much time to build.
|
On September 07 2010 21:39 okrane wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 19:30 Acritter wrote:
Let's try taking a different tack in terms of "balance", OP. To be precise, let's throw balance out the window and say that what's important is that the game is fun. Right now, the game isn't fun for many Zerg players. It isn't fun to have your base raped by Reapers and be forced to play perfectly to counter it. It isn't fun to have to prepare for a thousand and one harassment and early pressure strategies. It isn't fun to manage an excellent economy and have your army killed by much simpler compositions with much lower control. From my one-game experience as Terran, I can also say that it isn't fun to just mass Marauders and win, but I'm not experienced enough with them to make serious judgment calls.
In order for Starcraft II to succeed, it needs to be played for a long time. In order for it to be played for a long time, it needs to be fun and interesting to watch. 5rax Reaper is anything but. The thing that made BW such a fucking INCREDIBLE game was that all races were fun and interesting to watch. You watch ZvT in BW, it's pressure with lings into counterpressure with MM ball into counterpressure with Mutas into counterpressure with Science Vessels into an endgame with Defilers, Cracklings, and Ultras. Every race has its period of aggression, and they can always be aggressive back with a little bit of Muta harass or an MM push into a third. That's pretty exciting. SC2 ZvT? 1rax Reaper aggression into 3rax Reaper aggression into 5rax Reaper aggression with an expo into 5rax Marauder aggression possibly into counterpressure with Mutas, and over half the time the games don't get past that point. That's BORING. Having all the core decisions and initiative lie with one player is a recipe for dull, solitaire-esque games. That needs to be fixed. This post should have his own thread. Can't believe everyone rambles about hard to grasp stuff like "balance" and misses the essential point summed up in a gem like this post. Respect to you sir, for putting it thus nicely.
indeed a good post.
the game is very one sided in most matchups atm. not necessarily from pure balance point of you but from whos in control/aggressive.
while this ofc is still related to balance,maps etc i think blizzard just fucked up with some of the dynamics between the races.
for example ZvP. in broodwar gateway units were very limited in power early on. the P had to fear the Zs tech. goons were horrible against mutas, no robo bay no lurker detection, no storm/speed and you cant take on hydras. now the 3 basic gateway units do perfectly fine against pretty much all Z can do. stalker+sentry has no prob with mutas in a straight fight,lurkers are gone and their substitute banelings are a non issue, evrything Z has till hive except the hydra is "ok" at best vs the most basic gateway spam. P can stay aggressive the whole game. P doesnt have to fear anything (hydras get HARDcountered by collosus aclick, mutas get HARDcountered by phoenix rightclick spam) and its just a survival test for the Z till he gets ultras out which then stomp pretty much evrything the P has(if the P doesnt have tons immortals+storm. )
similar thing in TvP where T doesnt really fear anything P has and just spams units into the enemys base cause their most basic units just stomp/do very well against most of P units. add vikings to hardcounter collosus and we have a similar situation like in ZvP . again P has to survive till he got storm+energy upgrade. then he can stomp like evrything T has (if the T doesnt have tons of emp and gets most/all templars)
add the lack of real challenging/unique micro,the ability to mass a ton of units from 1-2 bases,the small unbalanced map and you have the boring one sided games we have now. sure its possible to balance the game around such gameplay(and the actual race powers arent that much different). but it just isnt fun when the matchups lack dynamics and one race is just in survival mode for 90% of the game.
|
United States428 Posts
Everyone on this forum is now more stupid for reading the OP. You are awarded no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Win!
|
On September 07 2010 23:01 TLOBrian wrote:
Most idiotic OP I have read in a long time.
Have you even seen 5rax reaper versus zerg?
Have you seen siege tanks versus ANY ground army?
Nothing made sense except:
Neural parasite is broken..... ....It is also barely viable against big late game armies. Some change to its mechanics would be adorable.
The marauder might need to lose stim.
Other units which might need some tweaks: corruptor with corruption. It lacks complexity when compared to the devourer. Mothership, carriers, archons are seldom used.
Honestly everything else sounds like someone who has never even watched a game of starcraft 2.
Everyone on this forum is now more stupid for reading the OP. You are awarded no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
I agree with everything in this post. I don't see how you can make statements like - bunker build time was never a problem, when you are a pretty bad player. Being 300th in a region is pretty bad, being 300th random player is definately not a qualification. I'm was 800 points at one point and I suck. I never played sc1 online and my macro is terrible. Whenever I find random players around my skill level they just cheese every game.
OP's like this are the reason the imbalance discussion is so bad.
|
On September 07 2010 23:21 TLOBrian wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 23:06 ltortoise wrote:On September 07 2010 23:01 TLOBrian wrote:
The marauder might need to lose stim. Absurd. If the marauder lost stim, it would COMPLETELY BREAK TvP. Completely. Protoss would simply win the game once they got Colossi or Templar. End. It's already a close, balanced matchup. If you gave a huge nerf like that to the marauder, there would be nothing you could do to stop the onslaught of second tier Protoss. And the problem people have with the Reaper, Brian, is that it's only useful in one specific build in one specific matchup, or for scouting. THAT'S IT. It's a broken unit. Just "nerfing it" isn't really good enough. It needs to be REVAMPED. A straight nerf and it will just end up as a unit that never gets used, ever. People don't seem to be using their brains very much in this thread. 1) Maybe make some tier 2 units? Ghost which have OP emp, Tanks which have OP siege mode, helions which have OP blue flame for zealots. 2) Marauders shrug off storm like no tomorrow. 3) The fact that you can LOL STIM and take down 4 collossi with a couple volleys and then kite the rest of the army with concussive shells guaranteeing your retreat is bullshit. 4) The matchup is not close to balance in any way with marauders having stim AND concussive shells. One of them needs to go, or have a huge drawback to making it balanced. 30 HP every stim for marauders maybe, or every other hit slowing, or even the marauder cannot move after firing a volley with concussive shells. Something along those lines to make it so you cannot mow down half a protoss army if they make the wise decision and try to retreat. You simply CANNOT retreat against a bio terran now, It's like here, heres two upgrades for less than 200/200 that BREAKS the game. The combination of stim AND concussive shells on the marauder makes them BROKEN. END OF STORY. IN EVERY MATCHUP. When you can drop 4 of any unit thats not tier 3, well a unit more effective at killing bases than a tier 3, and have to worry about your entire base being wiped out, that makes me a sad sad panda. 5) God forbid the terran has to actually position his army or get vikings against collossi, which come two at a time from a building that is easily produced and cheapily doubles its production capacity with a simple addon that doesn't take that much time to build.
What the hell? You can't possibly watch or play much TvP. Marauders do not "shrug off" storm. Storm RAPES all forms of bio. It's a giant AoE attack that takes massive chunks of HP out of large quantities of units.
Also, nothing is so simple as "vikings counter colossi." Are we even playing the same game? The game is about composition, not "UNIT X COUNTERS UNIT Y."
When people make colossi, they typically PROTECT their colossi with blink stalkers. I can't just go up and kill the colossi with my vikings unless their micro sucks.
And now I'm supposed to mass tanks and hellions, as well as vikings, in addition to my bio ball with medivacs? I can't make everything. Day9 talks about people who make these kinds of comments and laughs. It's like you think I can just have all the units all at once. Gas limits my compositions greatly. The more marauders I have, the less tanks, medivacs, and vikings I can have.
And how is EMP "overpowered." A ghost costs 150 gas. That's A LOT. EMP uses a lot of energy. I don't even MAKE ghosts vs protoss generally, because the good tosses use their storms ASAP, and never ball their templar up. It takes all of 5 clicks to make your templars cost one EMP each, and that's assuming you can even get close enough to EMP them. It's not like people put their templar right at the front of their army and say "emp me please!" Being cutesy and trying to get a cloaked ghost up close is also a joke. Furthermore, once the Protoss has the amulet, a templar has a storm immediately upon being warped in. Good luck EMP'ing it in the 5 second window before they cast a storm.
Do you watch tournaments? Terran does not have a huge win rate vs Protoss. There are perhaps more Terrans in the top 5 or so of tournaments because of the simple number advantage (TvZ is imbalanced and PvZ is not, so more tosses get knocked out by zergs than terrans).
TvP is not a one-sided affair. It's the most balanced matchup in the game IMO. There are LOADS of viable Protoss openings and Terran openings, lots of interesting ways to build your armies, and everything has an accessible counter.
But sure, a Terran who has massed up ghosts, medivacs, vikings, siege tanks, and marauders might not have a counter. INFINITE GAS TERRAN! WOOOO
|
On September 07 2010 14:51 Perscienter wrote:
Appendixes (just because I'm posting):
1. The changes in detail
[list]
[*]Zealot build time and warpgate cooldown +5 seconds each:
I'd leave them alone.
have you played zerg vs protoss? the one and only tactic i have no chance against at all is early zealot pressure (simply, i don't have the economy early game to defend something like that and still come out with a decent economy once he stops and puts up his expo, i lose within a few minutes after this even if i defended it perfectly)
On September 07 2010 14:51 Perscienter wrote:
[*]Reapers and bunkers build time +5 seconds:
I'd leave them also alone. There were no issues with the bunker at all.
right now it's very hard unless the enemy is way to slow to actually get a good defence, creep and overlord placement up in time to defend a reaper rush, reapers are fine, i just need more time to prepare, 5 seconds isn't that long and will help zerg to even out the game. so yes, you're right that it's easy to defend against the reapers, but putting up everything you said takes time and 5 tiny tiny seconds will help zerg to deal with reapers better.
On September 07 2010 14:51 Perscienter wrote:
[*]Siege tank nerf vs. light and unarmored:
My essay implies of course that this is unnecessary. It also doesn't make sense. These units should be blasted by the siege tanks all the more.
it does make sense that big tanks with big explosions rip small and light units apart. but the question is, is it balanced?
right now, no. the tank still makes a lot of damage vs lings and hydras which your marines are supposed to clean up. having tanks kill heavier units like ultralisks/roaches would actually balance things out, currently the only unit in the terran army that properly counters roaches are marauders, and marauders are not good with a tank army since you need those extra marines for AA unless you go heavy mech and gets more thors out.
anyways, blizz probably needs more time to think over the current problems, the game haven't been out for that long and tactics are new and experimental. BW wasn't balanced from the start.
|
On September 07 2010 15:38 kickinhead wrote:
It's not too early...
It's too late for my taste, Blizzard can't be that ignorant and not see that:
- Reapers and Marauders are heavily overpowered.
- Almost any kind of early timing-push (or 4-gateway-timing-push) is extremely hard for Zerg to hold (they have to sacrifice their economy basically).
- Structural defense is underpowered (cuz stuff like Marauders and Reapers deal ridiculous DMG).
- Zerg has too less options early on and their basic Unit (Zergling) is by far the weakest compared to Zealot/Marine.
- Terran Upgrades like Nitro Packs, Blue-Flames for Hellions and Stim Packs are too cheap and good, while Zergs Upgrades are too expensive and bad (Adrenalin-Upgrade for Zerglings)
- Tech Lab is too cheap, builds too fast and opens up too many Options for Terran.
- The Creep-Mechanic is totally f'd up...
- Several Skills like Neural parasite, 250mm Cannon and HSM have been nerfed to death with no apparent reason.
- THEIR MAPS FKN SUCK!
None of the changes Blizzard mentioned so far won't do anything to make the game more balanced. I mean: 5 sec's more on the reapers? With 5-rax-reapers, you can't build Reapers out of all raxes at any time anyways until the expansion is fully up- and running, so absolutely no harm done there. zealot -5 sec? Who cares if all the other Warpgate-Units still have a much too short cooldown for Zerg to hold without saccing their economy (while Protoss can pump Probes and even expand...). BC-change is ridiculous and the Siege-Tank-nerf will only make Tanks less viable in TvP, but everyone uses Bio in TvP anyways, so who cares?... rly, it's like Blizzard randomly throws dart at the wall with different Units and Stat-buff's/nerf and then implements them into the game - how can they be so oblivious?
This is pretty much exactly what has been in my head for the last couple of weeks. Both this post and the OP are quite subjective and I just got to agree with kickinhead. When discussing bunkers the reply is "theyre fine" I guess you've never had 2 bunkers at the bottem of your ramp, even if they dont get up, terran loses so little compared to the 6 drones the zerg pulls or whatever. Considering reapers, I think the zerg has to put ten times more effort into stopping them than the terran has, while T is setting up for a solid midgame, while the zerg has 2/3 of the workercount if he survives it.
|
some ppl still think that blizzard don't play the game or listen to player feedback.
seriously, HSM is heavily nerfed right now - but there was a point where it was completely imbalanced and internal testing alone showed that it needed a drastic change. didn't 'mr. terrible terrible damage' say that terran players were just massing ravens and being unbeatable?
when something is gamebreakingly overpowered then you nerf it hard and then gradually implement changes (like the removal of the fusion core pre-requisite) to see when it feels right.
this takes time. people whining about game balance less than 2 months after release are pretty naive and probably noobs to the online multiplayer gaming scene.
|
The reaper nerf is fine, people will still be able to mass reapers, it's not the build time that's important it's the cost of them. The patch is just nerfing 7 rax or 10 rax reaper bunker rushes. There has been plenty of shifts in the races, Protoss are starting to do really good vs terran recently. The only patch difference that will really have an effect vs P is tanks vs zealots, which isn't really a huge deal because tanks aren't supposed to beat zealots anyways, you need support units to deal with them. Blizzard has done a LOT of homework and they are working really really hard to balance the game, they have 999999999999999x more info than your personal statistics, sorry man but you don't know any better than blizzard. The Patch is directed towards helping zerg vs terran, which I believe it will do a good job of doing, without messing up TvP too badly, which at the moment is quite balanced. Also the 5 second zealot nerf will be good for T because noobass P cheese is really strong. I don't know what this stupid pawn analogy is but blizzard has buffed and nerfed many units in the past, the easiest way to balance is to nerf things that are overpowered though and you are crazy to think otherwise. Your list of "things that look patchy" makes no sense, you basically just complain about some units ( units that are actually really good, corruptors are really good in certain situations, and PF's are borderline overpowered and I wouldn't care at all if they got nerfed ) without providing any reasons or change suggestions. Marauders cannot lose stim, it would completely break TvP that is a horrible idea. Carriers / archons / motherships are also rarely used because they are tier 3 units and the game doesn't go late that often at the mid diamond level because every single player just allin cheeses. Lots of P's are starting to use carriers vs T, they are really good agaisn't terran as are motherships, and blizzard said themselves that archons aren't supposed to be amazing, they are just something for HT's with no energy to make.
