|
On November 11 2010 08:01 DawgEm wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 07:46 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:On November 11 2010 07:38 Skyze wrote:
Thats all foreigner tournaments though.. In Korea, there hasnt been a protoss in the top 4 of a tournament since when? 1.1.1?
Even that fOu clan tourney yesterday. I doubt we'll see much difference in the next 2 days in Startale and NEX/Zenith.
Outside of NEXgenius winning blizzcon (only one other korean, and Loner being the only other even on a "similar level"), protoss has been banished from any tournaments involving koreans.
NexGenius qualified through a tournament in Korea which had a lot of top level GSL players. This tournament was super important and everybody took it as serious as the GSL. The point is not that because Protoss outside of Korea do well and thus that they should do well inside Korea too, not at all. But that both the foreign scene and the Korean scene can be seen as independent from each other. If you are arguing imbalance then you are implying TT1, Socke and Huk somehow learned faster than their Zerg/Terran peers in the foreign scene, and were able to win tournaments because of this. Saying that tourney results are influenced this much by the individual skill of these players could also mean that the Zergs/Terrans in Korea may have learned faster than their Protoss peers. Bottom line is it is too early to use statistics are they are meaningless. Protoss players in the GSL are simply not playing as well as their peers. Given time I'm very confident that NexGenius, Inca and Minchul are good enough to perform better in the GSL but that so far they simply have not played up to their own level in it. Especially MinChul has choked pretty hard. Let me give you a real statistic though, one that is not decided by a few bo3s, over thousands of games MinChul leads the oGs/Liquid ranking nearly every week. If NexGenius had gotten to the final of GSL2 nobody here would raise their voice. To show you how thin that makes your argument: NexGenius was 2-3 matches away from removing all your balance issues. You can't seriously use these GSL's and think they mean anything statistically. I almost feel as we could close the thread to after this statement.
Why is that?
The point he's making - that Protoss are not playing as well as Zerg and Terran players - has already been made 100 times in this thread and been refuted just as many times.
Sure, you can make that argument, nothing wrong with that, but it hardly closes the discussion and is based on nothing more then speculation.
And, even if true, the fact that only Protoss players by default seem to be 'playing poorly' is pretty damning evidence that their may indeed be something wrong with the race.
Lastly, I don't understand why so many gamers seem to give Blizzard some sort of carte blanche in terms of balance issues, when they like any game producer, have almost always had balance issues in their games.
|
On November 11 2010 07:46 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
Saying that tourney results are influenced this much by the individual skill of these players could also mean that the Zergs/Terrans in Korea may have learned faster than their Protoss peers. Bottom line is it is too early to use statistics are they are meaningless. Protoss players in the GSL are simply not playing as well as their peers. Given time I'm very confident that NexGenius, Inca and Minchul are good enough to perform better in the GSL but that so far they simply have not played up to their own level in it. Especially MinChul has choked pretty hard.
Let me give you a real statistic though, one that is not decided by a few bo3s, over thousands of games MinChul leads the oGs/Liquid ranking nearly every week.
If NexGenius had gotten to the final of GSL2 nobody here would raise their voice. To show you how thin that makes your argument: NexGenius was 2-3 matches away from removing all your balance issues. You can't seriously use these GSL's and think they mean anything statistically.
I'm just posting to reiterate the most logical thing said in 75+ pages of text.
There's too much theorycrafting going on here, too. Dustin Browder said in the interview at Blizzcon that there was something that they were still investigating this matchup to see what precisely is going on.
Give the game time. That's the ONLY thing that it needs right now.
|
It seems a big problem with calling protoss imbalanced is that it is in effect an attack on the quality of foreign Z and T players. If protoss is up and yet still manages to dominate NA lans, then NA T might have already fallen significantly behind Korean Terran. So in effect, it's difficult for NA players to talk about any sort of P balance.
Or P is just teh ungodly turtle race and this is all rather silly complaining about a stylistic difference in the race.
I just don't like the time argument because of the amount of whining we had to suffer through to see major patches to Z and more nerfs to P.
|
On November 11 2010 07:46 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 07:38 Skyze wrote:
Thats all foreigner tournaments though.. In Korea, there hasnt been a protoss in the top 4 of a tournament since when? 1.1.1?
