|
On November 12 2010 02:22 SwaY- wrote:
I was pondering if chronoboost could be appled to buildings warping in, to make them faster, but at like a 1/4 or 1/3 of the regular boost AND the building must require gas to be able to do it on it, to prevent early zeal cheese.
You realize that 1/4 or 1/3 of a chronoboost is 2.5 or 3.33 seconds?
|
On November 12 2010 02:07 andrewwiggin wrote:
To every zerg and terran player shouting 'Protoss is fine!', look at the overall goddamn GAME DESIGN!
Zerg have the larvae mechanic, which allows them to adapt instantly to any situation.
Terran have incredible scouting, mining and harass possibilities.
But now let's look at what was supposed to be a KEY mechanic of protoss; CHRONOBOOST. Chronoboost is the reason that Blizzard decided to:
(a) seperate tech paths, as a way of increasing time-to-tech
(b) increasing tech costs, as a way of increasing time-to-tech
(c) increasing tech times, as a way of... well you get the point by now.
What would prompt Blizzard to do (a), (b), and (c)?
The answer, you guessed it!
Chronoboost.
Chronoboost has been the BANE of protoss, because Blizzard seems to try to account for it in the design of ALL TOSS TECH PATHS. They seem to conveniently forget that protoss doesn't have unlimited chronoboost.
But that doesnt matter, because chronoboost COULD be used on a particular build for e.g. Dark Templars, or Colossi, or High Templars, or Void rays. So they have to account for it.. by using (a), (b) and (c).
The result though, is that protoss have to use chronoboost simply to keep UP with every other race's NORMAL tech times!!
There's an earlier post by someone who did the tech time math. In any case, what I'm saying is that - every other race's key mechanic wasn't 'accounted' for when they designed their tech paths/builds etc, because that's what a race-specific mechanic is supposed to be, race-specific, and its supposed to give the race an exclusive advantage.
But chronoboost scared the shit out of David Kim. And that's the story of how it became chrono-catchup.
Please blizzard, give us our MECHANIC BACK!!
2c.
(On extra thought, chronoboost is really then ANOTHER micro exercise for protoss with almost no added benefit except MAYBE probe building time).
Where is that post I'd like to take a look at the timings you are talking about. Anyone know where thats at?
|
On November 12 2010 02:07 andrewwiggin wrote:
To every zerg and terran player shouting 'Protoss is fine!', look at the overall goddamn GAME DESIGN!
Zerg have the larvae mechanic, which allows them to adapt instantly to any situation.
Terran have incredible scouting, mining and harass possibilities.
But now let's look at what was supposed to be a KEY mechanic of protoss; CHRONOBOOST. Chronoboost is the reason that Blizzard decided to:
(a) seperate tech paths, as a way of increasing time-to-tech
(b) increasing tech costs, as a way of increasing time-to-tech
(c) increasing tech times, as a way of... well you get the point by now.
What would prompt Blizzard to do (a), (b), and (c)?
The answer, you guessed it!
Chronoboost.
Chronoboost has been the BANE of protoss, because Blizzard seems to try to account for it in the design of ALL TOSS TECH PATHS. They seem to conveniently forget that protoss doesn't have unlimited chronoboost.
But that doesnt matter, because chronoboost COULD be used on a particular build for e.g. Dark Templars, or Colossi, or High Templars, or Void rays. So they have to account for it.. by using (a), (b) and (c).
The result though, is that protoss have to use chronoboost simply to keep UP with every other race's NORMAL tech times!!
There's an earlier post by someone who did the tech time math. In any case, what I'm saying is that - every other race's key mechanic wasn't 'accounted' for when they designed their tech paths/builds etc, because that's what a race-specific mechanic is supposed to be, race-specific, and its supposed to give the race an exclusive advantage.
But chronoboost scared the shit out of David Kim. And that's the story of how it became chrono-catchup.
Please blizzard, give us our MECHANIC BACK!!
2c.
(On extra thought, chronoboost is really then ANOTHER micro exercise for protoss with almost no added benefit except MAYBE probe building time).
This makes no sense.
You can't chronoboost a Dark Shrine to make it build faster. Tech != upgrades.
|
A couple timings that make no sense to me are Charge 140 seconds, Concussive Shells 60 seconds.
|
This makes no sense.
You can't chronoboost a Dark Shrine to make it build faster. Tech != upgrades.
You can chronoboost probes, to gain the minerals/gas to increase speed-to-DT-tech.
You can chronoboost warp gate cool down OR alternatively unit build time (if you didn't get warpgate tech) to increase speed-to-DT build.