This seems like a big whine thread without any really good ideas... sorry
|
I hate how people say things like it has only been x months from release. SC1 didn't have cash tournaments 1 month after its release, not even years after release.
When money is on the line you cannot wait months.
|
Reapers are just too much because of the seamless transition to muraders.
|
On September 07 2010 23:34 ltortoise wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 23:21 TLOBrian wrote:On September 07 2010 23:06 ltortoise wrote:On September 07 2010 23:01 TLOBrian wrote:
The marauder might need to lose stim. Absurd. If the marauder lost stim, it would COMPLETELY BREAK TvP. Completely. Protoss would simply win the game once they got Colossi or Templar. End. It's already a close, balanced matchup. If you gave a huge nerf like that to the marauder, there would be nothing you could do to stop the onslaught of second tier Protoss. And the problem people have with the Reaper, Brian, is that it's only useful in one specific build in one specific matchup, or for scouting. THAT'S IT. It's a broken unit. Just "nerfing it" isn't really good enough. It needs to be REVAMPED. A straight nerf and it will just end up as a unit that never gets used, ever. People don't seem to be using their brains very much in this thread. 1) Maybe make some tier 2 units? Ghost which have OP emp, Tanks which have OP siege mode, helions which have OP blue flame for zealots. 2) Marauders shrug off storm like no tomorrow. 3) The fact that you can LOL STIM and take down 4 collossi with a couple volleys and then kite the rest of the army with concussive shells guaranteeing your retreat is bullshit. 4) The matchup is not close to balance in any way with marauders having stim AND concussive shells. One of them needs to go, or have a huge drawback to making it balanced. 30 HP every stim for marauders maybe, or every other hit slowing, or even the marauder cannot move after firing a volley with concussive shells. Something along those lines to make it so you cannot mow down half a protoss army if they make the wise decision and try to retreat. You simply CANNOT retreat against a bio terran now, It's like here, heres two upgrades for less than 200/200 that BREAKS the game. The combination of stim AND concussive shells on the marauder makes them BROKEN. END OF STORY. IN EVERY MATCHUP. When you can drop 4 of any unit thats not tier 3, well a unit more effective at killing bases than a tier 3, and have to worry about your entire base being wiped out, that makes me a sad sad panda. 5) God forbid the terran has to actually position his army or get vikings against collossi, which come two at a time from a building that is easily produced and cheapily doubles its production capacity with a simple addon that doesn't take that much time to build. What the hell? You can't possibly watch or play much TvP. Marauders do not "shrug off" storm. Storm RAPES all forms of bio. It's a giant AoE attack that takes massive chunks of HP out of large quantities of units. Also, nothing is so simple as "vikings counter colossi." Are we even playing the same game? The game is about composition, not "UNIT X COUNTERS UNIT Y." When people make colossi, they typically PROTECT their colossi with blink stalkers. I can't just go up and kill the colossi with my vikings unless their micro sucks. And now I'm supposed to mass tanks and hellions, as well as vikings, in addition to my bio ball with medivacs? I can't make everything. Day9 talks about people who make these kinds of comments and laughs. It's like you think I can just have all the units all at once. Gas limits my compositions greatly. The more marauders I have, the less tanks, medivacs, and vikings I can have. And how is EMP "overpowered." A ghost costs 150 gas. That's A LOT. EMP uses a lot of energy. I don't even MAKE ghosts vs protoss generally, because the good tosses use their storms ASAP, and never ball their templar up. It takes all of 5 clicks to make your templars cost one EMP each, and that's assuming you can even get close enough to EMP them. It's not like people put their templar right at the front of their army and say "emp me please!" Being cutesy and trying to get a cloaked ghost up close is also a joke. Furthermore, once the Protoss has the amulet, a templar has a storm immediately upon being warped in. Good luck EMP'ing it in the 5 second window before they cast a storm. Do you watch tournaments? Terran does not have a huge win rate vs Protoss. There are perhaps more Terrans in the top 5 or so of tournaments because of the simple number advantage (TvZ is imbalanced and PvZ is not, so more tosses get knocked out by zergs than terrans). TvP is not a one-sided affair. It's the most balanced matchup in the game IMO. There are LOADS of viable Protoss openings and Terran openings, lots of interesting ways to build your armies, and everything has an accessible counter. But sure, a Terran who has massed up ghosts, medivacs, vikings, siege tanks, and marauders might not have a counter. INFINITE GAS TERRAN! WOOOO
Never said you needed to have all the units at once.
Never said you'd have infinite gas.
Woo I'm going to assume so I can make a post which I think is right so I can be right because I'm right and the only thing that matters is being right, right?
If you make collossi, I make vikings, or more marauders with stim. What's easier to make? Vikings or Collossi?
If you make Templar, I make ghost. Whats easier to use and make? Templar or ghosts?
If you just have a heavy Zealot/stalker army, I'm going to be making Hellions, marines, and marauders. Whats easier to use and make? Zealots or Hellions? Stalkers or marauders?
All I'm saying is, that the Terran units that can be used to nullify advantages from the protoss units are cheaper, easier to use, and generally are more useful in the matchup early game to late game. Collossi and high templar are expensive to tech up to and to get. Terran upgrades and spells do way more and are cheaper than ANY OTHER RACES SPELLS AND UPGRADES IN THE GAME.
I'm not right, It's my opinion. I'm not going to 'argue' anymore.
|
On September 07 2010 23:21 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 21:39 okrane wrote:On September 07 2010 19:30 Acritter wrote:
Let's try taking a different tack in terms of "balance", OP. To be precise, let's throw balance out the window and say that what's important is that the game is fun. Right now, the game isn't fun for many Zerg players. It isn't fun to have your base raped by Reapers and be forced to play perfectly to counter it. It isn't fun to have to prepare for a thousand and one harassment and early pressure strategies. It isn't fun to manage an excellent economy and have your army killed by much simpler compositions with much lower control. From my one-game experience as Terran, I can also say that it isn't fun to just mass Marauders and win, but I'm not experienced enough with them to make serious judgment calls.
In order for Starcraft II to succeed, it needs to be played for a long time. In order for it to be played for a long time, it needs to be fun and interesting to watch. 5rax Reaper is anything but. The thing that made BW such a fucking INCREDIBLE game was that all races were fun and interesting to watch. You watch ZvT in BW, it's pressure with lings into counterpressure with MM ball into counterpressure with Mutas into counterpressure with Science Vessels into an endgame with Defilers, Cracklings, and Ultras. Every race has its period of aggression, and they can always be aggressive back with a little bit of Muta harass or an MM push into a third. That's pretty exciting. SC2 ZvT? 1rax Reaper aggression into 3rax Reaper aggression into 5rax Reaper aggression with an expo into 5rax Marauder aggression possibly into counterpressure with Mutas, and over half the time the games don't get past that point. That's BORING. Having all the core decisions and initiative lie with one player is a recipe for dull, solitaire-esque games. That needs to be fixed. This post should have his own thread. Can't believe everyone rambles about hard to grasp stuff like "balance" and misses the essential point summed up in a gem like this post. Respect to you sir, for putting it thus nicely. indeed a good post. the game is very one sided in most matchups atm. not necessarily from pure balance point of you but from whos in control/aggressive. while this ofc is still related to balance,maps etc i think blizzard just fucked up with some of the dynamics between the races. for example ZvP. in broodwar gateway units were very limited in power early on. the P had to fear the Zs tech. goons were horrible against mutas, no robo bay no lurker detection, no storm/speed and you cant take on hydras. now the 3 basic gateway units do perfectly fine against pretty much all Z can do. stalker+sentry has no prob with mutas in a straight fight,lurkers are gone and their substitute banelings are a non issue, evrything Z has till hive except the hydra is "ok" at best vs the most basic gateway spam. P can stay aggressive the whole game. P doesnt have to fear anything (hydras get HARDcountered by collosus aclick, mutas get HARDcountered by phoenix rightclick spam) and its just a survival test for the Z till he gets ultras out which then stomp pretty much evrything the P has(if the P doesnt have tons immortals+storm. ) similar thing in TvP where T doesnt really fear anything P has and just spams units into the enemys base cause their most basic units just stomp/do very well against most of P units. add vikings to hardcounter collosus and we have a similar situation like in ZvP . again P has to survive till he got storm+energy upgrade. then he can stomp like evrything T has (if the T doesnt have tons of emp and gets most/all templars) add the lack of real challenging/unique micro,the ability to mass a ton of units from 1-2 bases,the small unbalanced map and you have the boring one sided games we have now. sure its possible to balance the game around such gameplay(and the actual race powers arent that much different). but it just isnt fun when the matchups lack dynamics and one race is just in survival mode for 90% of the game.
I believe this is a more important point to the whole 'balance' discussion. Most people focus on 'balance' in the sense of whether two sides are evenly matched, where both have almost equal opportunity to attain victory. Let's call this 'naive balance'.
However, these posters are highlighting something else: 'Power balance'. 'Power' in this case is the ability of a side to dictate the pace of the game and the strategic choices of the enemy.
It is possible to achieve 'naive balance' without having 'power balance'.
The OP is completely right in the sense that, it is possible for a Z in SC2 ZvT to hold off reapers, hold off helions, hold off cloaked banshees and transition into the mid game. Continue to hold off the bio/mech push and eventually win the game with mass mutas/broodlords/ultras. The win rate could be a perfect 50% and we have achieved our 'naive balance'.
But the balance of power is heavily skewed towards the T. T almost always has the initiative.
Cast your eye back to SCBW ZvT.
On September 07 2010 19:30 Acritter wrote:
It's pressure with lings into counterpressure with MM ball into counterpressure with Mutas into counterpressure with Science Vessels into an endgame with Defilers, Cracklings, and Ultras. Every race has its period of aggression, and they can always be aggressive back with a little bit of Muta harass or an MM push into a third. That's pretty exciting.
He's right. It is pretty exciting. Because the 'power balance' continually shifts throughout the game.
Maybe the OP is right. ZvT is completely balanced now, in the 'naive balance' sense. But it definitely does not have the interesting changes in power dynamics that characterize all the SCBW matchups. THIS is what Blizzard needs to fix.
|
On September 07 2010 23:58 TLOBrian wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 23:34 ltortoise wrote:On September 07 2010 23:21 TLOBrian wrote:On September 07 2010 23:06 ltortoise wrote:On September 07 2010 23:01 TLOBrian wrote:
The marauder might need to lose stim. Absurd. If the marauder lost stim, it would COMPLETELY BREAK TvP. Completely. Protoss would simply win the game once they got Colossi or Templar. End. It's already a close, balanced matchup. If you gave a huge nerf like that to the marauder, there would be nothing you could do to stop the onslaught of second tier Protoss. And the problem people have with the Reaper, Brian, is that it's only useful in one specific build in one specific matchup, or for scouting. THAT'S IT. It's a broken unit. Just "nerfing it" isn't really good enough. It needs to be REVAMPED. A straight nerf and it will just end up as a unit that never gets used, ever. People don't seem to be using their brains very much in this thread. 1) Maybe make some tier 2 units? Ghost which have OP emp, Tanks which have OP siege mode, helions which have OP blue flame for zealots. 2) Marauders shrug off storm like no tomorrow. 3) The fact that you can LOL STIM and take down 4 collossi with a couple volleys and then kite the rest of the army with concussive shells guaranteeing your retreat is bullshit. 4) The matchup is not close to balance in any way with marauders having stim AND concussive shells. One of them needs to go, or have a huge drawback to making it balanced. 30 HP every stim for marauders maybe, or every other hit slowing, or even the marauder cannot move after firing a volley with concussive shells. Something along those lines to make it so you cannot mow down half a protoss army if they make the wise decision and try to retreat. You simply CANNOT retreat against a bio terran now, It's like here, heres two upgrades for less than 200/200 that BREAKS the game. The combination of stim AND concussive shells on the marauder makes them BROKEN. END OF STORY. IN EVERY MATCHUP. When you can drop 4 of any unit thats not tier 3, well a unit more effective at killing bases than a tier 3, and have to worry about your entire base being wiped out, that makes me a sad sad panda. 5) God forbid the terran has to actually position his army or get vikings against collossi, which come two at a time from a building that is easily produced and cheapily doubles its production capacity with a simple addon that doesn't take that much time to build. What the hell? You can't possibly watch or play much TvP. Marauders do not "shrug off" storm. Storm RAPES all forms of bio. It's a giant AoE attack that takes massive chunks of HP out of large quantities of units. Also, nothing is so simple as "vikings counter colossi." Are we even playing the same game? The game is about composition, not "UNIT X COUNTERS UNIT Y." When people make colossi, they typically PROTECT their colossi with blink stalkers. I can't just go up and kill the colossi with my vikings unless their micro sucks. And now I'm supposed to mass tanks and hellions, as well as vikings, in addition to my bio ball with medivacs? I can't make everything. Day9 talks about people who make these kinds of comments and laughs. It's like you think I can just have all the units all at once. Gas limits my compositions greatly. The more marauders I have, the less tanks, medivacs, and vikings I can have. And how is EMP "overpowered." A ghost costs 150 gas. That's A LOT. EMP uses a lot of energy. I don't even MAKE ghosts vs protoss generally, because the good tosses use their storms ASAP, and never ball their templar up. It takes all of 5 clicks to make your templars cost one EMP each, and that's assuming you can even get close enough to EMP them. It's not like people put their templar right at the front of their army and say "emp me please!" Being cutesy and trying to get a cloaked ghost up close is also a joke. Furthermore, once the Protoss has the amulet, a templar has a storm immediately upon being warped in. Good luck EMP'ing it in the 5 second window before they cast a storm. Do you watch tournaments? Terran does not have a huge win rate vs Protoss. There are perhaps more Terrans in the top 5 or so of tournaments because of the simple number advantage (TvZ is imbalanced and PvZ is not, so more tosses get knocked out by zergs than terrans). TvP is not a one-sided affair. It's the most balanced matchup in the game IMO. There are LOADS of viable Protoss openings and Terran openings, lots of interesting ways to build your armies, and everything has an accessible counter. But sure, a Terran who has massed up ghosts, medivacs, vikings, siege tanks, and marauders might not have a counter. INFINITE GAS TERRAN! WOOOO Never said you needed to have all the units at once. Never said you'd have infinite gas. Woo I'm going to assume so I can make a post which I think is right so I can be right because I'm right and the only thing that matters is being right, right? If you make collossi, I make vikings, or more marauders with stim. What's easier to make? Vikings or Collossi? If you make Templar, I make ghost. Whats easier to use and make? Templar or ghosts? If you just have a heavy Zealot/stalker army, I'm going to be making Hellions, marines, and marauders. Whats easier to use and make? Zealots or Hellions? Stalkers or marauders? All I'm saying is, that the Terran units that can be used to nullify advantages from the protoss units are cheaper, easier to use, and generally are more useful in the matchup early game to late game. Collossi and high templar are expensive to tech up to and to get. Terran upgrades and spells do way more and are cheaper than ANY OTHER RACES SPELLS AND UPGRADES IN THE GAME. I'm not right, It's my opinion. I'm not going to 'argue' anymore.