Even that fOu clan tourney yesterday. I doubt we'll see much difference in the next 2 days in Startale and NEX/Zenith.
Outside of NEXgenius winning blizzcon (only one other korean, and Loner being the only other even on a "similar level"), protoss has been banished from any tournaments involving koreans.
NexGenius qualified through a tournament in Korea which had a lot of top level GSL players. This tournament was super important and everybody took it as serious as the GSL. The point is not that because Protoss outside of Korea do well and thus that they should do well inside Korea too, not at all. But that both the foreign scene and the Korean scene can be seen as independent from each other. If you are arguing imbalance then you are implying TT1, Socke and Huk somehow learned faster than their Zerg/Terran peers in the foreign scene, and were able to win tournaments because of this. Saying that tourney results are influenced this much by the individual skill of these players could also mean that the Zergs/Terrans in Korea may have learned faster than their Protoss peers. Bottom line is it is too early to use statistics are they are meaningless. Protoss players in the GSL are simply not playing as well as their peers. Given time I'm very confident that NexGenius, Inca and Minchul are good enough to perform better in the GSL but that so far they simply have not played up to their own level in it. Especially MinChul has choked pretty hard. Let me give you a real statistic though, one that is not decided by a few bo3s, over thousands of games MinChul leads the oGs/Liquid ranking nearly every week. If NexGenius had gotten to the final of GSL2 nobody here would raise their voice. To show you how thin that makes your argument: NexGenius was 2-3 matches away from removing all your balance issues. You can't seriously use these GSL's and think they mean anything statistically.
Completely false.
Your making an assumption from the safety of hindsight.
What happened last GSL?
A Zerg made it to the finals.
A Zerg won the finals.
After GSL?
Zerg continued to complain..
and got buffed.
You see what I'm saying?
Even if a lot more people do not see the imbalance this time around does not mean it isn't there.
As for MinChul, kid is so far ahead of most in Korea it's just not funny. You cannot use MinChul as an example of balance. He botched his matches with Nestea because he was too over confident. Yes, that is his mistake but hardly a point for balance.
|
On November 11 2010 08:14 Proximo wrote:
And, even if true, the that fact the only Protoss players by default seem to be 'playing poorly' is pretty damning evidence that their may indeed be something wrong with the race.
Or that they're playing poorly. There really haven't been that many big tournaments, you're acting like we've had years of statistics when we've had two GSLs, Blizzcon, and some MLGs.
Lastly, I don't understand why so many gamers seem to give Blizzard some sort of carte blanche in terms of balance issues, when they like any game producer, have almost always had balance issues in their games.
Because there's no reason to make balance changes if the game can sort things out by itself. How long has it been since Blizzard patched BW?
|
On November 11 2010 08:31 Redmark wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 08:14 Proximo wrote:
And, even if true, the that fact the only Protoss players by default seem to be 'playing poorly' is pretty damning evidence that their may indeed be something wrong with the race. Or that they're playing poorly. There really haven't been that many big tournaments, you're acting like we've had years of statistics when we've had two GSLs, Blizzcon, and some MLGs. Show nested quote +
Lastly, I don't understand why so many gamers seem to give Blizzard some sort of carte blanche in terms of balance issues, when they like any game producer, have almost always had balance issues in their games.
Because there's no reason to make balance changes if the game can sort things out by itself. How long has it been since Blizzard patched BW?
So what?
That many tournaments is more than enough to reveal something.
It definitely didn't stop Zerg getting buffed now did it?
|
On November 11 2010 07:56 H0i wrote:
Ignoring the stats and possible imbalance, how about the game design? Do you not think toss has a really limited amount of builds, and that (2/3 gate) robo is the only safe build (not all in) against terran? Don't you think the stargate units are bad overal, compared to the air the other races have?
Don't you think the harass options are too limited?
Agreed.
The three biggest problems that I try to work with/around in my play is lack of speed (zergling run around + marine stim), lack of harrass speed/options (warp prism is powerful but fragile and not a unit that is readily available like Medivac+Overlord), and lack of mainstream air options (vs muta+corruptor & viking).