You can chronoboost lots of other things that will affect how far down a tech path you are (researching psi-storm? or the amulet? those can be chronoboosted - I'm using an example now other than DTs, because chrono affects almost every other toss build even more..).
Unforunately, all of that seemed to have been accounted for by Blizzard.
...And I mean in a "OH! he might chrono that... yep, best to increase the timing by like..a THOUSAND BAJILLION minutes on that one, just to be safe"
-______-
P.S To the person asking about where that other post is for tech time paths that were calculated, try searching 'chronoboost' in this thread via search? =P That other guy's posts opened my eyes to an issue that I think is VERY big. At the very least, in the sense that we lost an exclusive advantage because.. it gave us an advantage? But that logic wasn't applied to MULES/scans/larvae/creep/etc.? =(
|
To expand on the whole issue of why chronoboost is bad. Note the Following.
A Chronoboost can knock 10 seconds off any tech/unit/probe. Contaminate will extend the duration of any tech/unit by 30 seconds, and chain-stacks to the point that structure is disabled. (There is no limit to how many times you can contaminate something, there is a chronoboost limit though).
Under ideal map settings, conditions whatever the chronoboosting of probes will not reap the same benefit as a single mule, or larva inject. Chronoboosting of units will not either. Larva injecting for drones vs mules is about even, but vs chronoboost both reap much better rewards.
Because its easier to calculate, I'll use mules as the example.
It takes 2.13 chronoboosts to get a 1 probe advantage. A mule is worth 6 workers for its duration with the bonus of it not effecting the mineral saturation. To get an advantage via chronoboosts equal to a single mule a Protoss must use over 12 chronoboosts only on the Nexus, thats 300 nexus Energy, thats 5 minutes of only chronoboosting probes. Not only this but 6 probes cost 300 minerals to produce unlike the free mule and the nexus energy is spent faster than it is gotten, so the return is even worse.
TLDR - Protoss has todo nothing but the chronoboosting of probes for 5 minutes gametime to be at an eco advantage compared to a single mule being alive. I am pretty damn sure that its possible to get at least 3 or more in that time, even if you use scans you are still ahead of a pure eco focused protoss.
|
On November 12 2010 02:07 andrewwiggin wrote:
...
Chronoboost has been the BANE of protoss, because Blizzard seems to try to account for it in the design of ALL TOSS TECH PATHS. They seem to conveniently forget that protoss doesn't have unlimited chronoboost.
... protoss have to use chronoboost simply to keep UP with every other race's NORMAL tech times!!
...
Well we saw in beta why chrono has to operate this way. If you can get stuff out ridiculously fast compared to your opponents, it just ends up being crazy imbalanced. That is why we saw protoss get so many nerfs in beta.
In my opinion, chrono boost basically breaks the game. Now you have this situation where protoss will have to make decisions which limit their play. Call it poor game design if you want, but it's the way it has to be, sorry.
|
On November 12 2010 02:30 H0i wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2010 02:22 SwaY- wrote:
I was pondering if chronoboost could be appled to buildings warping in, to make them faster, but at like a 1/4 or 1/3 of the regular boost AND the building must require gas to be able to do it on it, to prevent early zeal cheese. That could solve some woes in going something other than robo, we could chrono a robo in to save us from banshees in a quick spot. Or make DT's viable harrass. Idk my mind is wild :o No it won't help. The whole mechanic of chrono boost is wrong, like the post above me explained. If the intention of chrono boost is to make stuff come faster, than it should do that. What it actually does is it makes stuff come at the time it should come. The problem is you can't have infinite chrono boost. No boost but normal tech times / costs would be a lot better.
so maybe an unlimited chronoboost with a cooldown is in order?
|
On November 12 2010 02:07 andrewwiggin wrote:
To every zerg and terran player shouting 'Protoss is fine!', look at the overall goddamn GAME DESIGN!
Zerg have the larvae mechanic, which allows them to adapt instantly to any situation.
Terran have incredible scouting, mining and harass possibilities.
But now let's look at what was supposed to be a KEY mechanic of protoss; CHRONOBOOST. Chronoboost is the reason that Blizzard decided to:
(a) seperate tech paths, as a way of increasing time-to-tech
(b) increasing tech costs, as a way of increasing time-to-tech
(c) increasing tech times, as a way of... well you get the point by now.
What would prompt Blizzard to do (a), (b), and (c)?
The answer, you guessed it!
Chronoboost.
Chronoboost has been the BANE of protoss, because Blizzard seems to try to account for it in the design of ALL TOSS TECH PATHS. They seem to conveniently forget that protoss doesn't have unlimited chronoboost.