This post just shows that you are completely ignorant of the matchup and perhaps the large portions of the game. People like you shouldn't even be allowed to post their opinions on TL about these kinds of topics.
I already explained that ghosts don't even counter templars unless the Protoss player puts their templar in a tight little ball, moves them to the front of their army, and then politely asks in chat for the Terran to please EMP their templar. I wish this would happen more, but frankly it doesn't so I don't make a lot of ghosts even if templars are on the field. Please read posts before replying.
Again, just because I make some vikings doesn't mean the colossi are magically "countered." Blink stalkers are a natural fit with colossus, and they can very easily snipe vikings. When I get into these situations usually it comes down to: "THE BEST PLAYER WINS."
There is no secret magical abusive strategy in TvP that I can do to get consistent wins against people of greater skill than myself. Typically speaking if I'm consistently raping a protoss, it means they are just a worse player than me. Usually they have less APM, worse micro, worse multitasking, and bad macro. Maybe not all of that, but some combination for sure.
Nobody of any notoriety has claimed that TvP is imbalanced. Nobody. Why? Because it's a balanced matchup. Watch more tournaments. Watch more showmatches. Players of similiar skill have close win rates against each other.
|
Day 9 Daily 172 really shows that a reaper opening against Zerg is not imbalanced.
EDIT: But then again, I don't believe in inbalance.
|
The problem with ANY balance changes is that player balance, that is when the community balances the game by evolving the metagame, devising new strategies, finding new timings etc etc, is such a complex process.
Some timings are very very hard to find, and it could take a long time before they are discovered but when you change the game balance you erase all the work that has already been done because all timings change. If the balance of the game is constantly changing through blizzard meddling that will actually result in an inability for players to balance the game out since you can never get the really deep timings that you got in broodwar that were the result of a long long time of metagame evolution.
|
this takes time. people whining about game balance less than 2 months after release are pretty naive and probably noobs to the online multiplayer gaming scene.
Alright, seriously, how many months is it going to take? Balance issues were obvious the first week of release, and now we have tons of (Terran) players spouting "It's too early to tell! It's only been 1 week/month/2 months/a year!/wait until I'm in Diamond!"
Get over it. Terran is imba. The sooner you accept that, the sooner you'll become a better player and stop being carried by your race.
|
I really think that "the game is still evolving" argument is pretty defeasible as the game might still be pretty young but there assumably never has been a more active scene in a rts. There are about 2 money tournaments a day, top players are quickly switching to pro-status and thus train 6 and more hours per day and there is also a widespread rts-knowledge as many peope have been following bw and wc3 for countless years. So because of that a set of standard strategies now have mostly settled and we are likely to see small refinemts in the matchups but surely no more magical counters to 4Gate All-in or MMM.
|
On September 08 2010 00:32 Grimjim wrote:Get over it. Terran is imba. The sooner you accept that, the sooner you'll become a better player and stop being carried by your race.
Ugh. I don't even like this statement. To be ACCURATE and PRECISE we would say that TvZ is imbalanced. Specifically, Terran has an advantage over Zerg during the early game. Blanket statements like "Terran is imba" is just incorrect. It would be correct if TvP was also in favor of T... But it isn't...
|
The problem with reaper harass and 2 gate openings are that they are extremely easy to do yet really hard to defend. It shouldn't be like that. Whether that is a problem due to the maps or actual balance is still up in the air.
|
- Reapers are meant to be a harass unit. I can understand Blizzard's intent, but the siege damage they do is absolute overkill to an already very useful unit. Why should 4 or 5 reapers absolutely destroy a spinecrawler? For a unit that does so much for the cost, zerg should at least be able to build some static defense to counter it.
- I absolutely agree with the zealot build time nerf. This isn't a zealot is OP problem, its a zergling is UP problem.
- Maps are a little imbalance, but lets be realistic... Blizzard isn't going to restructure the way the maps are.
- I can somewhat agree with the Ultralisk nerf. On the other hand, they take very long to get (way longer than any other massive unit.) I don't see why they can't have a little bit over the top damage.
- Absolutely agree with the siege tank nerf. I think it needs to be nerfed more to be honest.
- In beta and maybe the first couple weeks of release I thought Psi storm was a little UP, but I've seen some devestating play since then, and would absolutely not touch the spell right now.
- Neural Parasite is awful. Maybe castable while burrowed and a 20 second increase would help
- Corrupter could attack a little faster I think.
- Marauders are just all around too good. They already attack pretty slow, so an overall damage nerf would suffice.
- Planetary fortress is already seeing some offense play in higher level games. The splash damage should just be removed entirely.
|
On September 07 2010 15:16 Wolfpox wrote:
Perscienter, I think you're the one overreacting, not Blizzard.
Quickly spreading creep and being masterful with a Queen is your solution to fast Reapers? All you have to do with Reapers is run and gun. Creating a creep tumor means that you lose 4 extra larva! Having to ruin your macro in order to spread creep early, in order to effectively hold off an extremely easy to execute rush strategy -- how is that fair? It's easy for Terran to block their ramp on almost every ramp, and most players do it by default.
This is the point ruining completely your post, you obviously never tried it yourself. It looks easy buti t's hard to pull off without backfiring you hard at the first minimal mistake you can do ; losing even 2 , 3 reapers or so early on can shift the way the game is going dramatically.
About those changes really, even if the increased build time for reapers is ok, the tank nerf has nothing to do here, you were hardly seeing them in TvP, in TvT well, marines die anyway, and in TvZ zerg got so much mobility they're not really a problem since zergs realise mutas are good (which I've always screamed) and that their mobility has to be used against this
|
Countering reapers isn't as hard as many people think.
Then why do the worlds #1 Zergs keep losing to it?
|
On September 07 2010 14:51 Perscienter wrote:
Siege tank nerf vs. light and unarmored:
My essay implies of course that this is unnecessary. It also doesn't make sense. These units should be blasted by the siege tanks all the more.
OP wants to buff siege tanks. Who's in favour of this?
*silence*
*burst of laughter*
|
On September 08 2010 00:59 sob3k wrote:Then why do the worlds #1 Zergs keep losing to it?
Reapers hard counter Zerglings.
Reapers out-range and outrun Roaches and Queens.
They're too strong early game since Zerg has no counter to it.
|
Hi i'm Unkk and i am a semi terrible player. Up until i played sleep deprived yesterday and lost 7 or 8 games in a row, i was a 950ish protoss player i diamond. Why i open up with the fact that i am not that great of a player is because, well, im not. I am way higher up in the ladder then i myself think i should be, and probably the biggest reason for this is because of one matchup, which is PvZ.
Before i say anything, i have the two maps that i'd guess zerg performs the best on thumbed down(scrap station and that desert map that takes 8 hours to walk around to the other guys base) simply because im an aggressive player. Now, my best matchup is without a doubt PvZ, and i only have one build for this MU which is 4 warpgate timing push with +1 weapons, with this i win about half my PvZ games straight up during the push, the other half i cripple the zerg so badly that i can just double expand and macro him to death 5 - 10min later. It's pretty much 4 warpgate A-move and win. I have no stats but i very rarely lose to a zerg, even 1200 1300 zergs have a very very hard time handling this push.
Why is this? Well, i didnt play tons of BW, but i did play a little. And as of now it feels that A) The maps are quite small, early pressure is very easy B) Can't really explain it but it feels like the zerg has less units early on but you have more, compared to BW.
These two things just makes early pressure on zerg the easiest thing in the world, 3-4 zealots from a 2 gate does such incredible amounts of damage its silly, even if i kill 0 drones and his expo goes up unharmed, i still made him produce 10+ zerglings, so thats 5 drones he wont have. And if they overcomit to zerglings its pretty much a free win right then and there since 2 zealots and one sentry can hold a ramp vs lings for just about forever.
Will the CD increase on warpgates help zerg? No it won't, 4 warpgate will just become 5 warpgate without sacrificing much, the + zealot build time will help against the very early pressure of 3-4 zealots, and this i think might be the biggest change. Since those early zealots does so much damage and forces the zerg to build so much stuff he doesnt want to build.
ALso on the terran issue, only thing i'd change really is marauders, make conc shell cost more or remove it alltogether. Stim i think is too vital to remove or they won't have a place later on in the game.
Maybe some inconsisten nonsense ramblings here by a bad player, but it's how i feel after a 8 hour reading bender, college ftw!
|
On September 07 2010 23:42 hoovehand wrote:
some ppl still think that blizzard don't play the game or listen to player feedback.
seriously, HSM is heavily nerfed right now - but there was a point where it was completely imbalanced and internal testing alone showed that it needed a drastic change. didn't 'mr. terrible terrible damage' say that terran players were just massing ravens and being unbeatable?
when something is gamebreakingly overpowered then you nerf it hard and then gradually implement changes (like the removal of the fusion core pre-requisite) to see when it feels right.
this takes time. people whining about game balance less than 2 months after release are pretty naive and probably noobs to the online multiplayer gaming scene.
What you don't to understand is the concept of alot of top gamers playing sc2. It wont take as long as BW or wc3 to develope the best strategys.
There are the best players of bw, wc3, c&c and other games playing sc2 right now.
It wont take such a long time to discover for the best strats and builds for each race.
|
I just want to add one thing to this topic. I've seen a couple posts about 2 gate and 4warpgate timing push. Saying that is op is straight up blasphemy. You're just mad because you can't fast expand and mass up WAY more units than a Toss without an expansion ever could. You're original plan to FE was ruined, and it makes the game more difficult. You have to sacrifice your economy(like a Toss would have to) to keep up. Yes you're in a reactionary stance, but a 4warpgate/2gate is extremely easy to scout, and fairly easy to defend. Reaper/Marauder vs. Zerg is incredibly op because of what units can be built. Tech lab for reapers, cool, he has to invest in loads of roaches, and then when that happens, you just bust out the Marauders like nothing, and if you kept most of your reapers alive, it is just a horrible rape fest and there is nothing Zerg can do.
|
On September 07 2010 22:52 smegged wrote:
It's so easy to transition from 5rax reaper into marauders if the zerg goes roaches and marauders just own roaches so hard it's not funny.
Exactly, that's why, most of the time, Zerg spends 200 minerals+mining time for the Roach Warren and 3-5 larvae and 75/25 per Roach just to make the Terran switch to marauders. Then of course, Zerg needs the Speed-Upgrade and huge amounts of them Zerglings - How the hell should that work out?
Even if Zerg exatcly knows what the opponent is doing, it's nearly impossible to get a good Unit-composition. Take Marauder+Hellion for example - even if your a Maphacker and could see everything the Terran is doing, there is simply put no Unit-composition that is at least decent against Marauder+Hellions on Small maps.
Or Mech+marines - there is no good unit or Unit-composition to counter that, you have to just be lucky and/or extremely aware of what the Terran is doing, where his Army is etc. and get a hilariously good flank. I guess ppl like DIMAGA and IdrA can pull this off, but not only because they are better than me, but because they are better then almost all other players...
And I don't wanna just bash on the Terran-Players, because Protoss are nowhere near more balanced. In Korea, Protoss is said to be the best race and most really good protoss-players practically feel invinsible to Zergs. Zerg just can't really hold of 4-gate-timing attacks without seriously neglecting their economy, all the while Protoss can constantly pump probes and later on expand.
it's also ridiculous that every decent Zerg-Unit has soooo strong counter by the Protoss. I mean - the timing-windows are REALLY small to get the counter-units out to defend 4-warpgate-push (hydras), but to get the counter-unit (Corruptor) to the Protoss' counter-unit (Collossi) out in time, is just ridiculous. Protoss could just stay on Warpgate-tech and have nothing to fear from the Zerg, but Zerg constantly has to play catch-up: defend, tech, macro-up etc. - IT'S A FREAKING CHORE...
Don't even get me started on forward-2-gate pressure (not proxy; not all-in) on smaller Maps...
Standard tactics that Zerg had to punish heavy aggression by the opposing players don't exist anymore either. Try to make a backstab with Speedlings when 1 Unit completely shuts it down (Force-Field)! What good are the Zerglings Speed, when they can't do backstabs and runby's, I tell you what good it is: They get to get assraped faster!
|
On September 07 2010 17:35 Wolfpox wrote:
They are base-raiders, plain and simple. The problem is that fucking Tech Lab that unlocks EVERYTHING.
