|
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 September 02 2011 22:15 Velladin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 20:29 Shade_CsT wrote:On September 02 2011 15:31 EricCartman wrote:
hope they revert the rax build time. too much of a change imo. Then how would you fix the 2 barracks TvZ imbalance ? It's the only way without nerfing terran too much late game (a change to marine would change the entiere game) How is 2 rax imbalanced? It is very easy to stop As long as you micro your drones properly
2rax isn't really imbalanced imo. Sure, there are some situations where it might be a little too strong, but if so it's a map issue, not a build issue. If Blizzard removed close spawns from 1v1 ladder pool everything would be fine...
|
i played a few games on the ptr and was surprised at how little the rax nerf changed in my builds. pretty much the same. the proxy 11/11 rax is now about as good as proxy 12/14. if you want to punish a zerg for going hatch first you just have to commit more econ to it. the blue flame change doesnt affect much in tvt as far as i can tell. bf hellions still hold off marine tank pushes reasonably well. i still havent seen enough ultras or immortals to make up my mind on what to think about them.
|
On September 02 2011 22:17 HaXXspetten wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 22:15 Velladin wrote:On September 02 2011 20:29 Shade_CsT wrote:On September 02 2011 15:31 EricCartman wrote:
hope they revert the rax build time. too much of a change imo. Then how would you fix the 2 barracks TvZ imbalance ? It's the only way without nerfing terran too much late game (a change to marine would change the entiere game) How is 2 rax imbalanced? It is very easy to stop As long as you micro your drones properly 2rax isn't really imbalanced imo. Sure, there are some situations where it might be a little too strong, but if so it's a map issue, not a build issue. If Blizzard removed close spawns from 1v1 ladder pool everything would be fine...
The thing a lot of people don't like about 2 rax + bunker rushes, is that they're potentially game ending without being especially risky. In a sense, it's the same problem as with BFH. It's not the fact that Hellions 2 shot workers that's a problem, it's how cheap and safe Hellion drops and runbys are - 90% of the time they will at least pay for themselves. Why not do something that can potentially win you the game, and won't really set you back even if it fails?
Similarly, a Zerg defending 2 rax very well doesn't put them much ahead, since forcing Lings in the early game is always good for Terran, Bunkers can be cancelled/salvaged, and counterattacks won't work unless the Terran messes up. On the other hand, failing to defend a 2 rax can mean an instant loss.
It's just basic risk/reward balance. Potentially game-ending strategies should be appropriately risky - they should involve a commitment.
Personally, I think they should just remove Salvage and make Bunkers cheaper. Or give the other races their own ways of defending without commiting to it. This patch needs a Bunker change anyway.
|
Edit: Nvm, I'm silly 
|
On September 02 2011 22:31 Toadvine wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 22:17 HaXXspetten wrote:On September 02 2011 22:15 Velladin wrote:On September 02 2011 20:29 Shade_CsT wrote:On September 02 2011 15:31 EricCartman wrote:
hope they revert the rax build time. too much of a change imo. Then how would you fix the 2 barracks TvZ imbalance ? It's the only way without nerfing terran too much late game (a change to marine would change the entiere game) How is 2 rax imbalanced? It is very easy to stop As long as you micro your drones properly 2rax isn't really imbalanced imo. Sure, there are some situations where it might be a little too strong, but if so it's a map issue, not a build issue. If Blizzard removed close spawns from 1v1 ladder pool everything would be fine... The thing a lot of people don't like about 2 rax + bunker rushes, is that they're potentially game ending without being especially risky. In a sense, it's the same problem as with BFH. It's not the fact that Hellions 2 shot workers that's a problem, it's how cheap and safe Hellion drops and runbys are - 90% of the time they will at least pay for themselves. Why not do something that can potentially win you the game, and won't really set you back even if it fails? Similarly, a Zerg defending 2 rax very well doesn't put them much ahead, since forcing Lings in the early game is always good for Terran, Bunkers can be cancelled/salvaged, and counterattacks won't work unless the Terran messes up. On the other hand, failing to defend a 2 rax can mean an instant loss. It's just basic risk/reward balance. Potentially game-ending strategies should be appropriately risky - they should involve a commitment. Personally, I think they should just remove Salvage and make Bunkers cheaper. Or give the other races their own ways of defending without commiting to it. This patch needs a Bunker change anyway.
