|
Since this whole topic degenerated into the usual balance flamefest where every topic ends up if unmoderated it's time for it to clean up. Locking this down for a while. Any posts made after my post [page 233] not addressing the changes in this patch directly and containting flames or general balance whine will get banned for at least a week. ~Nyovne
There is way too much flaming in this thread right now. Calm down before you post! (Page 271) ~iamke55 |
On August 28 2011 23:56 Huragius wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 23:41 Existor wrote:
Ultralisks before build time buff was Ultra-Risk units. They were not. Carriers/BC are not viable at all, in any match-ups (besides late late game TvT, which doesn't really count since is freaking mirror lol) but they are still left alone to be like this. Meanwhile zergs already had two an incredibly strong late game tech routes BL/Infestor (which one was better before this buff) and Ultra/Infestor. And now, zerg is the only race which can utilize it's tier 3 units in evey matchup. I liked how every biased zerg came up with shit like "Ultra is a terrible unit", "We don't see much of Ultras in pro games" and etc., and every single of them ended with idea that Ultralisk needs to be buffed somehow. Meanwhile it became a normal thing for Terran and Protoss to have a tier 3 flying piece of shit lol.
BCs are just not figured out yet in a lot of match-ups, my hypothesis for why they get used more in TvT is because there are so many more highly ranked Terran players, especially in GSL, that TvTs are the most common match-up and so gets more figured out.
Carriers, on the other hand, are not risky at all. You 100% know what is going to happen if you go for them - you will die horribly. Blizzard really needs to decide whether Carriers are going to be viable in Sc2 or just a "flavour" unit like Scouts in bw.
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On August 28 2011 22:42 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 22:32 Plexa wrote:
Easiest way to 'fix' mules is to accept that they aren't broken -.-; Hmm. I know you're the admin and all, but unless there's a decent discussion to be had rather than just baseless assertions like "x is broken" "no x is fine" I'd recommend not posting at all, because the thread will just devolve further. I was quite happy with a number of lengthy posts on the previous page, and although I'm not a mod/whatever on this website I think it would be a shame for the posts to turn into what they were earlier again. I feel that if you look at the situation logically, Lurk is absolutely right. MULEs are essentially an extra 3+ workers mining for the whole game per Orbital minus time for Supply cooldown/Scans. If MULEs were replaced by another mechanic which still just helped Terran keep up with P/Z in the economy (like chrono etc) then the problem would still remain with the 1-1-1. If Terran just produced workers faster every so often they would just leave some behind and continue with the attack as normal. The problem is NOT the MULEs, I would say (and yes, I agree with your statement Plexa just not the way you went about it). The problem is the efficiency of the Terran units, particularly the Marine, and the synergy between them all. Protoss has good unit synergy but to compensate for that Protoss units are individually inefficient the vast majority of the time. I think SCVs need slightly less health or Marines need slightly less DPS. I don't understand why Marines became so much more efficient compared to BW in the first place. Think of it as my way of saying this is a pointless discussion. It's a simple math problem really, MULEs are at best +4 SCVs and at worst +3 - I always like to think of them as +4. If a Protoss spends his chronoboost on his nexus, by the time the orbital completes the protoss should be around 3-4 probes ahead. The MULE balances this out. Similar for Zerg, although the non-linear growth makes things drastically more complex. If the Protoss continues to spend all his chronoboost on probes then he will have a sizable worker lead by the time the second orbital is online (somewhere in the region of 8-12 iirc depending on how quick the CC is). Of course, no one does this because you die to any kind of pressure (think of it as a Zerg only powering drones from his larvae). As such, the MULE is designed to counteract the inherent delay in SCV production from making an orbital which leads to the other races getting a worker count advantage.
TLDR; the MULE isn't the problem, and there is little point discussing it.
My opinion on the 1/1/1 is that the problem lies within the Stalker. It's an absolutely terrible unit. However, en masse, sheer numbers can overpower things. So it being weak is necessary to the balance of the game. As a consequence, Stalkers are trash. Blink stalkers are good, don't get me wrong, but vanilla stalkers are fucking terrible. Any Protoss should agree with me on this. I don't know how many times I've had 2-2.5x the army worth of my opponent and yet they've manage to defend because stalkers are just that bad. I think Artosis said it best when he said stalkers are an active unit - they're not meant for fighting, they're meant for harassing, poking, prodding, forcing your opponent to do things they dont want to do etc. But as an army core they are trash.
Blink stalkers can hold off a 1/1/1 with proper micro. Of course, this is off of one base and you risk that they're not getting cloak but still... point is, Blink stalkers with proper numbers can hold the rush. Vanilla stalkers can't.
Turn to the rest of the Protoss forces - they're all wildly efficient. Zealots have some insane DPS, Immortals are actually stupidly powerful vs armoured (unintuitive so), sentries are godly - both for FF and guardian shield (so important against marines). I could go on and on about how awesome the remainder of the Protoss forces are, but I would get sidetrack (oh except carriers, they suck  ).