Make them build a seperate god damn building for Mauraders and Reapers, the same way you need to for the Ghost Academy. Call it the Merc Post and put the upgrades for the units in there instead of the Tech Lab. That's what they were going to do, but then they were like, "no let's make it easier so they can rush these units, but let's not give any half-decent equivalent to Zerg, even though Protoss can warp units anywhere they want."
Really, with the Reaper/Marauder rape advantage, this all boils down to the Terran tech tree being so ridiculously flexible and advantageous, whereas Zerg has to build a new building for every unit and then research the upgrades if they dont want them to suck balls.
That's called race features, terran can unlock more things easier, but they can't get 20 of them right when they unlock it, nothing wrong there.
|
5s off the Reaper isn't going to stop them being a good early harassment unit. It just makes it riskier to spam the things because that extra 5 seconds will keep adding up, leaving you with only Reapers in a realm where the Zerg starts having a larger and larger force.
5s off the Zealot, again, isn't going to really affect anything unless you're just spamming the things. It'll make Korean 4-Gate attempts more popular, because 2-Gate pushes were already not particularly effective, but if its anything like what happened in Beta that week they 'accidentally' put the 38s build time in, it'll shift the matchup into mass Stalkers, Immortals and Sentries, which is actually a ton of fun. Lots of reward for micro, defenders advantage and less Collossus rushing because Zealots being out of the picture leaves a wide window of opportunity to hammer a Collossus rusher with Stalkers and Immortals.
|
On September 08 2010 00:32 Irrational_Animal wrote:
I really think that "the game is still evolving" argument is pretty defeasible as the game might still be pretty young but there assumably never has been a more active scene in a rts. There are about 2 money tournaments a day, top players are quickly switching to pro-status and thus train 6 and more hours per day and there is also a widespread rts-knowledge as many peope have been following bw and wc3 for countless years. So because of that a set of standard strategies now have mostly settled and we are likely to see small refinemts in the matchups but surely no more magical counters to 4Gate All-in or MMM.
This is my biggest gripe with balancing nowadays.
It's no longer 1995, people. We have the internet, forums, websites, streamers streaming 24 hours a day.
The competetive gaming scene (not just starcraft) no longer consists of local homogeneous communities whos only gamplay input comes once a year when the asians fly over for the world championships to teach the rest of the world how to play. Strategies evolve at a raging speed (as evident by how fast the 5 rax reaper build spread), especially when the games iterate on previous versions.
Another modern example of this is Street Fighter IV. When it came out, lots of people shunned any idea of balancing patches, saying that Street Fighter II / III's gameplay evolved for several years. But so far, not that much has changed. Sure, the balance has evened out a bit, but what was good when SFIV came out, is still what's good today (and the characters that does not have access to said "good" elements, while still being able to win, will have an upphill battle), and simply tweaking a few numbers isn't going to change that.
In SC2, being able to deny the opponent from getting into your base for the first 10 minutes while you are free to tech into a number of builds while denying scouting is what's good (talking zvp, zvt here). This includes abusing chokes, edges and walloffs, with the current map pool. It's a fundamental advantage that require some pretty broad changes, not just a couple of seconds worth of build time added or subtracted.
|
I like how every post in favor of nerfing Terran is obviously a Zerg player and every post in favor of not is obviously a Terran player. Also anyone who disagrees with anyone else is obviously a noob who doesn't understand game balance.
No one even considers the possibility that someone has taken the time to come to a thoughtful conclusion that doesn't 100% match up with theirs.
|
On September 08 2010 01:17 cArn- wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 17:35 Wolfpox wrote:
They are base-raiders, plain and simple. The problem is that fucking Tech Lab that unlocks EVERYTHING.
Make them build a seperate god damn building for Mauraders and Reapers, the same way you need to for the Ghost Academy. Call it the Merc Post and put the upgrades for the units in there instead of the Tech Lab. That's what they were going to do, but then they were like, "no let's make it easier so they can rush these units, but let's not give any half-decent equivalent to Zerg, even though Protoss can warp units anywhere they want."
Really, with the Reaper/Marauder rape advantage, this all boils down to the Terran tech tree being so ridiculously flexible and advantageous, whereas Zerg has to build a new building for every unit and then research the upgrades if they dont want them to suck balls. That's called race features, terran can unlock more things easier, but they can't get 20 of them right when they unlock it, nothing wrong there.
So if Zerg had the race Feature that the Queen could fly around the Map and throw Nukes at you from the start, that would be okay?
You sir, are an idiot!
There aer race-features that are simply better than other and thus far, the Zergs race-features suck.
Look at the creep-mechanic: Instead of it giving you an advantage, your at a disadvantage if you don't have it. Okay, that's not the Mechanics fault, but the fact that Zerg Units are too slow off-creep. It's also very APM-consuming to spread creap and I think that's nothing bad (I've never complained about Zerg being hard to play, but at least I want a reward for a race that's clearly the most APM-consuming), but when Terran just has to scan or get ravens out and the protoss just needs an observer and A-Move to completely destroy that advantage you've earned by investing a lot of APM, it get's kinda annoying.
And for the other one with being able to unlock Units with 1 building - are you kidding me?
1) Firstly, Zergs Structures are kinda expensive and take long to build (look at the spire - it takes forever)
2) Larvae are also used to pump Drones - that makes a huge difference! You can't just pump all the Units you want out of them, so just like Terran and Protoss have to build more Warpgates/barracks, Zerg has to build more Hatcheries and queens to be able to keep the Macro smooth.
3) Atm. there is nearly no timing-window that can be abused by the fact that you can build a buttload of a certain Unit at a time right after they get unlocked:
- Mutas take way too long to build and are so expensive, you'll never have enough Gas to spend it all on Mutas, most of the time, you'll have way more Larvas than you could possibly use on Mutas.
- Hydras barely get out to hold off rushes and again, you won't have enough Gas to just pump out a ridiculous number of Hydras at once.
(*Exeption is the 5RR, but that's so soon and 1-base, it's nothing IMBA you'll use your 5 larva immediately for roaches as soon as the roach-warren finishes)
---> this is basically true for every zerg-Unit, there are just no good timing-attacks for Zerg that base on saving Larva and then producing a lot of one Unit which just has been unlocked, completely negating your aforementioned race-feature bonus. I think you would've known that if you ever played Zerg or ever tried to figure out how MU's work out if you are playing Zerg.
|
On September 07 2010 14:51 Perscienter wrote:- Planetary fortresses are often mentioned, but are immobile, lack air-defence and don't have mules and scans. They are probably ok, as long as the player doesn't engage them with a ground force. ;-)
So it's winky-face fine that a 150 gas unit counters everything Zerg can throw at it on the ground short of 25 baneling? I've been playing P recently and at least they have storm - PF isn't that big of a deal. But it is by far the most overpowered unit in the T arsenal in TvZ, and if anything it doesn't get nearly ENOUGH QQ because most Terran overly make OC instead of PF.
On September 08 2010 01:08 Demarini wrote:
I just want to add one thing to this topic. I've seen a couple posts about 2 gate and 4warpgate timing push. Saying that is op is straight up blasphemy. You're just mad because you can't fast expand and mass up WAY more units than a Toss without an expansion ever could. You're original plan to FE was ruined, and it makes the game more difficult. You have to sacrifice your economy(like a Toss would have to) to keep up. Yes you're in a reactionary stance, but a 4warpgate/2gate is extremely easy to scout, and fairly easy to defend. Reaper/Marauder vs. Zerg is incredibly op because of what units can be built. Tech lab for reapers, cool, he has to invest in loads of roaches, and then when that happens, you just bust out the Marauders like nothing, and if you kept most of your reapers alive, it is just a horrible rape fest and there is nothing Zerg can do.
You're clearly bad at 4 gate. 2 gate into 4 gate in PvZ is NOT an all-in and does NOT hurt the P player's economy. It is by far the best opening designed to delay the Z expansion and economy (if it doesn't outright win) allowing P to establish his expansion and a quick transition into HT or Colossi for another attack before the Zerg has recovered from the initial push.
|
On September 08 2010 01:38 comis wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 14:51 Perscienter wrote:
[*] Planetary fortresses are often mentioned, but are immobile, lack air-defence and don't have mules and scans. They are probably ok, as long as the player doesn't engage them with a ground force. ;-)
So it's winky-face fine that a 150 gas unit counters everything Zerg can throw at it on the ground short of 25 baneling? I've been playing P recently and at least they have storm - PF isn't that big of a deal. But it is by far the most overpowered unit in the T arsenal in TvZ, and if anything it doesn't get nearly ENOUGH QQ because most Terran overly make OC instead of PF.
PF's are the reason every noob-Terran can keep up in expansions with the Zerg. They just throw down a PF and a few Turrets and forget about the expansion. They don't have to defend it, they don't have to be too careful when putting the expansion up (fly there and Upgrade - very small timing-window to punish the Terran as Zerg), they can take Island-expansions very easily without having to think about how to get Units over there if it gets attacked etc. They also don't have to worry about splitting up their Army and can just troll around the Map in one big ball of racial design-disaster.
This completely negates the Zergs mobility-bonus as well. A Mech-Ball that is walking around killing off the Zergs expansions without Zerg being able to face them head-on and not die, should be punished for it, but Zerg simply can't.
And it's even more horrible on those small Blizzard Maps. Terran can just get his half of the Map and defend having the easiest time of their lives, get maxed out and completely raped the Zergs army. Terran was the strongest maxed-out race in BW, but in SC2, it's so ridiculously imbalanced, I have nightmares about it....
|
On September 07 2010 14:51 Perscienter wrote:Appendixes (just because I'm posting): 1. The changes in detail - Zealot build time and warpgate cooldown +5 seconds each:
I'd leave them alone.
- Reapers and bunkers build time +5 seconds:
I'd leave them also alone. There were no issues with the bunker at all.
- Siege tank nerf vs. light and unarmored:
My essay implies of course that this is unnecessary. It also doesn't make sense. These units should be blasted by the siege tanks all the more.
- Battlecruisers damage lowering:
Only necessary because of the lack of spells like plague.
- Ultralisk damage lowering and removal of the ram:
I completely agree on the removal. I don't think that the damage lowering will have a large impact. It's ok.
2. Things, that look patchy - Neural parasite is broken. It adds a factor of uncertainty because the player doesn't know in which favor the situation will tip. It is also barely viable against big late game armies. Some change to its mechanics would be adorable.
- Reapers pathfinding AI. They are sometimes stuck.
- The marauder might need to lose stim. Maybe the slow-effect should in turn be improved.
- Psi storm is worse than in scbw. Not necessarily to be patched.
- Other units which might need some tweaks: corruptor with corruption. It lacks complexity when compared to the devourer. Mothership, carriers, archons are seldom used.
- Planetary fortresses are often mentioned, but are immobile, lack air-defence and don't have mules and scans. They are probably ok, as long as the player doesn't engage them with a ground force. ;-)
I disagree with a lot of what you're saying. First of all I think your header is terrible. You complain about major balance changes and you mention one single change that would make a bigger difference than the complete coming patch - removing stim from marauders.
About Reapers: Zerg doesn't have that many different ways to open a game. They have been tested and it turns out that opening Reapers puts you ahead against a Zerg compared to pretty much everything else. I'm a 1200ish Zerg btw.
While the Zealot nerf will make PvT harder (and PvZ of course but I think zealot heavy openings are too strong at the moment so I'm fine with that) it is somewhat cancelled out by the fact that it is against Zealots that Tanks have gotten their major nerf.
And lastly I don't think these changes are "major balance changes". I still think 5 rax Reapers or something like it will be an extremely popular opening, I still think tanks will do great against Zerg and while it will have a big effect on Protoss the warp gate nerf will cancel it out (if just a little, I think Protoss will have an easier time against Terran now).
I think Blizzard could make much larger balance changes and Terran would still do extremely well against Zerg on a high level.
|
The OP is a little heavy on theory for some people I think. He's trying to advocate that even if the game needs balancing, it shouldn't come at the cost of interesting gameplay. Some units are meant to be "OP" (Spider Mines... and bw tanks, seriously nerf them plz)
I disagree with a lot of what you're saying. First of all I think your header is terrible. You complain about major balance changes and you mention one single change that would make a bigger difference than the complete coming patch - removing stim from marauders.
NO. He mentioned that stim should be removed but something should be added for the marauder elsewhere, which wouldn't necessarily amount to a nerf, just a change to the unit dynamic.
|
How's Protoss going to have an easier time? We're not particularly afraid of Reapers. We typically always get a fast Stalker with a Zealot tank (built with the Core is going up). Its the MM blob that's the killer and we really depend on Zealot-reinforcement damage sponges from Warp Gates so our expensive Stalkers/Sentries/Immortals/whatever else don't get completely obliterated by Stims.
More time between waves of Zealots just makes life a hell of a lot harder.
|
Who are you talking to?
Players?
Players will always have ideas about what should be changed. This will never go away and is a natural part of every gaming community. You will never convince the fan base that all is fine and to stop discussing changes.
Blizzard?
They will make changes as they see fit on the time line that they feel is most appropriate. They obvious don't make knee jerk changes since Beta has ended. There have been no balance patches and none of the changes in the upcoming patch are "severe".
Lay off the theorycraft threads if they are causing you stress. Suggestions like "Durr, hurr remove Marauders and tanks from game!! Make lings climb walls" are not going to happen, it is just players letting off steam.
The psychological trauma induced by "nerfs" is stunning. I have no idea why players are so personally and emotionally attached to temporary game states and transient unit damage.
Things change, especially early on, get used to it.
|
QQ more.
The two build time tweaks will have no affect on the metagame.
The only balance change is the tank nerf, and we can all agree that it is well deserved.
|
On September 08 2010 02:15 Xog wrote:
QQ more.
The two build time tweaks will have no affect on the metagame.
The only balance change is the tank nerf, and we can all agree that it is well deserved.