I agree with this, currently 2 rax bunker rush is just low risk high reward, instead of it being risky what it should be
|
On September 02 2011 22:43 Roynalf wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 22:31 Toadvine wrote:On September 02 2011 22:17 HaXXspetten wrote:On September 02 2011 22:15 Velladin wrote:On September 02 2011 20:29 Shade_CsT wrote:On September 02 2011 15:31 EricCartman wrote:
hope they revert the rax build time. too much of a change imo. Then how would you fix the 2 barracks TvZ imbalance ? It's the only way without nerfing terran too much late game (a change to marine would change the entiere game) How is 2 rax imbalanced? It is very easy to stop As long as you micro your drones properly 2rax isn't really imbalanced imo. Sure, there are some situations where it might be a little too strong, but if so it's a map issue, not a build issue. If Blizzard removed close spawns from 1v1 ladder pool everything would be fine... The thing a lot of people don't like about 2 rax + bunker rushes, is that they're potentially game ending without being especially risky. In a sense, it's the same problem as with BFH. It's not the fact that Hellions 2 shot workers that's a problem, it's how cheap and safe Hellion drops and runbys are - 90% of the time they will at least pay for themselves. Why not do something that can potentially win you the game, and won't really set you back even if it fails? Similarly, a Zerg defending 2 rax very well doesn't put them much ahead, since forcing Lings in the early game is always good for Terran, Bunkers can be cancelled/salvaged, and counterattacks won't work unless the Terran messes up. On the other hand, failing to defend a 2 rax can mean an instant loss. It's just basic risk/reward balance. Potentially game-ending strategies should be appropriately risky - they should involve a commitment. Personally, I think they should just remove Salvage and make Bunkers cheaper. Or give the other races their own ways of defending without commiting to it. This patch needs a Bunker change anyway. I agree with this, currently 2 rax bunker rush is just low risk high reward, instead of it being risky what it should be
Its only low risk high reward when a zerg gets a hatch first. Stop economically cheesing your opponent, and no you do not need to have an expansion at 15 to play zerg effectively.
|
On September 02 2011 22:17 HaXXspetten wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 22:15 Velladin wrote:On September 02 2011 20:29 Shade_CsT wrote:On September 02 2011 15:31 EricCartman wrote:
hope they revert the rax build time. too much of a change imo. Then how would you fix the 2 barracks TvZ imbalance ? It's the only way without nerfing terran too much late game (a change to marine would change the entiere game) How is 2 rax imbalanced? It is very easy to stop As long as you micro your drones properly 2rax isn't really imbalanced imo. Sure, there are some situations where it might be a little too strong, but if so it's a map issue, not a build issue. If Blizzard removed close spawns from 1v1 ladder pool everything would be fine...
Tell that to DRG on Tal'darim on opposite spawn points. He went 15 hatch and still lost his hatch to 11/11 bunker rush. That is the biggest map there is. If it is not risky as hell to do that there I don't see how it is balanced on any map.