On harrass specifically as an example, which would you be more scared of... 8 stimmed marines dropped behind your mineral line or 4 zealots/stalkers? I've experienced both and know I can run away from the P option.
I just keep trying to find answers by trying weird combinations and watching replays from pros like Nazgul, Huk, Tyler, Kiwikaki...
|
On November 11 2010 00:07 abrasion wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2010 23:07 Wayem wrote:
Yes there is a problem of detection for protoss. But I don't know if an ob obtained in a different way would be the best answer.
PvT: banshees are an issue. Cloack ghosts too but this tends to be end game so let's assume you'll have your robo anyway. So: banshees.
PvZ: you can basically guess what the Z does by poking in front of his entrance. Example: mass spines / speelings = mutas. The problem here is nor detection (you'll tend to get immortals for burrow roaches) nor scouting. You can have an ob end game on top of his base and maphack this wouldn't solve the problem of mass tech switching at all. So: nothing.
PvP: dark templars obviously. But you tend to go robo for colossi anyway. If not, air suxx pvp (phoenix are ridiculous vs colossi) and HT are lol. So if you go for example blink stalkers/chargelots build a forge early/mid game and later get your robo while you get colossi on 2/3 robos with multi bases anyway. So: nothing.
Problem of detection lies mainly in banshees. Why do they need cloack ? Not for much... if it's available as it is, it's kind of "win right now or lose resources" for the terran as all protoss have to go robo. If they don't, they lose, if they do banshees are not more threatening as uncloaked.
Therefore, I don't suggest to remove cloak for banshees from the game (it would be sad) but delay it even more. Just but a fusion core requirement like I think it was during early beta. And here you are. If T rushes it you'll have a much more solid economy. If he gets it late game for expo harassing purposes, you're supposed to have observers (interesting possibilites with scan/snipe) or canons. I can agree with most of this post, detection is a problem for Protoss simply because it forces a tech path AND costs a lot AND takes so long! Terran detection is just a mouseclick away if you have enough energy. Increasing banshee cloak build time and cost would come a huge way to helping.
Detection for brotoss does force the tech path, it is exploitable by an opponent if you do not take that tech path. It is your "punishment" for not getting an observer.
Similar to Zergs punishing Terrans for not building enough turrets, or protoss punishing the same the same with dark templars.
I realise these are all late game things for protoss.
Brotosses, if you're having trouble staying alive try to tech faster. Warp gates + Proxy dominates early the first battle with the reinforcement speed. Use that time to tech to (usually a robo) tier 2. Then push out with that first immortal or void ray.
|
It's just plain and simple - poor game design.
Protoss have horribly expensive and disparate tech routes, WHY? You want to know?
Largely as a compensation for.. .CHRONOBOOST. SO Blizzard, please, take away chronoboost and give brotoss NORMAL FRIGGIN TECH TIMES/COSTS!! =(
...
So much of our crap is nerfed because Blizzard seems to make the assumption that, "oh, he MIGHT chronoboost this tech time, so let's increase build time".
Chronoboost? More like Chronocatchup -_________________________-
|
Saying that tourney results are influenced this much by the individual skill of these players could also mean that the Zergs/Terrans in Korea may have learned faster than their Protoss peers.
What does that even mean learn faster? Each race has different mechanics. If you go back and watch foxers round of 64 games from THIS GSL he looked godawful, his game 1 strat consisted of trying to nuke kill a lair. In game 2 he made marines and found that they could hold off baneling bust after baneling bust and ever since has refined his marine micro and early expanding and is in the GSL finals. I would like to see that "learning" moment where protoss finds that they can just build zealots and micro them to win the GSL. The point is that each race is different and that protoss arent going to do better by just studying their textbooks harder than zerg and terran.
You could make a compeling argument that Protoss is the easiest race to learn. With the most expensive units it is the easiest to macro well and spend all of your money. It also makes it easier to micro with a smaller army. You see the "ease" of learning protoss by the fact that the largest amount of players play protoss and they do very well in the low leagues.
|
On November 11 2010 00:36 Treehead wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 00:07 abrasion wrote:On November 10 2010 23:07 Wayem wrote:
Yes there is a problem of detection for protoss. But I don't know if an ob obtained in a different way would be the best answer.