The strangest thing might be how absolutely little tanks were used in GSL and recent tournament events that would even correlate an effect with the patch....Pretty much 0.
|
On September 08 2010 02:25 DreXxiN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2010 02:15 Xog wrote:
QQ more.
The two build time tweaks will have no affect on the metagame.
The only balance change is the tank nerf, and we can all agree that it is well deserved. The strangest thing might be how absolutely little tanks were used in GSL and recent tournament events that would even correlate an effect with the patch....Pretty much 0.
I would attribute this to the prevalence of barracks --> starport builds in TvP and to the magic box trick that weakened mech vs. Zerg.
|
I believe that this game has a lot to offer. I don't like the fact that everyone cries for nerfs and patches this early in the games release, even though i feel zerg isn't on an even level with all the other races. It may be that I myself play zerg, so my opinion may be biased; but one of my biggest concerns is zergs inability to win games in the early stages of the game.
I find it unfair that zerg can have a very difficult time FE (especially against reapers/bunk rushes) when its probably the most sensible zerg opening, but zergs cant do anything to harass a terran or protoss opening. The fact that 2/3 races can wall themselves in and not have to worry about any early attacks in zvt and zvp is my biggest problem with the game so far.
The only other problem I have with zerg is the lack of flexable strategies as compared to the manyy different builds and openings of terran and protoss.
As far as units go, i would say for the most part they seem somewhat balanced. People complain about ultras and broodlords, but the fact is they are so difficult to tech to, so if you let a zerg opponent over expand and tech to them, its your fault anyway. I also dont like the phoenix ability to lift units, since it takes much longer to tech to AA units as zerg compared to the other races. Another ability i dislike is the forcefield, since it really makes microing for protoss players much easier
Im sure plety of people will argue with what i've said but i honestly dont care, it's just the way i feel at this point. dont look at it like complaining, because i like the game exactly as it is right now, but if i had it my way, these would be a few things that i feel may help balance the game a bit
|
OP unfortunatly, Reapers, Bunkers, Battlecruisers, Siege tanks, ALL need nerfs, and yes bunkers are a problem they build to fast, + reapers build to fast, so combine reapers + bunker rush = two big problems in one.
|
Countering reapers isn't as hard as many people think.
I disagree with this statement. If you do counter reapers you are way behind because terran was building up his economy during the mid game.
|
Countering reapers isn't as hard as many people think. Spread the creep carefully. Fly your overlords to key-positions, so that your defence force can welcome the reapers. The queens have to be controlled very tightly, so that they don't run into their doom. You must have some practice and a good countering build order, though.
Nice! You just completely said the opposite of your original point.
|
I´m sorry Perscienter, but I simply don´t get what you want to tell us with your post.
Do you assume that there is only one possible state in which the game is balanced, and just to be clear with state I mean a specific combination of build times, dmg per sec, etc for every single unit? If that is your opinion, I simply don´t agree with it, because I believe that there are probably several states (each with different strategies of course) in which Starcraft 2 could be balanced. If this is indeed the case, then why not try to approach the state which is most beneficial to all and by "all" I mean players with all kinds of skill. Let me give you an example, you write:
Countering reapers isn't as hard as many people think. Spread the creep carefully. Fly your overlords to key-positions, so that your defence force can welcome the reapers. The queens have to be controlled very tightly, so that they don't run into their doom. You must have some practice and a good countering build order, though. Speed is obligatory but if the enemy accumulates considerable masses of reapers, only roaches will be able to fend them off. If done well, the threat will finally be fully neutralized by hydras, roach speed or mutas. In that case the game transitions into follow-ups and the Zerg might already have an advantage, because the Terran sunk tons of gas into reapers, which possess only a very low amount of hit-points.
There is simply no way, that a bronze, silver or gold player can pull that off. So they will auto-lose every time a terran player opens reapers. Oh and don´t tell me it takes some kind of incredible skill to control reapers, because it doesn´t if your opponent has low apm and has to spread his attention on building up an economy and defending against reapers. The high damage reapers do against buildings makes it even harder to play against a reaper opening, because it negates the most simple way for newbies to defend an early push, ie building defense structures like photon cannons or spine crawler.
So I agree with Blizzard making some small balance changes, that will make live easier for the huge amount of us low to medium skill players out there, while it probably won´t effect high level play that much. You yourself said in your post that The speed at which the style of play is transitioning into new ones, is huge. So why do you think that there is no way balance can be archieved with the changes in the first patch? If anything your post states, that no one, not even a professional starcraft 2 player, can judge at this moment, with the limited information we habe, whether the balance changes proposed by Blizzard will in fact screw up the balance of the game or not.
|
On September 08 2010 02:01 gogogadgetflow wrote:
The OP is a little heavy on theory for some people I think. He's trying to advocate that even if the game needs balancing, it shouldn't come at the cost of interesting gameplay. Some units are meant to be "OP" (Spider Mines... and bw tanks, seriously nerf them plz)
This is the only thing worth discussing in this thread imo. The thing is, there should be "Oh shit" units. Frankly a perfect game would have only "oh shit" units. All units should feel overpowered inside a well designed game. Watering down the units (as someone mentioned the WC3 game changes) will only kill it faster.
The problem is actually in the current game, terran has a lot of "oh shit" units. Protoss has less, but they still have potential (dont like the range nerf on the void ray or the weak archons much, neither the fact that the dumb mothership is in the game instead of an arbiter and et-cetera ).
Zerg on the other hand, the only units that seem and feels OP are the Banelings, which are suicidal units hurting the Zerg and pushing him into more passivity.
Where is the Lurker which used to 1 shot an entire ball of Terran infantry? Where are the Defilers which ravaged Terran outposts? Where are the fearsome scourge one shooting drops filled with units? Where is muta micro?
Give the to Zerg (and to Protoss in some extent) the ability to pull "oh shit overpowered" moments and we'll all be fine with the way Terran is designed, because we all get our chance to shine.
|
if you think this is too early for a balance patch, what qualifies as a late balance patch?
Reapers are extremely debatable. Their speed is something I don't really mind much but their ability to easily snipe the shit out of buildings is godlike. Super Godlike. They can murder zealot, lings w/o speed and marines (except en massed marines) with proper micro at least.
And there's also the problem where in TvZ, TvP (I don't know the terran mirror match) if the players were to go a bit ling heavy or zealot heavy and terran goes reaper, they can get punished pretty hard. Unless zerg does not have a queen (for some odd reason) or speedlings, he's fucked. If toss doesn't have cannons or stalkers, he's fucked. Even if you scout, your opening can kill you basically and just having the wrong opening of going a bit heavy on zealots instead of stalkers or cannons is being hard-countered. Or at least this is my thought.
And bunker reapers is a problem. personally in ZvT, reaper bunkers can deny zerg it's expo. Yes roaches is a good counter to reapers and bunkers but during that time, terran can pump out marauders.
I wouldn't count on waiting for someone to suddenly bring a crazy strategy to the table. by doing that, I'm putting my hopes on something groundbreaking that may or may not exist.
I do agree on map balance.
|
On September 08 2010 00:30 VanGarde wrote:
The problem with ANY balance changes is that player balance, that is when the community balances the game by evolving the metagame, devising new strategies, finding new timings etc etc, is such a complex process.
Some timings are very very hard to find, and it could take a long time before they are discovered but when you change the game balance you erase all the work that has already been done because all timings change. If the balance of the game is constantly changing through blizzard meddling that will actually result in an inability for players to balance the game out since you can never get the really deep timings that you got in broodwar that were the result of a long long time of metagame evolution. Yep, but at the same time modern BW doesn't really balance its tech trees too well. In most matchups / maps, there are so specific plays already established that a large part of the game complexity is never used, except for bm and ownage demonstration. That extremity isn't something good about BW, and from the way Blizzard works on SC2 it shows that they would like to minimize this effect in SC2 as much as they can. This may sound preposterous right now, but I think if they keep working on that, closely with the best players in the world, they may eventually achieve a more balanced tech tree usage in SC2 than BW, which means more game variety, and hence more interesting gameplay. It's early to tell, of course, but since it's still a work in development, why not try to improve upon the previous version at least; that's what they try.
Also, the final multiplayer of SC2 will inevitably be different from how it looks in WoL, because no matter how small, or big, there will be some major enough changes around the next coming game expansions. New units etc. Even just the smallest stupidest new unit would change almost all timings in the game, except matchups that don't involve it, and based on how Blizzard treats the new units so far, they'll probably insist on making every new unit actually count. So, we better face it, none of the strats used today will be alive, with the same timings, in a couple of years. They are all temporary.
|
You contradict yourself. When you talk about
Evolution in strategies and tactics
The speed at which the style of play is transitioning into new ones, is huge
and
A few units are already underused and don't serve a particular purpose in some match-ups
With the evolution of strategies and tactics how do you know that some units in their current state do not serve a purpose in a MU? They might, ppl might simply not have discovered their use yet.
why do you think that your perception of the balance issue is more correct then blizzards who have a lot more statistics at their disposal? You also hardly bring any arguments for why blizzards changes are unwarranted or why your suggested changes are.
Not saying I do not agree with you on some points. Just that I think your arguments are a bit flawed
I also think that a change that is much more interesting for the game to handle the issues in balance we have is to introduce a new unit for Z. Gives Z more choices which we want. Can give us a unit that is as OP as the tank or similar. I'd prefer this over a mix of bland units. If this be lurker or scourge or something all new I do not care. Give Z something more interesting to work with that can change the balance of the game a bit.
|
On September 08 2010 03:31 okrane wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2010 02:01 gogogadgetflow wrote:
The OP is a little heavy on theory for some people I think. He's trying to advocate that even if the game needs balancing, it shouldn't come at the cost of interesting gameplay. Some units are meant to be "OP" (Spider Mines... and bw tanks, seriously nerf them plz)
This is the only thing worth discussing in this thread imo. The thing is, there should be "Oh shit" units. Frankly a perfect game would have only "oh shit" units. All units should feel overpowered inside a well designed game. Watering down the units (as someone mentioned the WC3 game changes) will only kill it faster. The problem is actually in the current game, terran has a lot of "oh shit" units. Protoss has less, but they still have potential (dont like the range nerf on the void ray or the weak archons much, neither the fact that the dumb mothership is in the game instead of an arbiter and et-cetera ). Zerg on the other hand, the only units that seem and feels OP are the Banelings, which are suicidal units hurting the Zerg and pushing him into more passivity. Where is the Lurker which used to 1 shot an entire ball of Terran infantry? Where are the Defilers which ravaged Terran outposts? Where are the fearsome scourge one shooting drops filled with units? Where is muta micro? Give the to Zerg (and to Protoss in some extent) the ability to pull "oh shit overpowered" moments and we'll all be fine with the way Terran is designed, because we all get our chance to shine.
Indeed. This is usually what makes Blizzard games fun to play and fun to watch. Somebody pulls some clutch move out of their ass at the last second and swings the game around.
Protoss get Force Field, Psi Storm (+Khaydarin Amulet) and Vortex
Zerg get Muta harass, Burrowed Ultralisks, Nydus Worms and Banelings.
Terrans get ... you name it. Cloaked Banshee harass, Hellion drops, M&M drops, Nukes, bombardment from Tanks on high-ground, Thors getting repaired, EMP, Stimmed blobs of death, PDD, Yamato Cannoning essential anti-air units, COMSAT...what am I forgetting?
Terran are very, very solid defensively and don't have to worry about these game-flipping moments quite so much. You can't surprise drop a Terran with a Sensor Tower up. You can't obliterate his army or expansion with DTs anywhere close to as easily as you can against a Zerg or Protoss by quickly sniping their only field-detection in the area, thanks to COMSAT and EMP.
I think that's why it always feels safer and more relaxed when I play Terran. There's really nothing that blind-sides you when you know what you're doing.
|
So I can't agree with you more. I see new tactics from players everyday. If it were say, all reapers all the time every game on every map, and perhaps the zerg literally couldn't win/suffered too much damage after playing near flawlessly, then perhaps a change would be in order. Just feels like if they nerf the Powerful strategy of the week, they're going to be a lot of nerfing. Roach push? Roaches now have +5 build time. Stalker timing attack? Stalkers now deal two less damage. Mass hellion too strong? Hellions now cost 25 gas.
This mentality can only end up with a bad game.
|
On September 08 2010 07:21 MythicalMage wrote:
So I can't agree with you more. I see new tactics from players everyday. If it were say, all reapers all the time every game on every map, and perhaps the zerg literally couldn't win/suffered too much damage after playing near flawlessly, then perhaps a change would be in order. Just feels like if they nerf the Powerful strategy of the week, they're going to be a lot of nerfing. Roach push? Roaches now have +5 build time. Stalker timing attack? Stalkers now deal two less damage. Mass hellion too strong? Hellions now cost 25 gas.
This mentality can only end up with a bad game.
You are assuming that strategies that are too strong can only be balanced by nerfing them to the ground. And yes, that WOULD result in a bland game. However there are more creative ways of balancing, such as making it easier to scout a particular timing attack and/or buffing a unit to make it usable as a counter. This would have the added benefit of making lesser used units more viable, and possibly open up strategies involving them.
|
Your balance changes seem more geared towards TvP which doesn't seem to be the major problem atm.
|
It is not too early to make changes.
Remember that Starcraft 1 didn't even have replays until several patches after its release. Strategies back then took forever to equilibrate because it was harder or impossible to copy what someone did. With constant streams every day of pro players, and an ample supply of top level replays, that isn't the case anymore. The mechanics learned in Starcraft 1, which took years to learn, carry over in just a few days to Starcraft 2. The current state of play is where it was 2 or 3 years after Starcraft 1's release.
|
On September 08 2010 10:41 Sentient wrote:
It is not too early to make changes.
Remember that Starcraft 1 didn't even have replays until several patches after its release. Strategies back then took forever to equilibrate because it was harder or impossible to copy what someone did. With constant streams every day of pro players, and an ample supply of top level replays, that isn't the case anymore. The mechanics learned in Starcraft 1, which took years to learn, carry over in just a few days to Starcraft 2. The current state of play is where it was 2 or 3 years after Starcraft 1's release.