The reason the 1/1/1 works so well is because Banshees force you to make Stalkers. Protoss just don't have any other legitimate AA options (choose either robo or stargate tech, it's stupidly difficult to get both although it might be possible... just. Point is, you need the robo meaning that phoenix are probably out of the question if you want to build an immortal). Stalkers suck balls and get rolled easily by tanks, marines, marauders and every other unit under the sun. Those who counter 1/1/1 with primarily zealots/immortals/sentries kill a lot more stuff than those who try to counter with stalkers.
Actually countering it will be a balancing act between chronoboosting right (most important, imo), making just enough stalkers to defend banshees (or somehow finding a way to build phoenix as well as immortals - because really phoenix are amazing against 1/1/1... they're just horribly inaccessible) and powering everything else into making zealots/immortals/sentries. If you wanted to buff/nerf things you'd be looking at tweaks to the immortal (like we're seeing here), tweaks to the Stargate (buildtime/cost of stargate and accessibility of phoenix), tweaks to PDD (although that won't change much), tweaks to the banshee (build time/damage/HP). But you have to be really careful as the game is so balanced in many other areas.
|
On August 28 2011 23:49 Zorgaz wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 23:20 Grumbels wrote:
Well, I accept MULES as a macro mechanic the terran race is balanced around, similar to spawn larva and chronoboost. It would be futile to try and argue whether it's 'overpowered' as it's so central to the way terran plays. I do think it has problems, namely: 1. it's not as hard to use as chronoboost and spawn larva 2. it allows you to very quickly mine out expansions once you have a couple of orbitals. Neither of those is necessarily bad though, just something to keep an eye on.
Blizzard could actually nerf any terran build by reducing the strength of the mule, but it just wouldn't be advisable as it would affect so many things. You can make some small changes that impact the afore-mentioned issues, such as adding cooldowns or limiting the OC's energy pool or so, though. -- but again, it might not be necessary, but I imagine it's still useful to at least be aware of how it possibly could be different. How does Chrono take more skill then a MULE? 
i sure would love being able to 4 gate every game while pulling 80% of my probes and even if i lose the fight, i am still either even in income or somehow pulling ahead magically
|
On August 28 2011 23:56 Sotamursu wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 23:49 Azhrei16 wrote:On August 28 2011 23:27 Huragius wrote:On August 28 2011 23:12 Azhrei16 wrote:On August 28 2011 23:10 Huragius wrote:
IMHO, it is kinda sad patch for Terran. HSM will still be useless, playing against 3 gate robo in TvP and mid game immortal heavy oriented builds will be even harder and 2 rax in TvZ (especially 11/11 11/12) is pretty much dead, unless on a map like XNC, where it still won't be great.
And I don't think it will be worth to get BFH ASAP at all, people might even consider to get mech weapon upgrades +1 before getting the expensive 150/150 Infernal Pre-igniters. We may still see a lot BFH wars in TvT (maybe), but besides that, seems like another ruined upgrade for Terran.
I think the most to do with this was the community's QQ, as always.
Also, lol at Ultra build time. It's freaking ridiculous. Dealing with zerg's tech switches in late game, for both Terran and Protoss will be even freaking harder (especially for Terran, when zerg switches from broodlords/infestor to ultra/infestor in freaking 55 seconds lol). I hope this balance change won't see the daylight. What's wrong with the Ultralisk build time? Just because they build faster doesn't mean they will start stomping now. It's the same exact unit as before, it is still terrible. Stalkers, Immortals, Tanks, Marauders, Marines, etc all counter it fairly easily. Terrible ?... Do you know what a tech switch is ? And I doubt that Ultra/Infestor is countered easily by Stalkers, Tanks, Marauders, Marines and "etc". After big army clashes in both TvZ and PvZ other side needs to make defenses and reinforce fast enough, not to be overrun by remaxed zergs army, and those 20 seconds for each freaking ultra is huge. I am perfectly aware of what a tech switch is, and although I agree with your point that Ultra/Infestor is not countered easily by the units I listed, you forget the fact that in my post I only said ULTRALISK. Not Ultralisk + Infestor. Just the Ultralisk, as a unit, is terrible. Too many times we have seen massive armies of Ultralisks get smashed because either their pathing is bad or every unit in the game gets +damage to armored. The main problem with Starcraft 2 as a whole is that too many units for Terran and Protoss get a +damage bonus against armored, while Zerg hardly gets anything like that. Sure, the Ultralisk has quite a bit of health and a nice armor upgrade, but that kind of gets offset by the fact that when they come out the opponent usually has their +3 attack done for their +dmg to armored units. For terran only tanks and marauders get +dmg to armor. Tanks in siege are fucking terrible against ultralisks and marauders are pretty much only good vs roaches and ultralisks and die pretty hard to everything else. Zerg hardly gets anything like that? What are you talking about? Units that do extra damage against certain types? Why is like 90% of the posts people whining about X terran feature, then saying their race doesn't have that therefore terran op. People sure love leaving out stuff that's possibly using their races.
Stimmed Marauders are all you need to wipe out any Ultralisks the Zerg has, and the splash from the Tanks just adds to that damage.