But that doesnt matter, because chronoboost COULD be used on a particular build for e.g. Dark Templars, or Colossi, or High Templars, or Void rays. So they have to account for it.. by using (a), (b) and (c).
The result though, is that protoss have to use chronoboost simply to keep UP with every other race's NORMAL tech times!!
There's an earlier post by someone who did the tech time math. In any case, what I'm saying is that - every other race's key mechanic wasn't 'accounted' for when they designed their tech paths/builds etc, because that's what a race-specific mechanic is supposed to be, race-specific, and its supposed to give the race an exclusive advantage.
But chronoboost scared the shit out of David Kim. And that's the story of how it became chrono-catchup.
Please blizzard, give us our MECHANIC BACK!!
2c.
(On extra thought, chronoboost is really then ANOTHER micro exercise for protoss with almost no added benefit except MAYBE probe building time).
Game design, game design, game design.
You know I am going to have to agree with you on this one but I'm not really sure what the solution is to solve it? Any theories anyone?
|
Isn't 81 pages of nonsensical, biased mudslinging enough? I'm surprised this thread has made it this far...
|
Not really
Its way better to have it all here than on 50 different threads on the strat/sc2 general forum regardless of your opinion on imba/balanced.
|
On November 11 2010 07:33 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 05:46 H0i wrote:On November 11 2010 05:31 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
I can't say I'm noticing an imbalance. Every time Protoss players get knocked out they are making gross mistakes that the other races aren't making. Seems to me Protoss just needs to play better and complain less. Well the statistics do not really agree here. I think that the thread is too much about imbalance though. It would be more important to make protoss more flexible. Perhaps there is a reason protoss players make mistakes? I am nearing the 2000 diamond playing as random (but I prefer toss), and protoss requires a lot of micro. It's also very tight. One small mistake can cost you the game, while the other races require less of this core micro. Their armies function a lot better with slightly worse micro. There also is the force field. I think the reason tosses lose often is because the game IS pretty balanced with perfect force fields while defending. In a direct confrontation it is a lot harder to make your force fields counts, which makes it hard for toss to simply engage in the middle of the map. With this kind of perfect micro required the game seems balanced when it all works out, but when a slight mistake is made, a toss loses. My suggestion would be to make the game a bit more flexible, observatory after core for 100/50 and a cheap 1st observer like I said before. Besides that a buff to gateway units and a nerf to force fields. This way FF can be used to support. It will still be useful and required if your army is larger, but it will make the toss army in small numbers (where you can' t use FF effectively) more effective. Actually the statistics mean absolutely nothing. The game is so new and the statistics are so few it puzzles me people are drawing conclusions from them. Nexgenius won Blizzcon, Huk and Socke have won tons of tournaments and TT1 just got second at the MLG finals where Zerg had its highest spot as #5 with TLO. Statistics at this point should only be used complimentary to observation. My observation is that Protoss' are not playing good. If I thought they would be playing good and not winning then statistics will start to have some relevance. Show nested quote +Perhaps the mistakes are not so gross. They are only seen as gross because of protoss being less forgiving, so each mistake can cost the protoss the game and be seen as gross. This still qualifies as imbalance though.
Moreover, it's highly unlikely that somehow most or all top level pro protoss players are all making gross mistakes, while the ones from the other 2 races don't, or can get away with them. Sorry but the likelyhood of that statement being true is really low, so low, that balance-wise it should be assumed as false. You are making it sound like there are hundreds of top level pro protoss players when in fact there's like 3 in Korea and maybe 4 or so outside of Korea. Of course it is possible they are still making big mistakes this game is like 5 months old. I would say this soon into the game nearly everyone is still making big mistakes so for Protoss to just make a few more here and there isn't far fetched at all. Also nearly every top level player thinks that PvT is in favor of Protoss. Tournaments haven't shown this yet but it is only a matter of time. These opinions weigh much more strongly than some of the top Protoss players noticeably not pulling through in the games that matter.
I know this is a few pages ago, so my apologies for bringing this back into the argument. I wanted to respond to this, since it was said by someone whose opinions are much more valid than my own (being Mr. Nazgul is going to the tourneys and I just play for fun).
1. The statement that is being made here does not back up the idea that Protoss is fine. What it backs up is that we don't know if it's not balanced in a tournament setting because the (as stated) half dozen or so "top level pro" protoss players haven't played a solid enough game to determine that balance is the issue behind their defeat.