These bunker rushes have been done for months now and they are still way too effective. Nobody (blizzard, spectators, non-terran players) but terran pro players want to win/watch games like these. If Zerg goes for economic opening so should Terran.
|
On September 02 2011 23:04 sekritzzz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 22:43 Roynalf wrote:On September 02 2011 22:31 Toadvine wrote:On September 02 2011 22:17 HaXXspetten wrote:On September 02 2011 22:15 Velladin wrote:On September 02 2011 20:29 Shade_CsT wrote:On September 02 2011 15:31 EricCartman wrote:
hope they revert the rax build time. too much of a change imo. Then how would you fix the 2 barracks TvZ imbalance ? It's the only way without nerfing terran too much late game (a change to marine would change the entiere game) How is 2 rax imbalanced? It is very easy to stop As long as you micro your drones properly 2rax isn't really imbalanced imo. Sure, there are some situations where it might be a little too strong, but if so it's a map issue, not a build issue. If Blizzard removed close spawns from 1v1 ladder pool everything would be fine... The thing a lot of people don't like about 2 rax + bunker rushes, is that they're potentially game ending without being especially risky. In a sense, it's the same problem as with BFH. It's not the fact that Hellions 2 shot workers that's a problem, it's how cheap and safe Hellion drops and runbys are - 90% of the time they will at least pay for themselves. Why not do something that can potentially win you the game, and won't really set you back even if it fails? Similarly, a Zerg defending 2 rax very well doesn't put them much ahead, since forcing Lings in the early game is always good for Terran, Bunkers can be cancelled/salvaged, and counterattacks won't work unless the Terran messes up. On the other hand, failing to defend a 2 rax can mean an instant loss. It's just basic risk/reward balance. Potentially game-ending strategies should be appropriately risky - they should involve a commitment. Personally, I think they should just remove Salvage and make Bunkers cheaper. Or give the other races their own ways of defending without commiting to it. This patch needs a Bunker change anyway. I agree with this, currently 2 rax bunker rush is just low risk high reward, instead of it being risky what it should be Its only low risk high reward when a zerg gets a hatch first. Stop economically cheesing your opponent, and no you do not need to have an expansion at 15 to play zerg effectively.
Ah, so all zergs should build 22 drones and then 7RR terrans like July? How long is that going to bring wins to Zergs?
|
On September 02 2011 23:15 -Archangel- wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 23:04 sekritzzz wrote:On September 02 2011 22:43 Roynalf wrote:On September 02 2011 22:31 Toadvine wrote:On September 02 2011 22:17 HaXXspetten wrote:On September 02 2011 22:15 Velladin wrote:On September 02 2011 20:29 Shade_CsT wrote:On September 02 2011 15:31 EricCartman wrote:
hope they revert the rax build time. too much of a change imo. Then how would you fix the 2 barracks TvZ imbalance ? It's the only way without nerfing terran too much late game (a change to marine would change the entiere game) How is 2 rax imbalanced? It is very easy to stop As long as you micro your drones properly 2rax isn't really imbalanced imo. Sure, there are some situations where it might be a little too strong, but if so it's a map issue, not a build issue. If Blizzard removed close spawns from 1v1 ladder pool everything would be fine... The thing a lot of people don't like about 2 rax + bunker rushes, is that they're potentially game ending without being especially risky. In a sense, it's the same problem as with BFH. It's not the fact that Hellions 2 shot workers that's a problem, it's how cheap and safe Hellion drops and runbys are - 90% of the time they will at least pay for themselves. Why not do something that can potentially win you the game, and won't really set you back even if it fails? Similarly, a Zerg defending 2 rax very well doesn't put them much ahead, since forcing Lings in the early game is always good for Terran, Bunkers can be cancelled/salvaged, and counterattacks won't work unless the Terran messes up. On the other hand, failing to defend a 2 rax can mean an instant loss. It's just basic risk/reward balance. Potentially game-ending strategies should be appropriately risky - they should involve a commitment. Personally, I think they should just remove Salvage and make Bunkers cheaper. Or give the other races their own ways of defending without commiting to it. This patch needs a Bunker change anyway. I agree with this, currently 2 rax bunker rush is just low risk high reward, instead of it being risky what it should be Its only low risk high reward when a zerg gets a hatch first. Stop economically cheesing your opponent, and no you do not need to have an expansion at 15 to play zerg effectively. Ah, so all zergs should build 22 drones and then 7RR terrans like July? How long is that going to bring wins to Zergs?
