EPTOn September 11 2011 08:53 Hollis wrote:
i have NEVER seen bane rain work against a protoss who micro'd his army.
i have NEVER seen bane rain work against a protoss who micro'd his army.
Clearly, you've never seen Losira against MC in MLG Columbus.
Patch 1.4 PTR Notes (updated 9/8) - Page 379
| 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 | ||
|
SoraLimit
Canada747 Posts
Clearly, you've never seen Losira against MC in MLG Columbus. | ||
|
Zambozo
United Kingdom63 Posts
| ||
|
Marooned
Norway161 Posts
But what I dont get is the APM "fix". Whats that for? APM was botched enough as it was compared to bw, now its pretty worthless. Its hardly a tool to check average actions per minute any longer. If they are gonna implement this change, then they might as well remove it completely, because its totally useless now. | ||
|
Lomak
United States311 Posts
On September 11 2011 09:19 Marooned wrote: After testing it out it seems like a nice patch from a T point of view. The hellion nerf might be bad for tvp if you use hellions against zealots, but they still work great for lings,blings and harvesters, so no big deal for me. But what I dont get is the APM "fix". Whats that for? APM was botched enough as it was compared to bw, now its pretty worthless. Its hardly a tool to check average actions per minute any longer. If they are gonna implement this change, then they might as well remove it completely, because its totally useless now. At the least, curiosity's sake? I know I'm curious how everyone's new APM will measure up, compared to the current standard. As well as what will be considered average when taking the spam out of the picture. | ||
|
Hollis
United States505 Posts
On September 11 2011 09:11 SoraLimit wrote: Clearly, you've never seen Losira against MC in MLG Columbus. MC is a badass protoss, but in that case he didn't start to micro in time; his stalkers just sat there in a clump while the olords rolled up with their rain of banes. about that specific game, i'd also like to point out the bane rain isn't really what won the game for losira, even though it did end up working reasonably well (not as well as a high-difficulty maneuver vs an unresponsive enemy should, i'd mention). it was 5 bases vs 3 bases and mc's attempts at harassment were being shut down all game long. losira also forced a cancel on mc's third and took out a good 30-40 probes with banes. targeting worker lines with bane rain is different from using it on the army; against the worker line i think it's a much more viable tactic but is still pretty simple to counter with good awareness. a really great use of banes in this way mirrors terran multi-drop tactics: right in the middle of a big army vs army attack you can have overlords queue'd to drop banes in his worker line, making it almost impossible for him to micro away, nearly guaranteeing at least a few solid worker hits. this is something losira did in the very game you mentioned and is one of the big reasons he won that game. also worth mentioning is if losira didn't drop the worker line during the attack, i seriously doubt it would have killed many workers, if any at all. i like mc a lot because he is a super good protoss and therefore a good benchmark when testing the effectiveness of strategies. when i see interesting zvp strategies my first thought is: would this work vs. mc playing at his best? if the answer is no, it's not a good strategy. on that note, i don't think bane rain is good for dealing with stalker-based death wads (but still good to use on the worker line as an indirect counter). | ||
|
Toadvine
Poland2234 Posts
On September 11 2011 09:29 Hollis wrote: MC is a badass protoss, but in that case he didn't start to micro in time; his stalkers just sat there in a clump while the olords rolled up with their rain of banes. blink wasn't even on cooldown. Are you some kind of Idra sock puppet or something? Reading your posts, it's all like "this will never work against a competent player"; "a competent player will always see this" - it's due to this kind of thought process that Idra leaves games too early. Claiming bling drops won't work on "competent players" is hilariously untrue, considering they've worked at the highest possible level (MC vs Losira, can't really get higher than that), and there are multiple GSL-level games where baneling drops on the army or in mineral lines do game-ending damage. If it works on that level, it will work in your ladder games as well. | ||
|
Hollis
United States505 Posts
