| Forum Index > Closed |
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 | ||
|
OPL3SA2
United States378 Posts
On August 30 2011 21:01 Huragius wrote: The more I read TL, I wonder why does zerg whines never get banned... From a technical standpoint, since teh #1 player in the world is a zerg, does this post have any merit? | ||
|
CarlaBruni
61 Posts
| ||
|
TeWy
France714 Posts
On August 30 2011 21:17 OPL3SA2 wrote: From a technical standpoint, since teh #1 player in the world is a zerg, does this post have any merit? Zerg won the 2 first GSL and it was at that time that the Zerg whines were at their maximum. The results of pro Zerg are not correlated with the ammount of Zerg tears. | ||
|
RandomAccount#106470
Lithuania1506 Posts
| ||
|
Numy
South Africa35471 Posts
On August 30 2011 21:15 Elefanto wrote: Roach a terrible unit? Do we play the same game? Roaches are a heavy core unit in PvZ, most of the games consist of 90% pure roaches. ZvZ currently is also extremely roach and infestor heavy. They are insanely good for their cost. They are a terrible unit. They only good because you can get a ton out early but then they are massively supply inefficient so you land up with this tiny army when supplies even out. I don't know what PvZ you play or see but they are almost never pure roaches these days. They serve as the core tanky backbone until later tech kicks in. | ||
|
OPL3SA2
United States378 Posts
On August 30 2011 07:15 purgerinho wrote: too bad they forgot carriers and hydras again. But they didn't forgot mothership. Nice :facepalm: and it would be great to put appear offline in real id.. there is whole bunch of topics at battle net forums about that but blizzard ignores it for more than a year because same rel id is used for WoW and sc2 etc. Hey man nice input. You want to appear offline to your real ID friends? Blizzard intentionally didn't include this. They are trying to force people to explain to their friends how bad they are at video games and to request they stop asking them for games. They also didn't realize how many people would go full on retard and real ID friend their bosses. | ||
|
Dommk
Australia4865 Posts
On August 30 2011 19:59 -Archangel- wrote: That just means those toss players have not found an effective way to use these carriers. In both cases it looks like they waited too long to attack. But probably the problem was they didn't find the right composition/timing to use them to win the game/cripple their opponent. Not going to act like I know all the in's and out's of Carriers, because tbh I'm not that great. But It doesn't take very long to counter Carriers at all. Just watch Goody vs Ace. Ace had _5_ Carriers with +2, in the time it took to finish +3 and get two more Carriers out, Goody went from 1 Viking and 1 Starport to 3 Starports and enough Viking to slow the Carriers, then finally crush it :| On August 30 2011 21:22 Numy wrote: They are a terrible unit. They only good because you can get a ton out early but then they are massively supply inefficient so you land up with this tiny army when supplies even out. I don't know what PvZ you play or see but they are almost never pure roaches these days. They serve as the core tanky backbone until later tech kicks in. Who says anything about pure roach? Does it mean Zealots are bad because I can't go pure Zealots? Obviously not. They are supply inefficient because they cost much less than anything else for their supply...If they were supply efficient as well as cost efficient then they would be a broken unit You see Roach/Infestor ALL THE TIME in PvZ these days. Obviously for super late game it is not the most ideal composition, but that doesn't mean they are bad. | ||
|
Xenomorph
United States137 Posts
I don't see how buffing ultra would make a zerg prefer that tech route, when the new immortals will give zerg more of a reason to use infestors or something that can limit the immortals strength. If a protoss gets a massive immortal ball, ultralisk is not something a zerg has in mind to tech directly to. Zerg and specifically protoss have some broken core mechanics. Zerg have certain core units that go with certain matchups and serve a obvious purpose but lack diversity in unit fulfilling roles. Where as protoss have a flawed core macro mechanic in chrono boost and weak gateway units relying heavily on strong compositions that are not traded, as they progress towards a stale late game requiring lots of probes working many bases. | ||
|
TeWy
France714 Posts