Yeah right, Protoss can only go Nexus first or 4G as well right?
I mean honestly i never got how zergs can go a built that potentially makes them take a economical lead and then go whine about it being highly vulnerable against early pressure.
Just go Pool first and its all good if u cant handle Rax pressure.
The Rax Nerf will by no means deny 2 Rax builts, it will just make it a bit more economically demanding.
Im curious on how the change will affect TvP tho...
|
Just go Pool first and its all good if u cant handle Rax pressure.
i hope your kidding, if you go pool first against 2 rax, have fun being trapped inside your base due to bunkers, by the time a spine is finished its absurdly easy to have 4 bunker (only costs 250 minerals since u can salvage the first 2) slightly back from the ramp, guess how many lings it takes to kill that, especially on maps where 4 bunkers in a NAT forms another wall.
|
On September 02 2011 23:29 KamehameHoe wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 23:15 -Archangel- wrote:On September 02 2011 23:04 sekritzzz wrote:On September 02 2011 22:43 Roynalf wrote:On September 02 2011 22:31 Toadvine wrote:On September 02 2011 22:17 HaXXspetten wrote:On September 02 2011 22:15 Velladin wrote:On September 02 2011 20:29 Shade_CsT wrote:On September 02 2011 15:31 EricCartman wrote:
hope they revert the rax build time. too much of a change imo. Then how would you fix the 2 barracks TvZ imbalance ? It's the only way without nerfing terran too much late game (a change to marine would change the entiere game) How is 2 rax imbalanced? It is very easy to stop As long as you micro your drones properly 2rax isn't really imbalanced imo. Sure, there are some situations where it might be a little too strong, but if so it's a map issue, not a build issue. If Blizzard removed close spawns from 1v1 ladder pool everything would be fine... The thing a lot of people don't like about 2 rax + bunker rushes, is that they're potentially game ending without being especially risky. In a sense, it's the same problem as with BFH. It's not the fact that Hellions 2 shot workers that's a problem, it's how cheap and safe Hellion drops and runbys are - 90% of the time they will at least pay for themselves. Why not do something that can potentially win you the game, and won't really set you back even if it fails? Similarly, a Zerg defending 2 rax very well doesn't put them much ahead, since forcing Lings in the early game is always good for Terran, Bunkers can be cancelled/salvaged, and counterattacks won't work unless the Terran messes up. On the other hand, failing to defend a 2 rax can mean an instant loss. It's just basic risk/reward balance. Potentially game-ending strategies should be appropriately risky - they should involve a commitment. Personally, I think they should just remove Salvage and make Bunkers cheaper. Or give the other races their own ways of defending without commiting to it. This patch needs a Bunker change anyway. I agree with this, currently 2 rax bunker rush is just low risk high reward, instead of it being risky what it should be Its only low risk high reward when a zerg gets a hatch first. Stop economically cheesing your opponent, and no you do not need to have an expansion at 15 to play zerg effectively. Ah, so all zergs should build 22 drones and then 7RR terrans like July? How long is that going to bring wins to Zergs? Yeah right, Protoss can only go Nexus first or 4G as well right? I mean honestly i never got how zergs can go a built that potentially makes them take a economical lead and then go whine about it being highly vulnerable against early pressure. Just go Pool first and its all good if u cant handle Rax pressure. The Rax Nerf will by no means deny 2 Rax builts, it will just make it a bit more economically demanding. Im curious on how the change will affect TvP tho...
Wow... Just wow...
OT: Is it true that the worker stacking trick for breaking a pylon contain is being fixed in 1.4? Read about it on reddit, but don't take them too seriously.
|
There seriously needs to be a sticky around here somewhere that explains in detail that 15 hatch is no more cheesy than 15 OC.
There is no major economic advantage for 15 hatch in comparison to 15 OC, the major difference is how incredibly RISKY it is. THERE IS NO ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE.
Zerg needs to take a giant risk to compete with a Terran making an OC at 15 supply.