And yes, I meant Zerg hardly gets any units that deal extra damage against certain types. Ultralisks get +armored, Corruptor gets +massive, Baneling gets +light but it suicides so you cannot keep the unit and the Infestor gets a spell that does +armored. As far as regular staple units that get a damage bonus, we have none.
I was not whining about any Terran feature. I play Protoss, but I also love spectating Starcraft II more than anything else. Mules are perfectly fine the way they are, just like chronoboost and larvae inject. No need to whine about them.
|
On August 29 2011 00:01 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 23:56 Huragius wrote:On August 28 2011 23:41 Existor wrote:
Ultralisks before build time buff was Ultra-Risk units. They were not. Carriers/BC are not viable at all, in any match-ups (besides late late game TvT, which doesn't really count since is freaking mirror lol) but they are still left alone to be like this. Meanwhile zergs already had two an incredibly strong late game tech routes BL/Infestor (which one was better before this buff) and Ultra/Infestor. And now, zerg is the only race which can utilize it's tier 3 units in evey matchup. I liked how every biased zerg came up with shit like "Ultra is a terrible unit", "We don't see much of Ultras in pro games" and etc., and every single of them ended with idea that Ultralisk needs to be buffed somehow. Meanwhile it became a normal thing for Terran and Protoss to have a tier 3 flying piece of shit lol. BCs are just not figured out yet in a lot of match-ups, my hypothesis for why they get used more in TvT is because there are so many more highly ranked Terran players, especially in GSL, that TvTs are the most common match-up and so gets more figured out. Carriers, on the other hand, are not risky at all. You 100% know what is going to happen if you go for them - you will die horribly. Blizzard really needs to decide whether Carriers are going to be viable in Sc2 or just a "flavour" unit like Scouts in bw.
I think BC and carriers are both terrible units in SC2. They suffer the same fate as the Ultra in the game, costly, slow and countered by units that are already on the field. Carriers just give you opponent option to over produce vikings/corruptors. As for BCs, I am not sure what terran would want them for. They don't really do anything that other terran units don't do.
|
Canada13389 Posts
On August 29 2011 00:02 Plexa wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 22:42 SeaSwift wrote:On August 28 2011 22:32 Plexa wrote:
Easiest way to 'fix' mules is to accept that they aren't broken -.-; Hmm. I know you're the admin and all, but unless there's a decent discussion to be had rather than just baseless assertions like "x is broken" "no x is fine" I'd recommend not posting at all, because the thread will just devolve further. I was quite happy with a number of lengthy posts on the previous page, and although I'm not a mod/whatever on this website I think it would be a shame for the posts to turn into what they were earlier again. I feel that if you look at the situation logically, Lurk is absolutely right. MULEs are essentially an extra 3+ workers mining for the whole game per Orbital minus time for Supply cooldown/Scans. If MULEs were replaced by another mechanic which still just helped Terran keep up with P/Z in the economy (like chrono etc) then the problem would still remain with the 1-1-1. If Terran just produced workers faster every so often they would just leave some behind and continue with the attack as normal. The problem is NOT the MULEs, I would say (and yes, I agree with your statement Plexa just not the way you went about it). The problem is the efficiency of the Terran units, particularly the Marine, and the synergy between them all. Protoss has good unit synergy but to compensate for that Protoss units are individually inefficient the vast majority of the time. I think SCVs need slightly less health or Marines need slightly less DPS. I don't understand why Marines became so much more efficient compared to BW in the first place. Think of it as my way of saying this is a pointless discussion. It's a simple math problem really, MULEs are at best +4 SCVs and at worst +3 - I always like to think of them as +4. If a Protoss spends his chronoboost on his nexus, by the time the orbital completes the protoss should be around 3-4 probes ahead. The MULE balances this out. Similar for Zerg, although the non-linear growth makes things drastically more complex. If the Protoss continues to spend all his chronoboost on probes then he will have a sizable worker lead by the time the second orbital is online (somewhere in the region of 8-12 iirc depending on how quick the CC is). Of course, no one does this because you die to any kind of pressure (think of it as a Zerg only powering drones from his larvae). As such, the MULE is designed to counteract the inherent delay in SCV production from making an orbital which leads to the other races getting a worker count advantage. TLDR; the MULE isn't the problem, and there is little point discussing it. My opinion on the 1/1/1 is that the problem lies within the Stalker. It's an absolutely terrible unit. However, en masse, sheer numbers can overpower things. So it being weak is necessary to the balance of the game. As a consequence, Stalkers are trash. Blink stalkers are good, don't get me wrong, but vanilla stalkers are fucking terrible. Any Protoss should agree with me on this. I don't know how many times I've had 2-2.5x the army worth of my opponent and yet they've manage to defend because stalkers are just that bad. I think Artosis said it best when he said stalkers are an active unit - they're not meant for fighting, they're meant for harassing, poking, prodding, forcing your opponent to do things they dont want to do etc. But as an army core they are trash. Blink stalkers can hold off a 1/1/1 with proper micro. Of course, this is off of one base and you risk that they're not getting cloak but still... point is, Blink stalkers with proper numbers can hold the rush. Vanilla stalkers can't. Turn to the rest of the Protoss forces - they're all wildly efficient. Zealots have some insane DPS, Immortals are actually stupidly powerful vs armoured (unintuitive so), sentries are godly - both for FF and guardian shield (so important against marines). I could go on and on about how awesome the remainder of the Protoss forces are, but I would get sidetrack (oh except carriers, they suck ). The reason the 1/1/1 works so well is because Banshees force you to make Stalkers. Protoss just don't have any other legitimate AA options (choose either robo or stargate tech, it's stupidly difficult to get both although it might be possible... just. Point is, you need the robo meaning that phoenix are probably out of the question if you want to build an immortal). Stalkers suck balls and get rolled easily by tanks, marines, marauders and every other unit under the sun. Those who counter 1/1/1 with primarily zealots/immortals/sentries kill a lot more stuff than those who try to counter with stalkers. Actually countering it will be a balancing act between chronoboosting right (most important, imo), making just enough stalkers to defend banshees (or somehow finding a way to build phoenix as well as immortals - because really phoenix are amazing against 1/1/1... they're just horribly inaccessible) and powering everything else into making zealots/immortals/sentries. If you wanted to buff/nerf things you'd be looking at tweaks to the immortal (like we're seeing here), tweaks to the Stargate (buildtime/cost of stargate and accessibility of phoenix), tweaks to PDD (although that won't change much), tweaks to the banshee (build time/damage/HP). But you have to be really careful as the game is so balanced in many other areas.