On August 30 2011 21:36 Xenomorph wrote: Interesting patch to stay the least, I really think that immortal and prism buffs will help in a lot of regards to protoss early game. However I still feel like PvZ was not directly addressed and is still quite zerg favored. As the game progresses into later mid-game to late game chrono boost becomes more and more stale and useless, and the protoss requires massive amounts of bases and harass on zerg forces. The zerg ball becomes dangerously powerful and they've received a late game buff for ultras additionally now. I don't see how buffing ultra would make a zerg prefer that tech route, when the new immortals will give zerg more of a reason to use infestors or something that can limit the immortals strength. If a protoss gets a massive immortal ball, ultralisk is not something a zerg has in mind to tech directly to. Zerg and specifically protoss have some broken core mechanics. Zerg have certain core units that go with certain matchups and serve a obvious purpose but lack diversity in unit fulfilling roles. Where as protoss have a flawed core macro mechanic in chrono boost and weak gateway units relying heavily on strong compositions that are not traded, as they progress towards a stale late game requiring lots of probes working many bases. Chronoboost is heavily flawed, I agree with that. I guess Protoss players want the late-game to be balanced around poor usage of chronoboost and Zergs/Terrans are afraid of buffing Protoss. This is why we never hear anything about it, but late-game chronoboost is probably the most broken core mechanics of Starcraft 2. Maybe if carriers and motherships were more used we would see it more, but since Protoss armies rely heavily on gateway units most of Pro Protoss Nexus ends up at the 25 mins mark with 100 energy. | ||
|
Xenomorph
United States137 Posts
| ||
|
Daralii
United States16991 Posts
On August 30 2011 21:43 Xenomorph wrote: I know I'm beating a dead horse here, but I really think some changes to carrier/star tech for the lategame would be great. Unfortunately I cannot see chrono boost fixed until HOTS and until them the late game energy-fest will be used on speeding up warpgate recovery time. 8P Bring back flux vanes? :D | ||
|
Xenomorph
United States137 Posts
Bring back arbiter. :D I love going star tech as protoss, but everytime I do I feel like I'm compromising something getting there. If I'm not devastating with voids or phoenix play, its just a matter of time before a massive ground army contains and destroys my forces. I feel much safer going robo and apparently that's the focus of the current patch. I feel like the only changes will be that my PvP and PvT will grow stronger (My PvT is already growing as my fav/best matchup) but PvZ is where I feel there could be some real effective changes made that would help protoss a lot more. | ||
|
Deleted User 124618
1142 Posts
| ||
|
MinimalistSC2
United States121 Posts
I fail to see how economic boost mechanics are "fundamentally flawed." They might or might not be imbalanced but that's another issue. I think by flawed he means that they cant be balanced properly because whenever they are balanced for one portion of the game, they become imbalanced in another, if you make mules too weak then terran early game is f***ed, but too strong and late game terran is overpowered. An if you balance it just right then you are actually going to see a stupid amount of two base all ins and timings because thats when mules will reach there max effectiveness. The same goes for chrono boost and and queen injects. Their are a few fundamentally flawed aspects to this design. And they may point to the reason Protoss has not seen great success compared to the other races. 1) Almost immediately into the start of the game you have a building that regenerates mana at a constant rate and even has a pretty lenient mana cap. What this means is that you can pool chrono or mules and then fire them all at a gold base, or fire them all at a really fast tech switch. - why it is flawed: It makes constant solid macro less important (except for zerg). Let me clarify and say it is still extremely important, but you can actually be behind a full cycle and really not feel the consequence. Anything over one cycle i feel like you could have had the minerals(terran) or tech(protoss) or units(zerg) out sooner and it really does hurt you. 2) because these mechanics can theoretically (and should) be used at a constant rate throughout the entire game, you see the effects of them spiral out of control if an opponent is just one base up on an opponent. It no longer means more income or a positional advantage, it means that that player immediately has more "macro energy". - why it is flawed: Terran and zerg can easily make in base hatcheries and orbitals specifically for increased mana energy, early and late game. Terran can lift off and expo later and zerg will always benifit from a macro hatch since they can actually fall behind in injects quite easily. Toss however cannot do this. Chrono boost is good early game and mid game, but in the late game it is just too hard to keep up with terran and zerg macro energy. The only time you EVER see a toss gain an advantage in macro energy without out expanding is when they FE vs Zerg. Think about that and then think about how much macro energy plays a part in SC2. As a sidenote, zerg can't afford to fall behind in spending macro energy, but at the same time they can pool larva and most easily spend resources purely for more macro energy. TL DR: Macro energy on buildings, Terran: mineral income, Toss: faster tech/units, Zerg: mass units/larva pooling It may be good or bad for SC2, but it is probably one ****** to try and balance for late mid and early game with three different races. I strongly feel like toss is too weak in regards to macro energy late game and that it is not balanced. Because toss cannot make extra nexus purely for chrono, and tech eventually runs dry, They are not as adaptable as the other races. Chrono boost on units hardly holds up to reactors and larva pooling (both are more productive and easier to execute than continuous chrono), where as minerals and mass units are always useful, especially late game | ||