2 rax is not punishing a greedy Zerg, it's beating up on the fat kid at lunch because he can't defend himself.
|
On September 03 2011 00:10 JEcho wrote:i hope your kidding, if you go pool first against 2 rax, have fun being trapped inside your base due to bunkers, by the time a spine is finished its absurdly easy to have 4 bunker (only costs 250 minerals since u can salvage the first 2) slightly back from the ramp, guess how many lings it takes to kill that, especially on maps where 4 bunkers in a NAT forms another wall.
Well he didn't mean go 18 pool like you
|
On September 03 2011 00:16 Jermstuddog wrote:
There seriously needs to be a sticky around here somewhere that explains in detail that 15 hatch is no more cheesy than 15 OC.
There is no major economic advantage for 15 hatch in comparison to 15 OC, the major difference is how incredibly RISKY it is. THERE IS NO ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE.
Zerg needs to take a giant risk to compete with a Terran making an OC at 15 supply.
2 rax is not punishing a greedy Zerg, it's beating up on the fat kid at lunch because he can't defend himself.
This immediately made me think of MVP 2-raxing JulyZerg next week.
|
fungal was needed
hellion admittedly was probably needed
want to see protoss use warp prisms and immortals more, so I like that change.
ultralisks!? I feel like they needed a reduce but I have a feeling that it will need to be slightly longer than 55 seconds. Would've quite liked to see a reduce BC build time or something.
raven change? over the bloody moon.
|
I really hate it when Blizzard play around with fundamental structure build times. Even if it is 5 seconds, everything will feel weird to terran for a while. I understand they want to make 2rax pressure harder to do well, but I think it will not only make two rax pressure 5 seconds late, but every kind of early pressure slightly harder for terran to pull off. I'm talking like 3 in game seconds, but I don't know... it's a very slight reduction to any push timing... it just annoys me. I think protoss and zerg would complain if gateways and spawning pools got a building time increase... not needed. The time has been fine since beta for gods sake.
|
On September 02 2011 23:04 sekritzzz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 22:43 Roynalf wrote:On September 02 2011 22:31 Toadvine wrote:On September 02 2011 22:17 HaXXspetten wrote:On September 02 2011 22:15 Velladin wrote:On September 02 2011 20:29 Shade_CsT wrote:On September 02 2011 15:31 EricCartman wrote:
hope they revert the rax build time. too much of a change imo. Then how would you fix the 2 barracks TvZ imbalance ? It's the only way without nerfing terran too much late game (a change to marine would change the entiere game) How is 2 rax imbalanced? It is very easy to stop As long as you micro your drones properly 2rax isn't really imbalanced imo. Sure, there are some situations where it might be a little too strong, but if so it's a map issue, not a build issue. If Blizzard removed close spawns from 1v1 ladder pool everything would be fine... The thing a lot of people don't like about 2 rax + bunker rushes, is that they're potentially game ending without being especially risky. In a sense, it's the same problem as with BFH. It's not the fact that Hellions 2 shot workers that's a problem, it's how cheap and safe Hellion drops and runbys are - 90% of the time they will at least pay for themselves. Why not do something that can potentially win you the game, and won't really set you back even if it fails? Similarly, a Zerg defending 2 rax very well doesn't put them much ahead, since forcing Lings in the early game is always good for Terran, Bunkers can be cancelled/salvaged, and counterattacks won't work unless the Terran messes up. On the other hand, failing to defend a 2 rax can mean an instant loss. It's just basic risk/reward balance. Potentially game-ending strategies should be appropriately risky - they should involve a commitment. Personally, I think they should just remove Salvage and make Bunkers cheaper. Or give the other races their own ways of defending without commiting to it. This patch needs a Bunker change anyway. I agree with this, currently 2 rax bunker rush is just low risk high reward, instead of it being risky what it should be Its only low risk high reward when a zerg gets a hatch first. Stop economically cheesing your opponent, and no you do not need to have an expansion at 15 to play zerg effectively.