On September 11 2011 09:44 Toadvine wrote: Are you some kind of Idra sock puppet or something? Reading your posts, it's all like "this will never work against a competent player"; "a competent player will always see this" - it's due to this kind of thought process that Idra leaves games too early. Claiming bling drops won't work on "competent players" is hilariously untrue, considering they've worked at the highest possible level (MC vs Losira, can't really get higher than that), and there are multiple GSL-level games where baneling drops on the army or in mineral lines do game-ending damage. If it works on that level, it will work in your ladder games as well. let me explain the logic. strategy effectiveness must be examined under the highest level of skill and perfect execution on the part of both the aggressor and the defender. the reason is that if a strategy won't work if your opponent plays well enough, then trying that strategy in a real game is a gamble. obviously every strategy is in some way a gamble, but the decisions a player should be making are the ones that will yield the highest possible chances of success. if your strategy won't work if your opponent reacts properly, then you have no business making that decision. i agree that idra's habit of leaving games early is a mistake, because in practice people do make mistakes; it IS possible to win a game that, in theory, you should lose. however, when examining strategy on the drawing board, it's vital to approach your research with the correct assumptions. i should probably note that i wouldn't completely throw out strategies like bane rain that won't work vs a player with sufficient skill and execution - keep them in your toolbox. use them against inferior players or if you find some game-specific mechanism to strengthen its chances of success. but only use them if you don't mind losing. and i guess i have to reiterate - it shouldn't have worked in that game. mc reacted poorly. if he had reacted well, he would have retained a huge percent of his army, and would have had a very high chance to come back and win. people have been splitting armies vs banelings since the time MKP was called Foxer. losira flipped the coin, and it came up in his favor. that doesn't mean the strategy will reliably work, at any level. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On September 11 2011 09:44 Toadvine wrote: Are you some kind of Idra sock puppet or something? Reading your posts, it's all like "this will never work against a competent player"; "a competent player will always see this" - it's due to this kind of thought process that Idra leaves games too early. Claiming bling drops won't work on "competent players" is hilariously untrue, considering they've worked at the highest possible level (MC vs Losira, can't really get higher than that), and there are multiple GSL-level games where baneling drops on the army or in mineral lines do game-ending damage. If it works on that level, it will work in your ladder games as well. Bling drops are great, but I agree with Hollis, that it is really sad, that most zerg strategies rely on your opponent not microing perfect. Infestors give zerg the ability to counteract micro and micro themselves. Banelings don't. You spread them and drop them, but in the end it comes down to you either being already ahead, so even the best splitting, blinking and forcefielding doesn't help, or your opponent making a micromistake. But it just never feels like it is up to you, to win a battle. yet I think a major part of bling drops is not the dropping itself, but rather the army that supports the drops. Because if you attack with speedroaches and drops, he will have to spread vs drops, which strenghtens roaches, because they are great in low supply battles. So your semiroach army does just better vs split units, if he doesn't split he loses to the drops, and if he runs away your roach/drop combo can chase him to his base, where he has to fight or lose. | ||
|
Elefanto
Switzerland3584 Posts
On September 11 2011 09:57 Hollis wrote: let me explain the logic. strategy effectiveness must be examined under the highest level of skill and perfect execution on the part of both the aggressor and the defender. the reason is that if a strategy won't work if your opponent plays well enough, then trying that strategy in a real game is a gamble. obviously every strategy is in some way a gamble, but the decisions a player should be making are the ones that will yield the highest possible chances of success. if your strategy won't work if your opponent reacts properly, then you have no business making that decision. i agree that idra's habit of leaving games early is a mistake, because in practice people do make mistakes; it IS possible to win a game that, in theory, you should lose. however, when examining strategy on the drawing board, it's vital to approach your research with the correct assumptions. i should probably note that i wouldn't completely throw out strategies like bane rain that won't work vs a player with sufficient skill and execution - keep them in your toolbox. use them against inferior players or if you find some game-specific mechanism to strengthen its chances of success. but only use them if you don't mind losing. and i guess i have to reiterate - it shouldn't have worked in that game. mc reacted poorly. if he had reacted well, he would have retained a huge percent of his army, and would have had a very high chance to come back and win. people have been splitting armies vs banelings since the time MKP was called Foxer. losira flipped the coin, and it came up in his favor. that doesn't mean the strategy will reliably work, at any level. You're an example why people that suck at the game shouldn't theorycraft. | ||
|
Hierarch
United States2197 Posts