Once again, Plexa drops the knowledge from lurking shadows
|
On August 29 2011 00:03 Azhrei16 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 23:56 Sotamursu wrote:On August 28 2011 23:49 Azhrei16 wrote:On August 28 2011 23:27 Huragius wrote:On August 28 2011 23:12 Azhrei16 wrote:On August 28 2011 23:10 Huragius wrote:
IMHO, it is kinda sad patch for Terran. HSM will still be useless, playing against 3 gate robo in TvP and mid game immortal heavy oriented builds will be even harder and 2 rax in TvZ (especially 11/11 11/12) is pretty much dead, unless on a map like XNC, where it still won't be great.
And I don't think it will be worth to get BFH ASAP at all, people might even consider to get mech weapon upgrades +1 before getting the expensive 150/150 Infernal Pre-igniters. We may still see a lot BFH wars in TvT (maybe), but besides that, seems like another ruined upgrade for Terran.
I think the most to do with this was the community's QQ, as always.
Also, lol at Ultra build time. It's freaking ridiculous. Dealing with zerg's tech switches in late game, for both Terran and Protoss will be even freaking harder (especially for Terran, when zerg switches from broodlords/infestor to ultra/infestor in freaking 55 seconds lol). I hope this balance change won't see the daylight. What's wrong with the Ultralisk build time? Just because they build faster doesn't mean they will start stomping now. It's the same exact unit as before, it is still terrible. Stalkers, Immortals, Tanks, Marauders, Marines, etc all counter it fairly easily. Terrible ?... Do you know what a tech switch is ? And I doubt that Ultra/Infestor is countered easily by Stalkers, Tanks, Marauders, Marines and "etc". After big army clashes in both TvZ and PvZ other side needs to make defenses and reinforce fast enough, not to be overrun by remaxed zergs army, and those 20 seconds for each freaking ultra is huge. I am perfectly aware of what a tech switch is, and although I agree with your point that Ultra/Infestor is not countered easily by the units I listed, you forget the fact that in my post I only said ULTRALISK. Not Ultralisk + Infestor. Just the Ultralisk, as a unit, is terrible. Too many times we have seen massive armies of Ultralisks get smashed because either their pathing is bad or every unit in the game gets +damage to armored. The main problem with Starcraft 2 as a whole is that too many units for Terran and Protoss get a +damage bonus against armored, while Zerg hardly gets anything like that. Sure, the Ultralisk has quite a bit of health and a nice armor upgrade, but that kind of gets offset by the fact that when they come out the opponent usually has their +3 attack done for their +dmg to armored units. For terran only tanks and marauders get +dmg to armor. Tanks in siege are fucking terrible against ultralisks and marauders are pretty much only good vs roaches and ultralisks and die pretty hard to everything else. Zerg hardly gets anything like that? What are you talking about? Units that do extra damage against certain types? Why is like 90% of the posts people whining about X terran feature, then saying their race doesn't have that therefore terran op. People sure love leaving out stuff that's possibly using their races. Stimmed Marauders are all you need to wipe out any Ultralisks the Zerg has, and the splash from the Tanks just adds to that damage. And yes, I meant Zerg hardly gets any units that deal extra damage against certain types. Ultralisks get +armored, Corruptor gets +massive, Baneling gets +light but it suicides so you cannot keep the unit and the Infestor gets a spell that does +armored. As far as regular staple units that get a damage bonus, we have none. I was not whining about any Terran feature. I play Protoss, but I also love spectating Starcraft II more than anything else. Mules are perfectly fine the way they are, just like chronoboost and larvae inject. No need to whine about them.