What I don't understand is why 2rax pressure is 'low risk/high reward' and a 15 hatch isn't? How is that fair.. the 2rax puts pressure/sometimes gets a hatch if the player is greedy, 15 hatch SHOULD have something to deny it... if not it makes the zerg player defensive, because he just put a hatch up very early! the 2rax is a build that is low risk, when the zerg player has taken a big risk... If 2rax was high risk, no one would do it, and zerg would start 2 base every single game and drone until factory tech could be a threat. THAT IS NOT GOOD GAME DESIGN.
|
On September 03 2011 00:44 silentblob wrote: I think protoss and zerg would complain if gateways and spawning pools got a building time increase... not needed. The time has been fine since beta for gods sake.
Well protoss got a 5 second per zealot build time nerf. It doesn't slow down the tech routing but it's almost certainly a bigger effect.
They also have specifically changed the barracks tech-req time by making it require a depot. Somehow terrans adjusted to that one and it was probably bigger, too.
|
Has any Good player tried iechoic TvT build in the PTR ? Is it still viable ?
|
On September 03 2011 00:49 silentblob wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 23:04 sekritzzz wrote:On September 02 2011 22:43 Roynalf wrote:On September 02 2011 22:31 Toadvine wrote:On September 02 2011 22:17 HaXXspetten wrote:On September 02 2011 22:15 Velladin wrote:On September 02 2011 20:29 Shade_CsT wrote:On September 02 2011 15:31 EricCartman wrote:
hope they revert the rax build time. too much of a change imo. Then how would you fix the 2 barracks TvZ imbalance ? It's the only way without nerfing terran too much late game (a change to marine would change the entiere game) How is 2 rax imbalanced? It is very easy to stop As long as you micro your drones properly 2rax isn't really imbalanced imo. Sure, there are some situations where it might be a little too strong, but if so it's a map issue, not a build issue. If Blizzard removed close spawns from 1v1 ladder pool everything would be fine... The thing a lot of people don't like about 2 rax + bunker rushes, is that they're potentially game ending without being especially risky. In a sense, it's the same problem as with BFH. It's not the fact that Hellions 2 shot workers that's a problem, it's how cheap and safe Hellion drops and runbys are - 90% of the time they will at least pay for themselves. Why not do something that can potentially win you the game, and won't really set you back even if it fails? Similarly, a Zerg defending 2 rax very well doesn't put them much ahead, since forcing Lings in the early game is always good for Terran, Bunkers can be cancelled/salvaged, and counterattacks won't work unless the Terran messes up. On the other hand, failing to defend a 2 rax can mean an instant loss. It's just basic risk/reward balance. Potentially game-ending strategies should be appropriately risky - they should involve a commitment. Personally, I think they should just remove Salvage and make Bunkers cheaper. Or give the other races their own ways of defending without commiting to it. This patch needs a Bunker change anyway. I agree with this, currently 2 rax bunker rush is just low risk high reward, instead of it being risky what it should be Its only low risk high reward when a zerg gets a hatch first. Stop economically cheesing your opponent, and no you do not need to have an expansion at 15 to play zerg effectively. What I don't understand is why 2rax pressure is 'low risk/high reward' and a 15 hatch isn't? How is that fair.. the 2rax puts pressure/sometimes gets a hatch if the player is greedy, 15 hatch SHOULD have something to deny it... if not it makes the zerg player defensive, because he just put a hatch up very early! the 2rax is a build that is low risk, when the zerg player has taken a big risk... If 2rax was high risk, no one would do it, and zerg would start 2 base every single game and drone until factory tech could be a threat. THAT IS NOT GOOD GAME DESIGN.
And yet... Hellion openers are probably THE BEST opener Terran has in TvZ...
If 2-rax were to completely disappear tomorrow, it wouldn't all of a sudden make Terrans incapable of winning TvZ. It would simply remove one of the endless options that Terrans have in that match-up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
113
EPT