PvT: banshees are an issue. Cloack ghosts too but this tends to be end game so let's assume you'll have your robo anyway. So: banshees.
PvZ: you can basically guess what the Z does by poking in front of his entrance. Example: mass spines / speelings = mutas. The problem here is nor detection (you'll tend to get immortals for burrow roaches) nor scouting. You can have an ob end game on top of his base and maphack this wouldn't solve the problem of mass tech switching at all. So: nothing.
PvP: dark templars obviously. But you tend to go robo for colossi anyway. If not, air suxx pvp (phoenix are ridiculous vs colossi) and HT are lol. So if you go for example blink stalkers/chargelots build a forge early/mid game and later get your robo while you get colossi on 2/3 robos with multi bases anyway. So: nothing.
Problem of detection lies mainly in banshees. Why do they need cloack ? Not for much... if it's available as it is, it's kind of "win right now or lose resources" for the terran as all protoss have to go robo. If they don't, they lose, if they do banshees are not more threatening as uncloaked.
Therefore, I don't suggest to remove cloak for banshees from the game (it would be sad) but delay it even more. Just but a fusion core requirement like I think it was during early beta. And here you are. If T rushes it you'll have a much more solid economy. If he gets it late game for expo harassing purposes, you're supposed to have observers (interesting possibilites with scan/snipe) or canons. I can agree with most of this post, detection is a problem for Protoss simply because it forces a tech path AND costs a lot AND takes so long! Terran detection is just a mouseclick away if you have enough energy. Increasing banshee cloak build time and cost would come a huge way to helping. Banshees already take 60 seconds to build. Any longer and they'd be up there with the Colossus. Edit: and actually 2-3 chrono boosts on a Colossus makes the build time on the two roughly equivalent. I don't think build time is the correct avenue for any adjustments to be made.
It's not just the unit build time, it's the barracks, factory, starport, lab build times and costs - the Banshee is quick to get to.
Regardless, according to another poster in this thread Blizzard are looking at the Banshee. My prediction was correct.
|
On November 11 2010 09:28 abrasion wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 00:36 Treehead wrote:On November 11 2010 00:07 abrasion wrote:On November 10 2010 23:07 Wayem wrote:
Yes there is a problem of detection for protoss. But I don't know if an ob obtained in a different way would be the best answer.
PvT: banshees are an issue. Cloack ghosts too but this tends to be end game so let's assume you'll have your robo anyway. So: banshees.
PvZ: you can basically guess what the Z does by poking in front of his entrance. Example: mass spines / speelings = mutas. The problem here is nor detection (you'll tend to get immortals for burrow roaches) nor scouting. You can have an ob end game on top of his base and maphack this wouldn't solve the problem of mass tech switching at all. So: nothing.
PvP: dark templars obviously. But you tend to go robo for colossi anyway. If not, air suxx pvp (phoenix are ridiculous vs colossi) and HT are lol. So if you go for example blink stalkers/chargelots build a forge early/mid game and later get your robo while you get colossi on 2/3 robos with multi bases anyway. So: nothing.
Problem of detection lies mainly in banshees. Why do they need cloack ? Not for much... if it's available as it is, it's kind of "win right now or lose resources" for the terran as all protoss have to go robo. If they don't, they lose, if they do banshees are not more threatening as uncloaked.
Therefore, I don't suggest to remove cloak for banshees from the game (it would be sad) but delay it even more. Just but a fusion core requirement like I think it was during early beta. And here you are. If T rushes it you'll have a much more solid economy. If he gets it late game for expo harassing purposes, you're supposed to have observers (interesting possibilites with scan/snipe) or canons. I can agree with most of this post, detection is a problem for Protoss simply because it forces a tech path AND costs a lot AND takes so long! Terran detection is just a mouseclick away if you have enough energy. Increasing banshee cloak build time and cost would come a huge way to helping. Banshees already take 60 seconds to build. Any longer and they'd be up there with the Colossus. Edit: and actually 2-3 chrono boosts on a Colossus makes the build time on the two roughly equivalent. I don't think build time is the correct avenue for any adjustments to be made. It's not just the unit build time, it's the barracks, factory, starport, lab build times and costs - the Banshee is quick to get to. Regardless, according to another poster in this thread Blizzard are looking at the Banshee. My prediction was correct.