Yeah, I agree with this completely.
A lot of people seem to say: "Just wait a year, the metagame will evolve". No it won't. At least not in the Zerg matchups. Zerg simply has too few tools to use, and the result of that we can see already, and nothing's going to change about that.I guarantee you that if there are no big changes made, one year from now Terran will still run around with the same strategies and Zerg will still mostly sit in his base all game long and react to what the opponent does. Toss will still do a lot of 4gate /3gate+robo pushes with follow ups.
The only thing that's going to change is stuff that requires multi tasking and focus on gimmicks. Terran will do a lot more drops and backstabbing, as will Protoss. Zerg won't, as there's nothing we can effectively backstab with. Toss will abuse small squads of blinking stalkers more, Terran will abuse bunkers all over the map more etc.
I'm willing to bet $100 with anyone in here that, if there are no major reworks made to Zerg (like burrow to tier 1 or something like that), one year from now, you won't see a single Zerg get to the Ro4 in any tournament anymore.
The problem with the other 2 races and Zerg are not some kind of overpowered unit, or that a unit comes too fast, no, it's the fact that both Terran and Protoss have good tools to heavily abuse their race if they're playing really really good, and Zerg simply doesn't.
Zerg is the only race which was downgraded from BW to SC2.
The thing is though, Zerg will most certainly get a lot better with HotS, so we just have to hold out 2 years or so until it's released. Then we can finally play some even-footed games.
|
I just think its ridiculous that we have to wait 2 years for zerg to be playable. Why even release them? At the current balance stage, TvT is really the only truly balanced match-up...
|
Well, shut up about reapers. Dimaga and IdrA both had crazyh issues with it at IEM.
Also, go watch the GSL and tell me BC's shouldn't be nerfed.
Specifically Spunky's game as well as Torch's.
|
Clearly these balance changes were considered by Blizzard carefully. They were mistakenly released during Phase II of Beta as back then Blizzard realized that there was an issue with the units before players really became aware of how to exploit the imbalance.
What ended up happening was a 5 second build time nerf for a few units, and lower DPS on ultras and BCs. The biggest nerf was to tanks, which I think both Terran and Zerg realize that was clearly required. The concept is that tanks shouldn't be impossible to engage, which they are now unless the Zerg completely outplays the Terran.
If this "breaks" the game, Blizzard will fix it. Have no fear. We can't sit around not balancing the game for fear that we might break it. What we need is carefully considered and playtested changes, which is what Blizzard is doing.
|
On September 08 2010 03:31 okrane wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2010 02:01 gogogadgetflow wrote:
The OP is a little heavy on theory for some people I think. He's trying to advocate that even if the game needs balancing, it shouldn't come at the cost of interesting gameplay. Some units are meant to be "OP" (Spider Mines... and bw tanks, seriously nerf them plz)
This is the only thing worth discussing in this thread imo. The thing is, there should be "Oh shit" units. Frankly a perfect game would have only "oh shit" units. All units should feel overpowered inside a well designed game. Watering down the units (as someone mentioned the WC3 game changes) will only kill it faster. The problem is actually in the current game, terran has a lot of "oh shit" units. Protoss has less, but they still have potential (dont like the range nerf on the void ray or the weak archons much, neither the fact that the dumb mothership is in the game instead of an arbiter and et-cetera ). Zerg on the other hand, the only units that seem and feels OP are the Banelings, which are suicidal units hurting the Zerg and pushing him into more passivity. Where is the Lurker which used to 1 shot an entire ball of Terran infantry? Where are the Defilers which ravaged Terran outposts? Where are the fearsome scourge one shooting drops filled with units? Where is muta micro? Give the to Zerg (and to Protoss in some extent) the ability to pull "oh shit overpowered" moments and we'll all be fine with the way Terran is designed, because we all get our chance to shine.
I was bored and read the whole post. It has been 99.9% ramblings and rubbish but this is the crux of the problem. It is simply because of the lack of OP-ed units that toss and zerg have that allows the terran player to not worry about being punished for what he does.
I mean how many times has a terran player lost his army only to bounce back magically while negating that supposedly dangerous muta harass with nothing but a thor and 2 missile towers? And lets not get started on Mules.
The 2nd thing I find that contributes to this problem is the fact that terrans have the relatively cheapest upgrades they have to invest in to have their units function at full potential. It really irks me everytime some random terran scrub brushes off the current discussion with "get HT's PLZZ. One STORM = GG BIOBALL L2P!!" Reason? Because the two main killers of so called bioballs - the collosus and HT require expensive, time consuming upgrades to be viable. A collosus without range and a HT without kaydharin(?) is relatively useless. Going either path commits the toss player for a significant amount of the game. And because of this commitment. the toss player can be punished if the appropriate counters are made. Can the same be said of a terran player? Does a terran player ever "commit"?
But yes, give the carrier, hydra etc some OP-ness and maybe we'll see the game dynamics improve. Until then, I'll always cheer for the underdog I.E toss/zerg players =P
|
I'm no diamond player,so I guess my thoughts doesn't count.
|
A 5-second build time increase to reapers is not a severe balance change. I bet you plenty of Terran players will still be using them after the patch.
It's interesting before the news of the patch when people suggested changes to fix ZvT balance others (usually terran players) would be like 'no, trust Blizzard, they know what they're doing' etc. Now that Blizzard is finally doing something and releasing a patch now the tone is changing somewhat from these people- 'OMG, Blizzard don't know what they're doing!' etc.
|
On September 08 2010 10:12 Zerker wrote:
Your balance changes seem more geared towards TvP which doesn't seem to be the major problem atm.
TvP is still imbalanced in favor of Terrans, it's just less so.
|
LOL. You do realize that they made balance changes before the game was released right?
|
i still trust blizzard. they always know what they doing.
|
I think the balance issues have become pretty obvious. Zerg is too hard to play early game against Terran. Terran has too many cool neat abilities for all its units while the units on the other races have very few, as well as such an easy economic advantage with mules. Hydras are too slow, zerglings attack too slow, marauders do too good dps with stim micro, carriers build too slow, dark templar tech building builds too slow, etc.
Blaming it all on the maps is kind of weak, honestly. It's like trying to find the magic hidden angle when no, it really is what most people keep saying.
|
I just switched to protoss, and being able to use 4-gate in every matchup on every map and have a very strong chance of winning AND being able to recover pretty well if you don't win is really fucking stupid and bad for the game. Zealot rushes are also really strong against zerg. 14 pool 14 hatch is almost extinct and 14 hatch vs protoss is almost unheard of because the threat of being put at a huge disadvantage because protoss decides to 2 gate rush. Zealot and warpgate changes are a good idea. Zergs almost universally using 14 pool->speed->expo just makes 4-gate that much stronger too; playing to be safe against 2-gate makes it so that your early-mid game economy is handicapped when the 4-gate push arrives. There's simply too many ways for a bad player to beat a superior zerg early game.
Tvz balance has been discussed to death and I don't really care since I don't play that matchup anymore.
Also there's a general theme of zerg being pigeonholed into a certain playstyle where terran and protoss aren't. With zerg, you win a long macro game or you go allin early, there's no middle ground. It's just way harder to play zerg when to win your games are always going to be 20+ minutes. That's probably a big reason why they're so unpopular; you're practically forced to play long turtle macro games. Would you like to win in 25 minutes and put in a lot of effort to do it? Or would you like to 4 gate and win in 10 and be in good shape even if you don't?
|
Blizzard do sth fast - the Zerg are loosing men... or uhm... Zerglings out here!
Really - look at the post above, which I totally agree with; that's the reason why it's not too soon for changes, but rather too late.
ppl don't seem to get how frustrating it is to play an underpowered race, to loose against clearly inferior opponents, to not seem to be able to come up with a decent strategy etc.
And it's not just solved with the phrase: "If you think Zerg is too underpowered - go play Terran or Protoss"! Some ppl don't have the time or energy to totally commit to a new race and maybe there are even players out there who just prefer the Zerg-race, because of whatever reason and it's unfair und to be honest a douche-move by Blizzard to keep the Zerg's waiting for a much needed Patch with changes that would actually help Zerg to be able to get into the lategame safer and to just have more fun playing the game.
And I don't think you have to win every game to have fun, but If you loose to the same strategy over and over and nothing you try seems to really work, even though you might be the superior player, it just get's annoying after a while.
If you look at the ladder atm, protoss and Terran-players that are on 1000+ Points in Diamond, are 80% ppl who just know how to effectively abuse their race and that's why there are so few Zergs high up there, because you can't abuse Zergs - you have to actually just play WAY better!
|
I have zero clue about Protoss and can just randomly beat Mid-Diamond-Zergs witheout too big problems, something has gone horribly wrong. Protoss is so fucking easy to play to a decent level, it scares the shit out of me when facing a Protoss (i'm Z), because if he's actually good the game most likely will be a nightmare....
4 Gate with +1 into Expansion into Colossi into GG... Even a monkey can play it and it's just to strong for the "skill" needed to pull it off...
Hey dude, i'm like Protoss and all i do is watch that little button down on the screen and i'm like "w" -> "SSSSSSSS" -> "w" -> "SSSSSS" with some Z and E's and stuff...
|
On September 08 2010 16:54 Velr wrote:
I have zero clue about Protoss and can just randomly beat Mid-Diamond-Zergs witheout too big problems, something has gone horribly wrong. Protoss is so fucking easy to play to a decent level, it scares the shit out of me when facing a Protoss (i'm Z), because if he's actually good the game most likely will be a nightmare....
4 Gate with +1 into Expansion into Colossi into GG... Even a monkey can play it and it's just to strong for the "skill" needed to pull it off...
Hey dude, i'm like Protoss and all i do is watch that little button down on the screen and i'm like "w" -> "SSSSSSSS" -> "w" -> "SSSSSS" with some Z and E's and stuff...
Protoss is the easy race - just like in SCBW. Pair that with the race being OP and u have Protoss in SC2.
|
On September 08 2010 17:15 kickinhead wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2010 16:54 Velr wrote:
I have zero clue about Protoss and can just randomly beat Mid-Diamond-Zergs witheout too big problems, something has gone horribly wrong. Protoss is so fucking easy to play to a decent level, it scares the shit out of me when facing a Protoss (i'm Z), because if he's actually good the game most likely will be a nightmare....
4 Gate with +1 into Expansion into Colossi into GG... Even a monkey can play it and it's just to strong for the "skill" needed to pull it off...
Hey dude, i'm like Protoss and all i do is watch that little button down on the screen and i'm like "w" -> "SSSSSSSS" -> "w" -> "SSSSSS" with some Z and E's and stuff... Protoss is the easy race - just like in SCBW. Pair that with the race being OP and u have Protoss in SC2.
No, terran is the easiest race unlike SCBW. Par that with the race being OP and you ahve terran in SC2. See how easy and fragile this argument is? Please bring anything useful or don't at all.
|
On September 08 2010 16:54 Velr wrote:
I have zero clue about Protoss and can just randomly beat Mid-Diamond-Zergs witheout too big problems, something has gone horribly wrong.
actually, that sentence describes perfectly why terran and protoss are overpowered vs zerg (or why zerg is so much harder to play than the other two races). if you have a rough clue of how to execute a 4gate zeal/sentry or m&m push, you will easily crush 600-800 diamond zerg players with a very very good win rate (75%+ against 600-800 easily doable). i'm 100% sure that if dimaga or idra off-raced against other high-ranked zerg players, they would get a good amount of wins too, even though basically totally sucking with the race. with zerg, something like that would just absolutely never be possible. you won't see a SINGLE terran or protoss who "roughly knows how to execute a certain zerg bo" and crush 600-800 diamond terran or protoss players or some terran or toss pro who offraces as zerg and beats terrans and toss if he doesn't have a large amount of playtime with zerg beforehand.
I'm would be fine with zerg being so much harder than the other races, if there actually was some kind of reward for it. but there isn't. on top of it you'll still lose to one of the two million possible cheeses even though being a lot better than your opponent.
|
On September 07 2010 15:26 Ndugu wrote:I agree in spirit. At the same time, I think the game is young and we can look at with fresh, theory-crafted eyes. Right now, we can question, "is it okay that X beats X?" In the future, that will just be how things are and all discussion will be based on how to deal with it. Think about how obnoxious it would be if someone started questioning the basis of a certain matchup for Brood War now. My biggest concern is that, since its easier, only a few playstyles will end up being viable in each matchup and Blizzard will work to maintain a 50% win ratio. That means, if Protoss is winning 50% of the game versus Terran, no way units that don't currently get used in that matchup will get buffed-- don't want to ruin that perfect 50%! I mean, look at Ultralisks, they got buffed to high heaven because Zerg was losing. Carriers suck worse than Ultralisks ever did, and they never got buffed because Protoss has always been strong. I guess its kinda hard to make my point but, in essence: While the game is young we NEED to try and examine the game's balance and push it in a positive direction. Obviously we need to accept that the Standard Phoenix/Void Ray opening of 2011 will make Marauders completely useless and anything but OP, but that doesn't change us from trying to think, look, and theorcrafy as best as we can while the game is still in flux. Brood War had an accepted balance of lots of OP things balancing each other out. Lots of you like that. I don't. I would like to see lots of different strategies and unit compositions work in various match ups and situations. That doesn't mean I want Void rays to no longer pwn buildings or Marauders to no longer pwn everything on the ground ( ), but I want units that don't see any play to get looked at before they get forgotten.
I think Brood War was balanced in a weird way. Like you had to have certain type of unit in order the make the matchup balanced. Who would go Bio as Terran against Protoss? Pretty much only the Deep Six cheese strategy uses Bio. And Mech was basically not the best choice against Zerg. Mech could work, but not the best choice.