2. I realize this thread is about tournaments, but since there is a distinct lack of evidence either way (since as was stated, mistakes cause you to lose games regardless of what race you play) - why not look to the ladder stats of some 7 million players worldwide? When we do that, we find fewer Protosses at the top (40% played compared to 30% in the top 5000 and 25% in the top 100). Could this perhaps be the reason there are only a half dozen top level pro Protosses?
3. Particularly related to the bolded sentence, what makes you/them so certain? And the people you are referring to - are they also fellow protosses? I personally would find it strange to think that someone with the past of HuK or a Socke believe that they have the advantage going into a PvT (though I don't know them, so I could be wrong here).
Again, I have nothing but respect for the pros here, and am primarily looking to reconcile the disagreement between yourself and the numbers I am seeing (which I also have respect for, being a mathematician). I understand the importance of recognizing a small sample size, but tournament stats for patch x.x.x will always have a low sample size. The ladder stats paint a different picture - thoughts?
Also, are we to believe that the game should only be balanced relative to two players who play absolutely perfectly? What does it even mean to play perfect in a game of decision making?
|
i pretty much agree that chronoboost itself is a damn stupid mechanic. artificially increasing upgrade cost, research and build times of units only to have a fancy spell which is basically doing nothing.
the only real advantage chronoboost gives are the standard +1 upgrades, because they are all the same for each race.
atleast more fancy stuff like decreasing construction times of buildings or boosting cannons for 50% more dps would be handy and maybe add some more diversity, but overall the current situation is pretty dire.
i could imagine so many cool situations where these 2 buffs would really make a difference:
- real rushing for a certain unit like dts or voids
- getting expo up very fast
- forgot a pylon? -> boost the next one building
- army out of position and getting attacked or harassed in the mineral line -> boost the damn cannons
the game would not change at all if u just removed chronoboost and substracted a realistic amount of time from each tech/unit (like 30 for most techs, carriers, motherhip; 20 for collosus, immortal, voidray and so on, u get the idea)
another point considering the defence capacities of protoss:
i mean why did zerg and especially terran got so many buffs for their defence, but for protoss they even removed the shield battery which wasn't used that often, but still.
all thats left are the shitty cannons while Z and T got moving spines, free bunkers, sensor tower, PF(wtf!?!?!?!) and to some extent i'd also call queens as defence. well sure u can bring the argument of warping in units any time, any where, but still. creep also serves as a kind of defence, so i'd really like to know their argument why for example the moving cannons from the alpha would be problematic.
|
On November 12 2010 07:27 Tin_Foil wrote:
Isn't 81 pages of nonsensical, biased mudslinging enough? I'm surprised this thread has made it this far...
While I agree that many posts in this thread are too ridiculous to even respond to (as is the case on most forum sites), there is actually a discussion going on to which I think both sides have a legitimate case. I hardly think examining what facts are known and what are facts are not, and determining if a cohesive case can be made for the statement that Protoss has a slight disadvantage qualify as "nonsensical, biased mudslinging".
Ironically, that's how your statement comes off.
|
|
|
Without Chronoboost Protoss would be even more predictable. Now you can either:
Use Chronoboost for economy (probes)
Use Chronoboost for technology
Use Chronoboost for unit production
"A mule is worth 6 workers for its duration with the bonus of it not effecting the mineral saturation. To get an advantage via chronoboosts equal to a single mule a Protoss must use over 12 chronoboosts only on the Nexus" <-- This doesn't take into account that the probe doesn't go away, so the effect is compounded.
Now don't get me wrong, I think it looks like protoss have a very narrow stable build path vs Terran and I believe something is going to get done about it. Personally I am relaying on Blizzard to do the balancing...
|
The automatic translation is so bad....
Is that what people think is the weakest race or what?
|
@ blackbrrd
Your points are valid, however:
1. The way you use Chronoboost is already predetermined. With the exception of the 4Gate-Push (All-In) you always chronoboost probes until you make an important upgrade (Warpgate --> Blink/Charge --> Colossi Range --> +1 Upgrades). The whole race is built around that.
2. First of alle no one is constantly chronoboosting probes, because you have to tech fast. And as soon as your main base is fully saturated, your economy does not benefit from chronoboost at all while MULEs get stronger the longer the game goes on (and the more bases are in play).
So in theory chronoboost gives you options, but in reality everyone has use it in a very predetermined way, because the whole race is built around the mechanic.
Protoss is already the weakest race in the early game despite chronoboosting its economy non-stop. Using it for something else would let you fall behind in terms of economy and since Gateway units suck so much, 2-3 more would not enable you to pressure your opponent anyway.
|
so looking at the playxp QQ thread.. is it safe too say protoss is the new zerg ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