Well, if a poster says so...
|
|
|
17 and 19 are no significantly high numbers. We need a lot more games to be able to say something about balance on a specific map.
|
On November 11 2010 09:09 andrewwiggin wrote:
It's just plain and simple - poor game design.
Protoss have horribly expensive and disparate tech routes, WHY? You want to know?
Largely as a compensation for.. .CHRONOBOOST. SO Blizzard, please, take away chronoboost and give brotoss NORMAL FRIGGIN TECH TIMES/COSTS!! =(
...
So much of our crap is nerfed because Blizzard seems to make the assumption that, "oh, he MIGHT chronoboost this tech time, so let's increase build time".
Chronoboost? More like Chronocatchup -_________________________-
This is an interesting point. All the tech and build times have been lengthened to compensate for Chronoboost but in the potion of the game where Protoss is struggling they have nowhere near enough Chronoboost to compensate for all the lengthened research and build times.
|
As far as I've seen, protoss is fine, and only like 1% of this thread is qualified to make statements on it anyway...
|
On November 10 2010 01:10 bokeevboke wrote:
I suggest you to imagine Protoss ball of death in right hands (by in right hands I mean Tester/Genious/HuK playing). Ball of death consists of HT, Colossi, Stalker, Zealot, Sentry, Immortal. Now, as a terran what can you do vs that?
Ok, so the ball of death consists of every major unit except Dark Templar and air. This is very similar to a unlocked high tech zerg army including Ultras/Infestors/Hydra/Roach/Ling/Bane.
-Of course you can go mass Thor, but its unrealistic, you don't have enough factories.
Make more factories. Protoss pumps out 1-2 Colossi at a time with 1-2 Robos. You have the option to do the same - or even more.
-Tanks? Protoss will just walk away and take expo.
Walk away and take your own expo. Take and hold the middle of the map with a defensive fortification and don't budge. It's not like Protoss is going to fly Mutas into the back of your base.
-MMM? they're melted right away.
Obviously - they're the lowest tech units with one higher tech supporting unit.
-EMP? again, protoss walks away since you can't attack kiting Colossis.
Try using Vikings - they work perfectly well against kiting Colossi. Just because you can't instantly kill one or more Colossi in every engagement doesn't mean that the engagement was a failure. If you have a good tank fortification setup, 3 tanks and 4 vikings can take down a colossi with significant ease at a more than safe distance and no amount of kiting will keep that colossi alive - if it enters the 12~ range of tanks with vikings at spotting distance for more than 1 volley, at least one colossi will die.
It also amazes me that ghosts still aren't used offensively against Protoss. When the Protoss pushes onto you with his death ball, launch a nuke. As he backs off, unsiege and move forward, cancel the nuke at the last second as you're resieging. It's an extremely easy way to push Protoss back and get a favorable position - in the same exact way it works with nuking on sieged terran tanks. The difference is that a well placed scan and tank volley can't counteract this strategy, as Protoss doesn't have that ability.
On November 11 2010 02:28 GoldenH wrote:
Even if they were killing my probes, I was killing their SCVs. You could still try this, but you will find that VR as of current patch, cannot deal with 2 or 3 rax aggression, kills banshee too slowly, and.do not harass a base protected by even 4 marines. If they undid the VR nerf, you could easily buy enough time to get observers or cannons.
The Void Ray nerf has absolutely no effect on what you're describing - unless your opponent is extremely bad, he will definitely not allow a charged void anywhere near a banshee, cloaked or not. If your void is charging on a building and he does not have the 4 marines present to defend against it, he will move the banshees away and kite the void ray with no problems. The void ray nerf only diminishes the ability for the void ray to level bases rapidly, and it actually has a POSITIVE effect on both the scenarios you're presenting - killing marines and killing banshees, as the void ray typically won't be charged for either of these scenarios anyways.