Why would zerg need a "staple unit" whatever the hell that means, that does extra damage against something? I mean I might as well swap that around and say terran has no staple +dmg units in tvz. Tanks don't count because there's more marines and marines do pure dmg. See suddenly Terran is the same as Zerg.
While stimmed marauders beat ultralisks in a unit tester, in a real game they'll be fungaled and the ultralisks are going to have lings with them. If this patch goes through, you can suddenly change to ultralisks even faster and unless you have a lto of marauders (which you won't have because they're shit against bl) or ghosts you die instantly. Arguing balance about single units doing stuff alone is pointless. You don't see terrans whine about the marine being a shit unit because it get's molested alone.
|
On August 28 2011 23:04 Galva wrote:
fungal growth did 36 damage over 4 sec. and +30 % to armored.
everyone said it is op... So terran has the emp, Protoss has the feedback. Protoss has the Psi Storm
(80 damage ! over 4 sec). And a zerg has nothing to prevent it. We have no snipes no emp, no feedback. think about it.
So you get a spell that murders armies and snares them at the same time? It also takes down air armies rather quickly (snare snare snare).
|
marauder does 10+10 , the roach does pure 16 . Would it help if roach did 8+8 , then zerg would have a +armored dealing unit 
|
I do agree that helions need work, but I think that the nerf to 5 damage for the blue flame seems a little overkill. Good thing the PTR is there so I can test it out
|
is this available also on EU server?
|
I feel like everyone is looking at the Ultralisk buff in the wrong light. It isn't whether Terran or Zerg has the right composition or whatever theorycrafting you might do, its about whether Terran can get a CRITICAL amount of Marauders(+whatever) in time to hard counter Ultralisk(+whatever) composition. Same thinking for Protoss. One of the biggest problems with Ultralisks is the ability for other races to get deal decently with the first attack and then remax with proper counter compositions in time to trade efficiently against the second wave.
The change not only reduces vulnerability during the first round of Ultras, but it allows Zerg a chance to break an entrenched opponent in a follow up attack.
|
Ultralisk buff seems ok to me as a terran... I much prefer to fight ultralisks than mustaches because ultras are counterd by tanks, banshees, marauders and ghosts while BLs only by vikings and ghosts.
|
On August 29 2011 00:02 Plexa wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 22:42 SeaSwift wrote:On August 28 2011 22:32 Plexa wrote:
Easiest way to 'fix' mules is to accept that they aren't broken -.-; Hmm. I know you're the admin and all, but unless there's a decent discussion to be had rather than just baseless assertions like "x is broken" "no x is fine" I'd recommend not posting at all, because the thread will just devolve further. I was quite happy with a number of lengthy posts on the previous page, and although I'm not a mod/whatever on this website I think it would be a shame for the posts to turn into what they were earlier again. I feel that if you look at the situation logically, Lurk is absolutely right. MULEs are essentially an extra 3+ workers mining for the whole game per Orbital minus time for Supply cooldown/Scans. If MULEs were replaced by another mechanic which still just helped Terran keep up with P/Z in the economy (like chrono etc) then the problem would still remain with the 1-1-1. If Terran just produced workers faster every so often they would just leave some behind and continue with the attack as normal. The problem is NOT the MULEs, I would say (and yes, I agree with your statement Plexa just not the way you went about it). The problem is the efficiency of the Terran units, particularly the Marine, and the synergy between them all. Protoss has good unit synergy but to compensate for that Protoss units are individually inefficient the vast majority of the time. I think SCVs need slightly less health or Marines need slightly less DPS. I don't understand why Marines became so much more efficient compared to BW in the first place. Think of it as my way of saying this is a pointless discussion. It's a simple math problem really, MULEs are at best +4 SCVs and at worst +3 - I always like to think of them as +4. If a Protoss spends his chronoboost on his nexus, by the time the orbital completes the protoss should be around 3-4 probes ahead. The MULE balances this out. Similar for Zerg, although the non-linear growth makes things drastically more complex. If the Protoss continues to spend all his chronoboost on probes then he will have a sizable worker lead by the time the second orbital is online (somewhere in the region of 8-12 iirc depending on how quick the CC is). Of course, no one does this because you die to any kind of pressure (think of it as a Zerg only powering drones from his larvae). As such, the MULE is designed to counteract the inherent delay in SCV production from making an orbital which leads to the other races getting a worker count advantage. TLDR; the MULE isn't the problem, and there is little point discussing it.
Agree with the rest of your post, I'd just like to point out why mules aren't balanced in all areas of the game. Yes, sure, if you look at it like "protoss and terran both make equally amount of workers, protoss will pull ahead with chrono and terran have mules to equalize the income", its perfectly balanced. THe problem comes when theres either a basetrade, bases are fully saturated, or when terran pulls scvs to fight. Since SCVs are so much more cost effective in battles than probes, its very likely that whatever leads up to the fight (cutting probes, or pulling them to defend), will make the terran come out on top in the economic battle.