|
Shalaiyn
Netherlands2735 Posts
On August 30 2011 21:17 OPL3SA2 wrote: From a technical standpoint, since teh #1 player in the world is a zerg, does this post have any merit? Yet that zerg whines more about zerg than IdrA himself. | ||
|
Xenomorph
United States137 Posts
On August 30 2011 21:55 MinimalistSC2 wrote: Macro energy on buildings, Terran: mineral income, Toss: faster tech/units, Zerg: mass units/larva pooling It may be good or bad for SC2, but it is probably one ****** to try and balance for late mid and early game with three different races. I strongly feel like toss is too weak in regards to macro energy late game and that it is not balanced. (because toss cannot make extra nexus purely for chrono and tech eventually runs dry and chrono boost on units hardly holds up to reactors and larva pooling (both are more productive and easier to execute than continuous chrono), where as minerals and mass units are always useful, especially late game Just quoted a chunk, but very well said. I find that despite not being as fundamentally powerful as mules, zerg macro mechanics make the most sense and are the most useful for their army structure (and very needed I might add) | ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On August 30 2011 21:43 Xenomorph wrote: I know I'm beating a dead horse here, but I really think some changes to carrier/star tech for the lategame would be great. Unfortunately I cannot see chrono boost fixed until HOTS and until them the late game energy-fest will be used on speeding up warpgate recovery time. 8P Which is what it should already be used for. Having nexuses with 100 energy is not a balance problem but a player problem. | ||
|
MinimalistSC2
United States121 Posts
Or even better, why not add complexity and control to the player by giving said player choice? Make normal gateways make units a few seconds faster, while warp-gates can warp but a bit slower. The complexity this adds is incredible. Aside from the obvious implication of Use-Gateway-When-Defending-and-Warpgate-When-Offensive, it adds a good dynamic when you go into midgame. How many of your gates do you have as warp? You never know when you need to defend against drops, when to maximize production output to match your economy, when to lower output but add versatility and mobility, etc. It also makes hallucination a viable scouting option (although numbers will need to be adjusted). Scouting outside of Robo is a problem, and this adds a real choice. When i was first starting to play this game back in beta, i actually just assumed that warp gates warped in slower than normal gateways the first time a saw them. After a few games i checked and was astounded to see that they didnt. It is very silly that there is a 50/50 upgrade that lets you warp in units instantly, and faster, and anywhere with pylon energy. But then again, toss is not balanced properly anyway, I feel like toss is a bleh mix between terran and zerg more than their own unique race. | ||
|
shizna
United Kingdom803 Posts
On August 30 2011 22:02 Xenomorph wrote: Just quoted a chunk, but very well said. I find that despite not being as fundamentally powerful as mules, zerg macro mechanics make the most sense and are the most useful for their army structure (and very needed I might add) he's quite wrong actually. i find that comparing chronoboost to reactors to highlight the protoss late game deficiency is pretty dumb... the correct answer is to MAKE MORE GATEWAYS. chronoboost increases the production of everything, reactor only increases the production of marines, hellions, medivacs and vikings. | ||
frontliner2
Netherlands844 Posts
 When on 2 bases 2-3 robotics pumping immortals 4 gate pumping Blink Stalkers Bring a Warp Prism for warping in Stalkers (nice buff hehe) Protoss is already OP enough imho | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Calm Dota 2 4731Bisu  990Britney  692EffOrt 612BeSt 324Stork 254firebathero  140Hyuk 129Mind 78Hyun 48[ Show more ] Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games hiko2049 Beastyqt587 B2W.Neo556 Khaldor526 WinterStarcraft419 Liquid`Hasu228 crisheroes175 KnowMe134 C9.Mang0121 QueenE64 Fuzer  40Chillindude14 |
|
Korean StarCraft League
Afreeca Starleague
Rush vs Soulkey
CranKy Ducklings
WardiTV Invitational
AI Arena Tournament
BSL Open Qualifier
Sparkling Tuna Cup
OSC
IPSL
BSL Open Qualifier
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