On November 11 2010 03:11 Techno wrote:
Perhaps banshees are something protoss has to think about and be aware of. Consider getting a cannon if you don't want to get a fast observer. Also, consider attacking the enemy at the time his banshee comes out so you can force him to defend.
Taking the banshee's viability away from Terran is not the answer.
While I certainly don't agree with anything said about Banshees in this thread (except that they do great DPS), I can comment that getting "a cannon" is not an effective answer to banshees.
In order to protect a worker line from banshees, two cannons is REQUIRED under all circumstances. If two cannons are not present (in favor of one cannon placed in the center) then the banshee can take out gas on either side as well as the first mineral patch. The cannon detector vision IS much further than the range, but a single cannon is still not enough to counteract a banshee threat. People seem to forget that Banshees have a range of 6 and are therefore able to target things while still being out of the cannon's sight range of 11.
With this information, we can deduce that protecting two bases requires 4 cannons and 4 pylons. Usually the pylons are freebies since you're building them anyways, but in the early game (specifically the time a fast cloaked banshee rush comes out), being required to dump 4*150 + 4*100 = 1000 minerals into a static defense is just a wee bit costly, to say the least. Plus that single cannon that will be shooting banshees at any one time can't take on two at once - so you still have to get stalkers to the location IMMEDIATELY. Once the cannon goes down, the cloak stays on and you're screwed.
In short, cannons are a solution to DTs and an aid to mutalisk harass. Cannons are NOT a solution to banshees.
|
When a really good protoss player can beat worst players than him 90% of the time then the game is balanced.. but thats not how it is right now. For zerg and terran they can easily achieve that though. With 2 weeks of practicing newb terran builds anyone can beat good protoss players 2-3 times out of 10.. which is why protoss wont ever win GSL because you have to play a lot of games and eventually the 2-3 games will be by the same person
and.. yeah protoss is the easiest to learn but definitely not the easiest to play good. Having few but expensive units doesnt make microing easier but harder.. Losing one can be game changing
and.. those map stats dont mean much with so few games played.. but lost temple is terran favored.. I dont see how metalopolis could be considered terran favored though..
Tester didn't qualify for GSL 2 which can easily prove that the game isn't balanced when one of the best players loses..
That is a good point about the build chronoboost timing... but I dont know what they could do to fix it without big changes.. like Lowering warp gate research time would allow the protoss to maybe chronoboost more probes/units.. but then people will cry about warp gate tech being possible a lot faster... maybe they could have a delay on how much you can chronoboost one building and they make things take less time so it would still be the same but you would have more energy to chronoboost other things..
|
i think us zergs and toss can unite and say nerf terran
|
On November 11 2010 10:40 Powster wrote:
When a really good protoss player can beat worst players than him 90% of the time then the game is balanced.. but thats not how it is right now. For zerg and terran they can easily achieve that though. With 2 weeks of practicing newb terran builds anyone can beat good protoss players 2-3 times out of 10.. which is why protoss wont ever win GSL because you have to play a lot of games and eventually the 2-3 games will be by the same person
and.. yeah protoss is the easiest to learn but definitely not the easiest to play good. Having few but expensive units doesnt make microing easier but harder.. Losing one can be game changing
and.. those map stats dont mean much with so few games played.. but lost temple is terran favored.. I dont see how metalopolis could be considered terran favored though..
Tester didn't qualify for GSL 2 which can easily prove that the game isn't balanced when one of the best players loses..
That is a good point about the build chronoboost timing... but I dont know what they could do to fix it without big changes.. like Lowering warp gate research time would allow the protoss to maybe chronoboost more probes/units.. but then people will cry about warp gate tech being possible a lot faster... maybe they could have a delay on how much you can chronoboost one building and they make things take less time so it would still be the same but you would have more energy to chronoboost other things..
Fruiterdealer lost early and TOP didn't qualify. What kind of a terrible argument is it that when a single player loses it is proof of the game being imbalanced? This is such clueless stuff please stop posting about things you don't understand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