Tbh, I think mules is a huge design issue, and should probably be either modified (cooldown, and/or push scvs out of the way so a base can't be over-saturated), or simply replaced with something equally good, but less good in situations mentioned above.
|
South Africa226 Posts
On August 29 2011 00:01 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 23:56 Huragius wrote:On August 28 2011 23:41 Existor wrote:
Ultralisks before build time buff was Ultra-Risk units. They were not. Carriers/BC are not viable at all, in any match-ups (besides late late game TvT, which doesn't really count since is freaking mirror lol) but they are still left alone to be like this. Meanwhile zergs already had two an incredibly strong late game tech routes BL/Infestor (which one was better before this buff) and Ultra/Infestor. And now, zerg is the only race which can utilize it's tier 3 units in evey matchup. I liked how every biased zerg came up with shit like "Ultra is a terrible unit", "We don't see much of Ultras in pro games" and etc., and every single of them ended with idea that Ultralisk needs to be buffed somehow. Meanwhile it became a normal thing for Terran and Protoss to have a tier 3 flying piece of shit lol. BCs are just not figured out yet in a lot of match-ups, my hypothesis for why they get used more in TvT is because there are so many more highly ranked Terran players, especially in GSL, that TvTs are the most common match-up and so gets more figured out. Carriers, on the other hand, are not risky at all. You 100% know what is going to happen if you go for them - you will die horribly. Blizzard really needs to decide whether Carriers are going to be viable in Sc2 or just a "flavour" unit like Scouts in bw.
I can tell you bc's are not used in tvz cause of neural parasite.
|
On August 29 2011 01:02 Blackk wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2011 00:01 SeaSwift wrote:On August 28 2011 23:56 Huragius wrote:On August 28 2011 23:41 Existor wrote:
Ultralisks before build time buff was Ultra-Risk units. They were not. Carriers/BC are not viable at all, in any match-ups (besides late late game TvT, which doesn't really count since is freaking mirror lol) but they are still left alone to be like this. Meanwhile zergs already had two an incredibly strong late game tech routes BL/Infestor (which one was better before this buff) and Ultra/Infestor. And now, zerg is the only race which can utilize it's tier 3 units in evey matchup. I liked how every biased zerg came up with shit like "Ultra is a terrible unit", "We don't see much of Ultras in pro games" and etc., and every single of them ended with idea that Ultralisk needs to be buffed somehow. Meanwhile it became a normal thing for Terran and Protoss to have a tier 3 flying piece of shit lol. BCs are just not figured out yet in a lot of match-ups, my hypothesis for why they get used more in TvT is because there are so many more highly ranked Terran players, especially in GSL, that TvTs are the most common match-up and so gets more figured out. Carriers, on the other hand, are not risky at all. You 100% know what is going to happen if you go for them - you will die horribly. Blizzard really needs to decide whether Carriers are going to be viable in Sc2 or just a "flavour" unit like Scouts in bw. I can tell you bc's are not used in tvz cause of neural parasite.
Or mass corruptors switch, mass hydra switch, being too immobile, taking too long to produce, being very expensive compared to the coins it has and the list goes on. IMO BC are more figured out than Carriers, and it has found it's place, which is late game TvT on "turtle heavy maps".
|
your Country52797 Posts
On August 29 2011 01:02 Blackk wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2011 00:01 SeaSwift wrote:On August 28 2011 23:56 Huragius wrote:On August 28 2011 23:41 Existor wrote:
Ultralisks before build time buff was Ultra-Risk units. They were not. Carriers/BC are not viable at all, in any match-ups (besides late late game TvT, which doesn't really count since is freaking mirror lol) but they are still left alone to be like this. Meanwhile zergs already had two an incredibly strong late game tech routes BL/Infestor (which one was better before this buff) and Ultra/Infestor. And now, zerg is the only race which can utilize it's tier 3 units in evey matchup. I liked how every biased zerg came up with shit like "Ultra is a terrible unit", "We don't see much of Ultras in pro games" and etc., and every single of them ended with idea that Ultralisk needs to be buffed somehow. Meanwhile it became a normal thing for Terran and Protoss to have a tier 3 flying piece of shit lol. BCs are just not figured out yet in a lot of match-ups, my hypothesis for why they get used more in TvT is because there are so many more highly ranked Terran players, especially in GSL, that TvTs are the most common match-up and so gets more figured out. Carriers, on the other hand, are not risky at all. You 100% know what is going to happen if you go for them - you will die horribly. Blizzard really needs to decide whether Carriers are going to be viable in Sc2 or just a "flavour" unit like Scouts in bw. I can tell you bc's are not used in tvz cause of neural parasite.
couldn't you upgrade air armor?