On September 11 2011 09:11 Zambozo wrote: NP not used on massive units lol... i do not see why is that even needed to be touched. to be honest i feel like that may be they need to change its time but not to remove it. WHat will be the point of that upgrade if it can't be use on good units ? It is not very used right now but if it get removed from massive units no one will use it. Tanks and immortals are the two units that come to mind that would still be worth NP ing | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8281 Posts
On September 11 2011 08:53 Hollis wrote: i have NEVER seen bane rain work against a protoss who micro'd his army. I've read all of your posts, but they all basically comes down to the line above "Protoss needs to suck and not move his units for bling drop to work". Explain to me again what the 3 spells an infestor can use is? I believe one of them could be, and have been, incredibly useful to stop the protoss army from "microing away". Please stop theorycrafting. You clearly do not know anything about this game to say that "bling drop has a 0% win chance", when its nearly what every single pro zerg player is doing at the moment. I'm sure they're all using inferior strategies.. On September 11 2011 10:07 Hierarch wrote: Tanks and immortals are the two units that come to mind that would still be worth NP ing I would like to elaborate on this a bit. Obviously blizzard intends for protosses to use a lot more immortals from now on, considering their +1 range (bordering them from situational unit, to a really, really good one). This opens up the chance for NP to be used against the immortals. And as Idra once stated"and what do you know? Immortals are actually quite good vs other protoss units"  | ||
|
ectonym
United States147 Posts
Now that NP is slated to not affect Massive Units, why has there been no conversation about Dropships (Medivacs, Warp Prisms, Overlords) and Massive Units. If we're really going to take this idea of Massive Units being invulnerable to certain spells, then doesn't it follow that these Massive Units (read Colossus, Thor, Ultralisk, Archon) shouldn't be able to be transported with Dropships? I hope someone smart sees this and discusses this. After searching there is no (little?) discussion of Massive Units and Dropships. Might this discussion warrant it's own thread once PTR1.4 is finalized? | ||
|
Toadvine
Poland2234 Posts
On September 11 2011 09:57 Hollis wrote: let me explain the logic. strategy effectiveness must be examined under the highest level of skill and perfect execution on the part of both the aggressor and the defender. the reason is that if a strategy won't work if your opponent plays well enough, then trying that strategy in a real game is a gamble. obviously every strategy is in some way a gamble, but the decisions a player should be making are the ones that will yield the highest possible chances of success. if your strategy won't work if your opponent reacts properly, then you have no business making that decision. i agree that idra's habit of leaving games early is a mistake, because in practice people do make mistakes; it IS possible to win a game that, in theory, you should lose. however, when examining strategy on the drawing board, it's vital to approach your research with the correct assumptions. i should probably note that i wouldn't completely throw out strategies like bane rain that won't work vs a player with sufficient skill and execution - keep them in your toolbox. use them against inferior players or if you find some game-specific mechanism to strengthen its chances of success. but only use them if you don't mind losing. and i guess i have to reiterate - it shouldn't have worked in that game. mc reacted poorly. if he had reacted well, he would have retained a huge percent of his army, and would have had a very high chance to come back and win. people have been splitting armies vs banelings since the time MKP was called Foxer. losira flipped the coin, and it came up in his favor. that doesn't mean the strategy will reliably work, at any level. I'm sorry to say this, but that is a perspective that is just completely useless. Not a single harassment technique in this game passes your test. Terran drops? If the opponent has spotters in place and units in position, they will fail. Ling runbys? If the opponent has good simcity and some defense, they will never do anything. Same with Hellions against Zerg, Banshees, again, units in position, spotters. On one hand, I think you still underestimate the straight-up power of baneling drops on an army. If the Protoss has Sentries or HTs in his army, they will die, period. There is no way for him to micro them. Furthermore, him spreading his units out works in your favor, because Zerg units require a lot of surface area to do damage. Finally, they force the Protoss to abandon his position, which is often critical, if he was set up in some kind of choke. Seriously, they're good. As a Masters' Protoss on EU, I find baneling drops the most terrifying thing a Zerg can do, worse than even Infestors. | ||
|
Hollis
United States505 Posts