In SC2 however, Bio can be viable against Protoss. The MMM ball however is a bit too strong.
|
On September 08 2010 19:53 Apolo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2010 17:15 kickinhead wrote:On September 08 2010 16:54 Velr wrote:
I have zero clue about Protoss and can just randomly beat Mid-Diamond-Zergs witheout too big problems, something has gone horribly wrong. Protoss is so fucking easy to play to a decent level, it scares the shit out of me when facing a Protoss (i'm Z), because if he's actually good the game most likely will be a nightmare....
4 Gate with +1 into Expansion into Colossi into GG... Even a monkey can play it and it's just to strong for the "skill" needed to pull it off...
Hey dude, i'm like Protoss and all i do is watch that little button down on the screen and i'm like "w" -> "SSSSSSSS" -> "w" -> "SSSSSS" with some Z and E's and stuff... Protoss is the easy race - just like in SCBW. Pair that with the race being OP and u have Protoss in SC2. No, terran is the easiest race unlike SCBW. Par that with the race being OP and you ahve terran in SC2. See how easy and fragile this argument is? Please bring anything useful or don't at all.
It's pretty generally accepted that Protoss is the easiest race for beginners in SC2.
|
IMO at high level protoss is the weakest by a little, and Terran the strongest by far.
Zerg is the weakest at low level, i'm quite sure about that.
|
On September 07 2010 21:57 PimpMobeel wrote:
I agree with the pawn analogy. Battlecruisers especially i would think needed a small buff, they are already so badly countered if spotted. Likewise I would think carriers and mothership need small buffs too, especially the carrier - the only thing going for the carrier is that it beats vikings; everything else that can shoot air pretty much owns it. Zerg t3 on the other hand is quite the force.
WTF are you talking about?????? Battlecruisers needing a buff? These are EASILY the most efficient units in game. Seriously, huge dps vs BOTH ground and air, massive 3 armor, extremely big hp pool, ok speed. AND Yamato (ty for correction), which kinda makes short work of any direct counter.
and oh, they can be repaired. This is the MOST imba unit currently there, thing is, terrans whine about oh how slow they are to get when in fact they are definately faster than getting t3 zerg units out.
Carrier beating vikings? Zerg t3 quite the force? Really? Slow ass broodlords, which cost almost as much as a Battlecruiser, yet have 2 times less hp and cant attack air? 1 armor??? WHAT GAME ARE YOU PLAYING???
The more I read in these forums, the dumber I feel. Sorry, but thats really the way I feel
|
On September 08 2010 21:34 Neuuubeh wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 21:57 PimpMobeel wrote:
I agree with the pawn analogy. Battlecruisers especially i would think needed a small buff, they are already so badly countered if spotted. Likewise I would think carriers and mothership need small buffs too, especially the carrier - the only thing going for the carrier is that it beats vikings; everything else that can shoot air pretty much owns it. Zerg t3 on the other hand is quite the force. WTF are you talking about?????? Battlecruisers needing a buff? These are EASILY the most efficient units in game. Seriously, huge dps vs BOTH ground and air, massive 6 armor, extremely big hp pool, ok speed. AND Yamamoto, which kinda makes short work of any direct counter. and oh, they can be repaired. This is the MOST imba unit currently there, thing is, terrans whine about oh how slow they are to get when in fact they are definately faster than getting t3 zerg units out. Carrier beating vikings? Zerg t3 quite the force? Really? Slow ass broodlords, which cost almost as much as a Battlecruiser, yet have 2 times less hp and cant attack air? 1 armor??? WHAT GAME ARE YOU PLAYING??? The more I read in these forums, the dumber I feel. Sorry, but thats really the way I feel
You just called Yamato "Yamamoto". Which I guess is some japanese character in some show, but not the ultimate weapon of the BCs.
|
Dunno, can't say, never watched japanese shows mate . I will edit my silly mistake, hope you are happy now.
Doesn't change anything. A flying all purpose unit with a high dps ranged attack, ultralisk-like armor and even more hp; with a powerful high damage attack "skill"... And we have terran players telling us tier 3 zerg is godly and everything pales in comparison?
PS. And you dont even have to RESEARCH anything for that 3 armor..
|
On September 08 2010 22:17 Salteador Neo wrote:
You just called Yamato "Yamamoto". Which I guess is some japanese character in some show, but not the ultimate weapon of the BCs.
Quoted for posterity, you are not getting of that hook with a ninja edit you historyless brat.
|
On September 08 2010 22:17 Salteador Neo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2010 21:34 Neuuubeh wrote:On September 07 2010 21:57 PimpMobeel wrote:
I agree with the pawn analogy. Battlecruisers especially i would think needed a small buff, they are already so badly countered if spotted. Likewise I would think carriers and mothership need small buffs too, especially the carrier - the only thing going for the carrier is that it beats vikings; everything else that can shoot air pretty much owns it. Zerg t3 on the other hand is quite the force. WTF are you talking about?????? Battlecruisers needing a buff? These are EASILY the most efficient units in game. Seriously, huge dps vs BOTH ground and air, massive 6 armor, extremely big hp pool, ok speed. AND Yamamoto, which kinda makes short work of any direct counter. and oh, they can be repaired. This is the MOST imba unit currently there, thing is, terrans whine about oh how slow they are to get when in fact they are definately faster than getting t3 zerg units out. Carrier beating vikings? Zerg t3 quite the force? Really? Slow ass broodlords, which cost almost as much as a Battlecruiser, yet have 2 times less hp and cant attack air? 1 armor??? WHAT GAME ARE YOU PLAYING??? The more I read in these forums, the dumber I feel. Sorry, but thats really the way I feel You just called Yamato "Yamamoto". Which I guess is some japanese character in some show, but not the ultimate weapon of the BCs.
... or he might be a very important historical figure masterminding the attack on Pearl Harbor that started the engagement of the US in World War II.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isoroku_Yamamoto
The biggest battleship of the japanese navy was the Yamato [class], so maybe there is the source of the "confusion".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_battleship_Yamato
|
Truth is, I am _theoretically_ working right now, so yeah, excuse my lameness once again :D
|
On September 08 2010 20:06 heishe wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2010 16:54 Velr wrote:
I have zero clue about Protoss and can just randomly beat Mid-Diamond-Zergs witheout too big problems, something has gone horribly wrong. actually, that sentence describes perfectly why terran and protoss are overpowered vs zerg (or why zerg is so much harder to play than the other two races). if you have a rough clue of how to execute a 4gate zeal/sentry or m&m push, you will easily crush 600-800 diamond zerg players with a very very good win rate (75%+ against 600-800 easily doable). i'm 100% sure that if dimaga or idra off-raced against other high-ranked zerg players, they would get a good amount of wins too, even though basically totally sucking with the race. with zerg, something like that would just absolutely never be possible. you won't see a SINGLE terran or protoss who "roughly knows how to execute a certain zerg bo" and crush 600-800 diamond terran or protoss players or some terran or toss pro who offraces as zerg and beats terrans and toss if he doesn't have a large amount of playtime with zerg beforehand. I'm would be fine with zerg being so much harder than the other races, if there actually was some kind of reward for it. but there isn't. on top of it you'll still lose to one of the two million possible cheeses even though being a lot better than your opponent.
This post articulates it perfectly, especially regarding terran/protoss to zerg carryover vs zerg carryover to terran/protoss. I think a fundamental problem with sc2 right now is that there are too many "build order Russian roulette" situations, especially in vs z matchups. Zerg can take the bullet to the head by picking the wrong build order and lose before the scouting drone is out, but if they "win", they just get to stay alive and play the game. There are too many ways for mechanically terrible players to completely circumvent ever being put in mechanically challenging situations. In scbw you couldn't get very far with bad mechanics. You could win some cheese games, but scouting and countering cheesy builds, which are cheesy because they don't require any substantial mechanical skills to execute, was a far more straightforward process and didn't demand as humongous of a sacrifice to do so. Playing "safe" is punished too severely in sc2; it's impossible to force your opponent to play a straightforward game. In scbw this wasn't as true, and "safe" builds used to direct the flow of the game toward a more straightforward mechanical game wouldn't put you hopelessly far behind.
|
On September 09 2010 12:55 Drowsy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2010 20:06 heishe wrote:On September 08 2010 16:54 Velr wrote:
I have zero clue about Protoss and can just randomly beat Mid-Diamond-Zergs witheout too big problems, something has gone horribly wrong. actually, that sentence describes perfectly why terran and protoss are overpowered vs zerg (or why zerg is so much harder to play than the other two races). if you have a rough clue of how to execute a 4gate zeal/sentry or m&m push, you will easily crush 600-800 diamond zerg players with a very very good win rate (75%+ against 600-800 easily doable). i'm 100% sure that if dimaga or idra off-raced against other high-ranked zerg players, they would get a good amount of wins too, even though basically totally sucking with the race. with zerg, something like that would just absolutely never be possible. you won't see a SINGLE terran or protoss who "roughly knows how to execute a certain zerg bo" and crush 600-800 diamond terran or protoss players or some terran or toss pro who offraces as zerg and beats terrans and toss if he doesn't have a large amount of playtime with zerg beforehand. I'm would be fine with zerg being so much harder than the other races, if there actually was some kind of reward for it. but there isn't. on top of it you'll still lose to one of the two million possible cheeses even though being a lot better than your opponent. This post articulates it perfectly, especially regarding terran/protoss to zerg carryover vs zerg carryover to terran/protoss. I think a fundamental problem with sc2 right now is that there are too many "build order Russian roulette" situations, especially in vs z matchups. Zerg can take the bullet to the head by picking the wrong build order and lose before the scouting drone is out, but if they "win", they just get to stay alive and play the game. There are too many ways for mechanically terrible players to completely circumvent ever being put in mechanically challenging situations. In scbw you couldn't get very far with bad mechanics. You could win some cheese games, but scouting and countering cheesy builds, which are cheesy because they don't require any substantial mechanical skills to execute, was a far more straightforward process and didn't demand as humongous of a sacrifice to do so. Playing "safe" is punished too severely in sc2; it's impossible to force your opponent to play a straightforward game. In scbw this wasn't as true, and "safe" builds used to direct the flow of the game toward a more straightforward mechanical game wouldn't put you hopelessly far behind.
After 2 weeks of not playing any Terran at all (switched to Zerg - YES, I actually did...), I played a BO3 in a Tournament Quarterfinals against a 800+ Diamond Zerg.
It was soooo freaking ridiculous: I made soo many mistakes, had no clue what I was doing but totally pwn him just with a straight-up attack. Here are some of my hilarous mistakes I made:
- Accidentally scanned my base when I wanted to make a supply-calldown
- Accidentally researched Concussive Shells and not Nitro packs
- Because the opponent chose Steppes of war, I thought he was gonna 7pool me or sth, so I built a Barracks at about 10, then just built a rafinery when I thought was right - I just had a total mess of a build-order that didn't make sense at all.
--> And this all in one game! I just won with a simple Stimmed Marauder+Hellion timing attack about 10 mins into the game and there was nothing the Zerg could've done to stop me.
I mean c'mon - It seems I can't lose as Terran in TvZ even if I wanted to!
After the games I was ashamed of myself btw, but I just didn't want to play a ZvZ in a tournament with a big prize-pool, just cuz ZvZ is so random...
|
Just with the discussion about the reapers, i bet this guy hasn't played against a REAL reaper opening. Like 7-8-9- rax reaper. Anything involving supply depot first isn't too hard to deal with. I bet this "decent" player, imo 700-800 diamond isn't impressive at this point, this guy just runs into crappy t players with crappy reaper builds and crappy reaper micro.
|
[*]Ultralisk damage lowering and removal of the ram:
I completely agree on the removal. I don't think that the damage lowering will have a large impact. It's ok.
It will destroy their ability to be used as fortification breakers. Yea who the F cares if they do splash on buildings when there is like 2 buildings affected, supplies and pylons... Rest of the time they will feel like VERY big zerglings on a building.
|
On September 09 2010 13:30 SuperGnu wrote:Show nested quote +
[*]Ultralisk damage lowering and removal of the ram:
I completely agree on the removal. I don't think that the damage lowering will have a large impact. It's ok.
It will destroy their ability to be used as fortification breakers. Yea who the F cares if they do splash on buildings when there is like 2 buildings affected, supplies and pylons... Rest of the time they will feel like VERY big zerglings on a building.
I would just like to clarify that I think the splash is for hitting a Planetary Fortress while also killing SCVs.
|
I've been playing for some time now and the only unit I have huge trouble with is marauder. Stim+slow seems like too much don't you think. Can I have zealots with blink and charge please?
|
On September 09 2010 13:30 SuperGnu wrote:Show nested quote +
[*]Ultralisk damage lowering and removal of the ram:
I completely agree on the removal. I don't think that the damage lowering will have a large impact. It's ok.
It will destroy their ability to be used as fortification breakers. Yea who the F cares if they do splash on buildings when there is like 2 buildings affected, supplies and pylons... Rest of the time they will feel like VERY big zerglings on a building.
A fully attack upgraded ultra does more damage to armored with its normal attack than when using ram. That is going to be a buff actually, not a nerf. Splashing area around building = good for us
|
Reapers contains the Zerg entirely, giving the Terran a free expo, and also delaying the Zergs expo. With the mules, this only makes it worse.
|
On September 09 2010 13:30 SuperGnu wrote:Show nested quote +
[*]Ultralisk damage lowering and removal of the ram:
I completely agree on the removal. I don't think that the damage lowering will have a large impact. It's ok.
It will destroy their ability to be used as fortification breakers. Yea who the F cares if they do splash on buildings when there is like 2 buildings affected, supplies and pylons... Rest of the time they will feel like VERY big zerglings on a building.