|
On August 29 2011 00:19 ZeromuS wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2011 00:02 Plexa wrote:On August 28 2011 22:42 SeaSwift wrote:On August 28 2011 22:32 Plexa wrote:
Easiest way to 'fix' mules is to accept that they aren't broken -.-; Hmm. I know you're the admin and all, but unless there's a decent discussion to be had rather than just baseless assertions like "x is broken" "no x is fine" I'd recommend not posting at all, because the thread will just devolve further. I was quite happy with a number of lengthy posts on the previous page, and although I'm not a mod/whatever on this website I think it would be a shame for the posts to turn into what they were earlier again. I feel that if you look at the situation logically, Lurk is absolutely right. MULEs are essentially an extra 3+ workers mining for the whole game per Orbital minus time for Supply cooldown/Scans. If MULEs were replaced by another mechanic which still just helped Terran keep up with P/Z in the economy (like chrono etc) then the problem would still remain with the 1-1-1. If Terran just produced workers faster every so often they would just leave some behind and continue with the attack as normal. The problem is NOT the MULEs, I would say (and yes, I agree with your statement Plexa just not the way you went about it). The problem is the efficiency of the Terran units, particularly the Marine, and the synergy between them all. Protoss has good unit synergy but to compensate for that Protoss units are individually inefficient the vast majority of the time. I think SCVs need slightly less health or Marines need slightly less DPS. I don't understand why Marines became so much more efficient compared to BW in the first place. Think of it as my way of saying this is a pointless discussion. It's a simple math problem really, MULEs are at best +4 SCVs and at worst +3 - I always like to think of them as +4. If a Protoss spends his chronoboost on his nexus, by the time the orbital completes the protoss should be around 3-4 probes ahead. The MULE balances this out. Similar for Zerg, although the non-linear growth makes things drastically more complex. If the Protoss continues to spend all his chronoboost on probes then he will have a sizable worker lead by the time the second orbital is online (somewhere in the region of 8-12 iirc depending on how quick the CC is). Of course, no one does this because you die to any kind of pressure (think of it as a Zerg only powering drones from his larvae). As such, the MULE is designed to counteract the inherent delay in SCV production from making an orbital which leads to the other races getting a worker count advantage. TLDR; the MULE isn't the problem, and there is little point discussing it. My opinion on the 1/1/1 is that the problem lies within the Stalker. It's an absolutely terrible unit. However, en masse, sheer numbers can overpower things. So it being weak is necessary to the balance of the game. As a consequence, Stalkers are trash. Blink stalkers are good, don't get me wrong, but vanilla stalkers are fucking terrible. Any Protoss should agree with me on this. I don't know how many times I've had 2-2.5x the army worth of my opponent and yet they've manage to defend because stalkers are just that bad. I think Artosis said it best when he said stalkers are an active unit - they're not meant for fighting, they're meant for harassing, poking, prodding, forcing your opponent to do things they dont want to do etc. But as an army core they are trash. Blink stalkers can hold off a 1/1/1 with proper micro. Of course, this is off of one base and you risk that they're not getting cloak but still... point is, Blink stalkers with proper numbers can hold the rush. Vanilla stalkers can't. Turn to the rest of the Protoss forces - they're all wildly efficient. Zealots have some insane DPS, Immortals are actually stupidly powerful vs armoured (unintuitive so), sentries are godly - both for FF and guardian shield (so important against marines). I could go on and on about how awesome the remainder of the Protoss forces are, but I would get sidetrack (oh except carriers, they suck ). The reason the 1/1/1 works so well is because Banshees force you to make Stalkers. Protoss just don't have any other legitimate AA options (choose either robo or stargate tech, it's stupidly difficult to get both although it might be possible... just. Point is, you need the robo meaning that phoenix are probably out of the question if you want to build an immortal). Stalkers suck balls and get rolled easily by tanks, marines, marauders and every other unit under the sun. Those who counter 1/1/1 with primarily zealots/immortals/sentries kill a lot more stuff than those who try to counter with stalkers. Actually countering it will be a balancing act between chronoboosting right (most important, imo), making just enough stalkers to defend banshees (or somehow finding a way to build phoenix as well as immortals - because really phoenix are amazing against 1/1/1... they're just horribly inaccessible) and powering everything else into making zealots/immortals/sentries. If you wanted to buff/nerf things you'd be looking at tweaks to the immortal (like we're seeing here), tweaks to the Stargate (buildtime/cost of stargate and accessibility of phoenix), tweaks to PDD (although that won't change much), tweaks to the banshee (build time/damage/HP). But you have to be really careful as the game is so balanced in many other areas. Once again, Plexa drops the knowledge from lurking shadows
This post explains a lot of my problem with the 1/1/1 in far much better wording. Well done sir.