On September 11 2011 10:07 Excludos wrote: I've read all of your posts, but they all basically comes down to the line above "Protoss needs to suck and not move his units for bling drop to work". Explain to me again what the 3 spells an infestor can use is? I believe one of them could be, and have been, incredibly useful to stop the protoss army from "microing away". Please stop theorycrafting. You clearly do not know anything about this game to say that "bling drop has a 0% win chance", when its nearly what every single pro zerg player is doing at the moment. I'm sure they're all using inferior strategies.. you haven't read all my posts, because i directly addressed using fungal in conjunction with bane rain. tldr: gas investment too much to make it cost efficient, although if you're already ahead it could work fine (and if you're ahead there are better strats) and what do you want me to say to your second part? you're basically just calling me a noob. i don't see "all pro zergs" using bane rain vs protoss. i see some of them experimenting with it (not much anymore), and i see that it only works when the protoss doesn't micro properly. note that i recognize it's great vs: a) zealot or sentry-based armies and b) worker lines. against stalker armies - especially with blink - the chance of it being cost efficient is just way too small. | ||
|
Dalguno
United States2446 Posts
| ||
|
xbankx
703 Posts
On September 11 2011 09:59 Big J wrote: Bling drops are great, but I agree with Hollis, that it is really sad, that most zerg strategies rely on your opponent not microing perfect. Infestors give zerg the ability to counteract micro and micro themselves. Banelings don't. You spread them and drop them, but in the end it comes down to you either being already ahead, so even the best splitting, blinking and forcefielding doesn't help, or your opponent making a micromistake. But it just never feels like it is up to you, to win a battle. yet I think a major part of bling drops is not the dropping itself, but rather the army that supports the drops. Because if you attack with speedroaches and drops, he will have to spread vs drops, which strenghtens roaches, because they are great in low supply battles. So your semiroach army does just better vs split units, if he doesn't split he loses to the drops, and if he runs away your roach/drop combo can chase him to his base, where he has to fight or lose. No1 micros perfectly/. According to you, why ever bother make baneling against terran. If terran micros perfectly, he can dodge every single baneling. This is a strategy game. Every move you make can be countered by move your opponments makes. Baneling drops is no different. Muta harass is no different. The thing is baneling drops forces toss to micro and well if he micros better than you, you lose. If you better than him, you win. | ||
|
tsuxiit
1305 Posts
| ||
|
GinDo
3327 Posts
On September 11 2011 10:07 Hierarch wrote: Tanks and immortals are the two units that come to mind that would still be worth NP ing As much as I like the nerf, since C. Ships are more viable now. NP is pretty useless in the sence that FG is so much better that its always better to FG then to NP a Tank or Immortal. | ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
On September 11 2011 10:07 Hierarch wrote: Tanks and immortals are the two units that come to mind that would still be worth NP ing and opponent casters, it might be ultra hard to get off, since the cast has a small delay. But people manage to snipe templars, which should be impossible because of feedback. (same range but 2 snipes needed compard to one feedback). And people love to send in their casters first sometimes. But well neural+fungal always bugged me a little. Since the fungal can keep everything out of the infestors range that is using neural. So outrangeing would be important, which for a terran would be tanks. But the army is still pretty limited in its movement to highest range in your army - 8.5. Moving ahead that slowly (well there are nukes) gives the zerg to much time and broodlords decrease that even more. But i guess a skill of a 2 supply unit blocking a 6 supply unit, that can be protected for 8 seconds by another 2 supply unit + add lots of damage to the opponent in that time, sounds abit overpowered if you think about it. It might hurt against colossi, but it enables alot of other units against zerg again, which makes the game better. Think thats a fair tradeoff (colossi haven't been a problem lately for zerg(without neural), ptr will show if that changes now :3 ) I wouldn't mind though if they add a skill called multiple minds, that blocks the neurals control. Would affect almost every massiv unit, except broods thors and colossi and ultralisks (which already have frenzy). On the other hand neural controls the body not the mind, so massiv units could simply be to massiv (need 2 then ?  ).Anyway i will always take a nerf over the other possibilities to make up for the problems with the infestors. (supply cost increase) | ||
|
Elefanto
Switzerland3584 Posts
On September 11 2011 10:45 FeyFey wrote: and opponent casters, it might be ultra hard to get off, since the cast has a small delay. But people manage to snipe templars, which should be impossible because of feedback. (same range but 2 snipes needed compard to one feedback). And people love to send in their casters first sometimes. That's not true, snipe has a range of 10, feedback 9. | ||
| ||