1. ram was very slow
2. normal slicing attack is faster
it's not all about the damage, you have to take attack speed into account.
|
On September 09 2010 13:15 kickinhead wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2010 12:55 Drowsy wrote:On September 08 2010 20:06 heishe wrote:On September 08 2010 16:54 Velr wrote:
I have zero clue about Protoss and can just randomly beat Mid-Diamond-Zergs witheout too big problems, something has gone horribly wrong. actually, that sentence describes perfectly why terran and protoss are overpowered vs zerg (or why zerg is so much harder to play than the other two races). if you have a rough clue of how to execute a 4gate zeal/sentry or m&m push, you will easily crush 600-800 diamond zerg players with a very very good win rate (75%+ against 600-800 easily doable). i'm 100% sure that if dimaga or idra off-raced against other high-ranked zerg players, they would get a good amount of wins too, even though basically totally sucking with the race. with zerg, something like that would just absolutely never be possible. you won't see a SINGLE terran or protoss who "roughly knows how to execute a certain zerg bo" and crush 600-800 diamond terran or protoss players or some terran or toss pro who offraces as zerg and beats terrans and toss if he doesn't have a large amount of playtime with zerg beforehand. I'm would be fine with zerg being so much harder than the other races, if there actually was some kind of reward for it. but there isn't. on top of it you'll still lose to one of the two million possible cheeses even though being a lot better than your opponent. This post articulates it perfectly, especially regarding terran/protoss to zerg carryover vs zerg carryover to terran/protoss. I think a fundamental problem with sc2 right now is that there are too many "build order Russian roulette" situations, especially in vs z matchups. Zerg can take the bullet to the head by picking the wrong build order and lose before the scouting drone is out, but if they "win", they just get to stay alive and play the game. There are too many ways for mechanically terrible players to completely circumvent ever being put in mechanically challenging situations. In scbw you couldn't get very far with bad mechanics. You could win some cheese games, but scouting and countering cheesy builds, which are cheesy because they don't require any substantial mechanical skills to execute, was a far more straightforward process and didn't demand as humongous of a sacrifice to do so. Playing "safe" is punished too severely in sc2; it's impossible to force your opponent to play a straightforward game. In scbw this wasn't as true, and "safe" builds used to direct the flow of the game toward a more straightforward mechanical game wouldn't put you hopelessly far behind. After 2 weeks of not playing any Terran at all (switched to Zerg - YES, I actually did...), I played a BO3 in a Tournament Quarterfinals against a 800+ Diamond Zerg. It was soooo freaking ridiculous: I made soo many mistakes, had no clue what I was doing but totally pwn him just with a straight-up attack. Here are some of my hilarous mistakes I made: - Accidentally scanned my base when I wanted to make a supply-calldown - Accidentally researched Concussive Shells and not Nitro packs - Because the opponent chose Steppes of war, I thought he was gonna 7pool me or sth, so I built a Barracks at about 10, then just built a rafinery when I thought was right - I just had a total mess of a build-order that didn't make sense at all. --> And this all in one game! I just won with a simple Stimmed Marauder+Hellion timing attack about 10 mins into the game and there was nothing the Zerg could've done to stop me. I mean c'mon - It seems I can't lose as Terran in TvZ even if I wanted to! After the games I was ashamed of myself btw, but I just didn't want to play a ZvZ in a tournament with a big prize-pool, just cuz ZvZ is so random...
people need to pay this post some attention.
this player admits his HUGE HORRIBLE blunders in a tournement and still walks over a zerg player. now if he had played zerg and made those kind of mistakes he would have lost instantly.
something about that is slightly off haha
|
On September 09 2010 15:43 TyrantPotato wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2010 13:15 kickinhead wrote:On September 09 2010 12:55 Drowsy wrote:On September 08 2010 20:06 heishe wrote:On September 08 2010 16:54 Velr wrote:
I have zero clue about Protoss and can just randomly beat Mid-Diamond-Zergs witheout too big problems, something has gone horribly wrong. actually, that sentence describes perfectly why terran and protoss are overpowered vs zerg (or why zerg is so much harder to play than the other two races). if you have a rough clue of how to execute a 4gate zeal/sentry or m&m push, you will easily crush 600-800 diamond zerg players with a very very good win rate (75%+ against 600-800 easily doable). i'm 100% sure that if dimaga or idra off-raced against other high-ranked zerg players, they would get a good amount of wins too, even though basically totally sucking with the race. with zerg, something like that would just absolutely never be possible. you won't see a SINGLE terran or protoss who "roughly knows how to execute a certain zerg bo" and crush 600-800 diamond terran or protoss players or some terran or toss pro who offraces as zerg and beats terrans and toss if he doesn't have a large amount of playtime with zerg beforehand. I'm would be fine with zerg being so much harder than the other races, if there actually was some kind of reward for it. but there isn't. on top of it you'll still lose to one of the two million possible cheeses even though being a lot better than your opponent. This post articulates it perfectly, especially regarding terran/protoss to zerg carryover vs zerg carryover to terran/protoss. I think a fundamental problem with sc2 right now is that there are too many "build order Russian roulette" situations, especially in vs z matchups. Zerg can take the bullet to the head by picking the wrong build order and lose before the scouting drone is out, but if they "win", they just get to stay alive and play the game. There are too many ways for mechanically terrible players to completely circumvent ever being put in mechanically challenging situations. In scbw you couldn't get very far with bad mechanics. You could win some cheese games, but scouting and countering cheesy builds, which are cheesy because they don't require any substantial mechanical skills to execute, was a far more straightforward process and didn't demand as humongous of a sacrifice to do so. Playing "safe" is punished too severely in sc2; it's impossible to force your opponent to play a straightforward game. In scbw this wasn't as true, and "safe" builds used to direct the flow of the game toward a more straightforward mechanical game wouldn't put you hopelessly far behind. After 2 weeks of not playing any Terran at all (switched to Zerg - YES, I actually did...), I played a BO3 in a Tournament Quarterfinals against a 800+ Diamond Zerg. It was soooo freaking ridiculous: I made soo many mistakes, had no clue what I was doing but totally pwn him just with a straight-up attack. Here are some of my hilarous mistakes I made: - Accidentally scanned my base when I wanted to make a supply-calldown - Accidentally researched Concussive Shells and not Nitro packs - Because the opponent chose Steppes of war, I thought he was gonna 7pool me or sth, so I built a Barracks at about 10, then just built a rafinery when I thought was right - I just had a total mess of a build-order that didn't make sense at all. --> And this all in one game! I just won with a simple Stimmed Marauder+Hellion timing attack about 10 mins into the game and there was nothing the Zerg could've done to stop me. I mean c'mon - It seems I can't lose as Terran in TvZ even if I wanted to! After the games I was ashamed of myself btw, but I just didn't want to play a ZvZ in a tournament with a big prize-pool, just cuz ZvZ is so random... people need to pay this post some attention. this player admits his HUGE HORRIBLE blunders in a tournement and still walks over a zerg player. now if he had played zerg and made those kind of mistakes he would have lost instantly. something about that is slightly off haha
Wooow, are you like a... Commentator or sth? ^^'
It really is shocking how little understanding of how to macro, when to expand, what to do in certain situations etc. you need to win with Terran or as Protoss.
I recently played 10 games on the Ladder (1100+ Diamond Zerg) and did the 5-Roach-Rush against every toss and terran and won 8 totally easy. Really, the Opponents just did their normal build they always do. Some even scouted me, but they obviously didn't know what I was up to nor how to stop me from winning with this, pretty easy to hold off, rush. It literally is the only strategy for punishin Protoss that go 4-warpgate or Terran that do mass-reapers and yet they can't even scout it out and react appropriately - I CALL HUGE NOOBS!
As a Zerg, you need to scout so well and adapt so fast, you'll shit brix when you play Terran or Protoss against Zerg and see that they basically can play the same build with minimal adaptations and scouting and win nonetheless.
Really, try it out and shit brixx my fellow Zergs! You can basically play down ur strat without ever seeing what your opponent is doing:
Wall-in so it's baneling-proof, harrass a bit with Reaper/Hellion, build your standard Marauder/Marine-Army, build 1-2 Turrets in the base to totally negate everything burrowed or Mutas, attack and maybe leave 1 marine in the base that could shoot down Nydus Worms. There is next to nothing Zerg could do to surprise the opponent or force him into building a certain Unit-combination. I only know one strategy that forces the Zerg into doing what you want and that is burrowed banelings (contain him, make him waste scans and/or build ravens), but because they can't move underground, you just have to be lucky enough that the opponent just walks right over them or doesn't kill you before burrow is finished (which is, ridiculously enough, a T2-Upgrade... -.-°)
|
On September 09 2010 15:55 kickinhead wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2010 15:43 TyrantPotato wrote:On September 09 2010 13:15 kickinhead wrote:On September 09 2010 12:55 Drowsy wrote:On September 08 2010 20:06 heishe wrote:On September 08 2010 16:54 Velr wrote:
I have zero clue about Protoss and can just randomly beat Mid-Diamond-Zergs witheout too big problems, something has gone horribly wrong. actually, that sentence describes perfectly why terran and protoss are overpowered vs zerg (or why zerg is so much harder to play than the other two races). if you have a rough clue of how to execute a 4gate zeal/sentry or m&m push, you will easily crush 600-800 diamond zerg players with a very very good win rate (75%+ against 600-800 easily doable). i'm 100% sure that if dimaga or idra off-raced against other high-ranked zerg players, they would get a good amount of wins too, even though basically totally sucking with the race. with zerg, something like that would just absolutely never be possible. you won't see a SINGLE terran or protoss who "roughly knows how to execute a certain zerg bo" and crush 600-800 diamond terran or protoss players or some terran or toss pro who offraces as zerg and beats terrans and toss if he doesn't have a large amount of playtime with zerg beforehand. I'm would be fine with zerg being so much harder than the other races, if there actually was some kind of reward for it. but there isn't. on top of it you'll still lose to one of the two million possible cheeses even though being a lot better than your opponent. This post articulates it perfectly, especially regarding terran/protoss to zerg carryover vs zerg carryover to terran/protoss. I think a fundamental problem with sc2 right now is that there are too many "build order Russian roulette" situations, especially in vs z matchups. Zerg can take the bullet to the head by picking the wrong build order and lose before the scouting drone is out, but if they "win", they just get to stay alive and play the game. There are too many ways for mechanically terrible players to completely circumvent ever being put in mechanically challenging situations. In scbw you couldn't get very far with bad mechanics. You could win some cheese games, but scouting and countering cheesy builds, which are cheesy because they don't require any substantial mechanical skills to execute, was a far more straightforward process and didn't demand as humongous of a sacrifice to do so. Playing "safe" is punished too severely in sc2; it's impossible to force your opponent to play a straightforward game. In scbw this wasn't as true, and "safe" builds used to direct the flow of the game toward a more straightforward mechanical game wouldn't put you hopelessly far behind. After 2 weeks of not playing any Terran at all (switched to Zerg - YES, I actually did...), I played a BO3 in a Tournament Quarterfinals against a 800+ Diamond Zerg. It was soooo freaking ridiculous: I made soo many mistakes, had no clue what I was doing but totally pwn him just with a straight-up attack. Here are some of my hilarous mistakes I made: - Accidentally scanned my base when I wanted to make a supply-calldown - Accidentally researched Concussive Shells and not Nitro packs - Because the opponent chose Steppes of war, I thought he was gonna 7pool me or sth, so I built a Barracks at about 10, then just built a rafinery when I thought was right - I just had a total mess of a build-order that didn't make sense at all. --> And this all in one game! I just won with a simple Stimmed Marauder+Hellion timing attack about 10 mins into the game and there was nothing the Zerg could've done to stop me. I mean c'mon - It seems I can't lose as Terran in TvZ even if I wanted to! After the games I was ashamed of myself btw, but I just didn't want to play a ZvZ in a tournament with a big prize-pool, just cuz ZvZ is so random... people need to pay this post some attention. this player admits his HUGE HORRIBLE blunders in a tournement and still walks over a zerg player. now if he had played zerg and made those kind of mistakes he would have lost instantly. something about that is slightly off haha Wooow, are you like a... Commentator or sth? ^^' It really is shocking how little understanding of how to macro, when to expand, what to do in certain situations etc. you need to win with Terran or as Protoss. I recently played 10 games on the Ladder (1100+ Diamond Zerg) and did the 5-Roach-Rush against every toss and terran and won 8 totally easy. Really, the Opponents just did their normal build they always do. Some even scouted me, but they obviously didn't know what I was up to nor how to stop me from winning with this, pretty easy to hold off rush. As a Zerg, you need to scout so well and adapt so fast, you'll shit brix when you play Terran or Protoss against Zerg and see that they basically can play the same build with minimal adaptations and scouting and win nonetheless. Really, try it out and shit brixx my fellow Zergs! You can basically play down ur strat without ever seeing what your opponent is doing: Wall-in so it's baneling-proof, harrass a bit with Reaper/Hellion, build your standard Marauder/Marine-Army, build 1-2 Turrets in the base to totally negate everything burrowed or Mutas, attack and maybe leave 1 marine in the base that could shoot down Nydus Worms. There is nothing Zerg could do to surprise the opponent or force him into building a certain Unit-combination. I only know one strategy that forces the Zerg into doing what you want and that is burrowed banelings (contain him, make him waste scans and/or build ravens), but because they can't move underground, you just have to be lucky enough that the opponent just walks right over them or doesn't kill you before burrow is finished (which is, ridiculously enough, a T2-Upgrade... -.-°)
if i was going for a commentator feel i would say terrible terrible mistakes ha ha ha
yes the 5 roach rush strat works wonders on greedy ignorant T and P players. it punishes all T and P players who think they are bullet proof till they decide to push out.
but your right about playing T and P. when ever i off race with them i feel as if im playing SC2 on normal speed. and there is nothing better then winning a TvT and having the other player say "you'll never get good newb," then messaging them that your offracing ha ha.
|
OP has a well written post, but not a very well thought out one. I am not going to elaborate on exactly why his argument was flawed, and I am not going to waste other people's time with listing everything that is wrong with the balances because they are well documented in many other threads on TL.
What I will bring up is the fact that everyone agrees SOMETHING must change. The game is far from balanced, and the general consensus among higher level players is that Zerg has the largest handicap out of the three races. Whether or not patch 1.1 will help these imbalances is something we can not predict.
Another thing I want to bring up is the fact that everyone has different interpretations of what "imbalanced" really means.
|
United States11637 Posts
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