|
On August 29 2011 00:02 Plexa wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 22:42 SeaSwift wrote:On August 28 2011 22:32 Plexa wrote:
Easiest way to 'fix' mules is to accept that they aren't broken -.-; Hmm. I know you're the admin and all, but unless there's a decent discussion to be had rather than just baseless assertions like "x is broken" "no x is fine" I'd recommend not posting at all, because the thread will just devolve further. I was quite happy with a number of lengthy posts on the previous page, and although I'm not a mod/whatever on this website I think it would be a shame for the posts to turn into what they were earlier again. I feel that if you look at the situation logically, Lurk is absolutely right. MULEs are essentially an extra 3+ workers mining for the whole game per Orbital minus time for Supply cooldown/Scans. If MULEs were replaced by another mechanic which still just helped Terran keep up with P/Z in the economy (like chrono etc) then the problem would still remain with the 1-1-1. If Terran just produced workers faster every so often they would just leave some behind and continue with the attack as normal. The problem is NOT the MULEs, I would say (and yes, I agree with your statement Plexa just not the way you went about it). The problem is the efficiency of the Terran units, particularly the Marine, and the synergy between them all. Protoss has good unit synergy but to compensate for that Protoss units are individually inefficient the vast majority of the time. I think SCVs need slightly less health or Marines need slightly less DPS. I don't understand why Marines became so much more efficient compared to BW in the first place. Think of it as my way of saying this is a pointless discussion. It's a simple math problem really, MULEs are at best +4 SCVs and at worst +3 - I always like to think of them as +4. If a Protoss spends his chronoboost on his nexus, by the time the orbital completes the protoss should be around 3-4 probes ahead. The MULE balances this out. Similar for Zerg, although the non-linear growth makes things drastically more complex. If the Protoss continues to spend all his chronoboost on probes then he will have a sizable worker lead by the time the second orbital is online (somewhere in the region of 8-12 iirc depending on how quick the CC is). Of course, no one does this because you die to any kind of pressure (think of it as a Zerg only powering drones from his larvae). As such, the MULE is designed to counteract the inherent delay in SCV production from making an orbital which leads to the other races getting a worker count advantage. TLDR; the MULE isn't the problem, and there is little point discussing it. My opinion on the 1/1/1 is that the problem lies within the Stalker. It's an absolutely terrible unit. However, en masse, sheer numbers can overpower things. So it being weak is necessary to the balance of the game. As a consequence, Stalkers are trash. Blink stalkers are good, don't get me wrong, but vanilla stalkers are fucking terrible. Any Protoss should agree with me on this. I don't know how many times I've had 2-2.5x the army worth of my opponent and yet they've manage to defend because stalkers are just that bad. I think Artosis said it best when he said stalkers are an active unit - they're not meant for fighting, they're meant for harassing, poking, prodding, forcing your opponent to do things they dont want to do etc. But as an army core they are trash. Blink stalkers can hold off a 1/1/1 with proper micro. Of course, this is off of one base and you risk that they're not getting cloak but still... point is, Blink stalkers with proper numbers can hold the rush. Vanilla stalkers can't. Turn to the rest of the Protoss forces - they're all wildly efficient. Zealots have some insane DPS, Immortals are actually stupidly powerful vs armoured (unintuitive so), sentries are godly - both for FF and guardian shield (so important against marines). I could go on and on about how awesome the remainder of the Protoss forces are, but I would get sidetrack (oh except carriers, they suck ). The reason the 1/1/1 works so well is because Banshees force you to make Stalkers. Protoss just don't have any other legitimate AA options (choose either robo or stargate tech, it's stupidly difficult to get both although it might be possible... just. Point is, you need the robo meaning that phoenix are probably out of the question if you want to build an immortal). Stalkers suck balls and get rolled easily by tanks, marines, marauders and every other unit under the sun. Those who counter 1/1/1 with primarily zealots/immortals/sentries kill a lot more stuff than those who try to counter with stalkers. Actually countering it will be a balancing act between chronoboosting right (most important, imo), making just enough stalkers to defend banshees (or somehow finding a way to build phoenix as well as immortals - because really phoenix are amazing against 1/1/1... they're just horribly inaccessible) and powering everything else into making zealots/immortals/sentries. If you wanted to buff/nerf things you'd be looking at tweaks to the immortal (like we're seeing here), tweaks to the Stargate (buildtime/cost of stargate and accessibility of phoenix), tweaks to PDD (although that won't change much), tweaks to the banshee (build time/damage/HP). But you have to be really careful as the game is so balanced in many other areas.
Obviously this is only theorycraft, but even so I find it hard to argue against your logic. I think you may well be correct.
What would you do about the vanilla Stalker problem, then? You said tweaks to the Immortal, PDD, Banshee, Stargate etc, but what about the Stalkers themselves? If the problem is how weak the Vanilla stalker is, then surely this should be patched?
A straight buff to Stalker DPS might help PvT, but you'd have to be very careful. 3gate Stargate is already really good vs Terran, and with Stalkers Terran would basically be forced to not wall in just to prevent getting rolled by 3gate Stargate. 4gate Blink Stalker is also really good on certain maps (Tal'Darim Altar et al) so... hmm.
Blink Stalker play is especially common in PvZ, and increasing some basic stats for the Stalker would probably ruin that match-up without any other changes. The first suggestion that came to me was another increase to Blink research time, making it a lategame upgrade rather than a midgame upgrade.
However, we then come to PvP. 4gate can at the moment be prevented by some 3gate play or sometimes a 1gate Robo, but making Stalkers better could have some weird implications for PvP as well, especially if Blink was delayed again.
I'm not convinced about any changes to the Stalker, to be honest. If there is some tampering with Stalkers, it will have to be minor and/or very well thought out.
|
Lol, did you just argue against you're own question?
Plexa seems to be in the right of it. If there are any changes that need to be made, it has to fall on the Terran side, specifically either banshees and/or ravens.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
