|
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 17 2011 18:01 Ryder. wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2011 17:51 Pixel. wrote:
I think the change is good for zvp. but I am thinking about zvt, how can zerg win the late game against ghost/tank. There is no way to use NP after the patch on there ghost because emp/snipe have way longer range :/ And then we dont even talk about the tanks. With the range nerf its will kill the late game of zvt. I don't understand, zergs were whining originally because NP couldn't be used on massive, and apparently the only units worth NPing were massive, and NPing immortals, seige tanks, ghosts and HT wasn't worth it. Now that the original change was reverted and NP range was reduced from 9 to 7, zergs are suddenly saying that now they can't EMP tanks and ghosts because the range is too short, so now zerg is gonna be horribly helpless in the late game. Weren't these units not worth NPing in the first place? Why is it suddenly such a problem that you can't NP ghosts all of a sudden? Sounds like people just like whining for the sake of whining...
nicely said
for me NP nerf will end spamming it against colosi, so with good micro you still can NP colosus and with good micro protoss can avoid that
|
On September 17 2011 17:59 Linoge20 wrote:
Long time reader, first time poster. ( So stupid but I always wanted to write this :D)
I am a zerg who just got into playing again I have though been watching alot of starcraft 2 though. So my opinion is more or less worthless. But I did see one thing here that makes me feel a little concerned. NP is at a range of 7 while feedback is at a range of 10. Now I am just a Diamon/plat scrub. But, Doesn't this mean that the protoss can keep his templar behind his colossus and still feedback the infestors, before NP goes off ? We are talking about a difference in 3 range which is a big deal imo.
I don't know, it might not be a big deal, maybe someone here who is way better then me can think about this for a few minutes.
I do see that the range is also a problem without taking into account ghosts and templars, but then it comes down to straight micro and positioning. Which will be harder for zerg, but then again we are talking about Mc'ing one of their units it should be hard. But the templar thing seems to be a big problem.
Sorry about this being a bit chaotic hopefully someone can read through my mess and come up with something.
Isn't that the point? Obviously Blizzard feel that the ability gives Zerg too much of an edge in the match up and the goal of the nerf is to make it difficult to NP Colossus.
The change before this was that you couldn't NP Massive at all, if they feel that strongly about the ability then whatever they eventually decide on will still be a pretty harsh nerf.
I don't think the change to NP from not able to target massive to 7 range was meant to be any less of a nerf
|
On September 17 2011 18:01 Ryder. wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2011 17:51 Pixel. wrote:
I think the change is good for zvp. but I am thinking about zvt, how can zerg win the late game against ghost/tank. There is no way to use NP after the patch on there ghost because emp/snipe have way longer range :/ And then we dont even talk about the tanks. With the range nerf its will kill the late game of zvt. I don't understand, zergs were whining originally because NP couldn't be used on massive, and apparently the only units worth NPing were massive, and NPing immortals, seige tanks, ghosts and HT wasn't worth it. Now that the original change was reverted and NP range was reduced from 9 to 7, zergs are suddenly saying that now they can't EMP tanks and ghosts because the range is too short, so now zerg is gonna be horribly helpless in the late game. Weren't these units not worth NPing in the first place? Why is it suddenly such a problem that you can't NP ghosts all of a sudden? Sounds like people just like whining for the sake of whining...
There is 4 units that really worth NP-ig. These 4 are: Mothership, Thor, Siege Tank and Collos. NP which doesn't work on Massive would really destroy the whole spell (Think about that, the only unit would worth it is Siege Tank). I think -3 range is still MUCH better than the first NP change, but it will be problematic to NP tanks due to the range nerf. The problem with this change that it will affect ZvT more than ZvP whereas the T is favored in TvZ and zerg is favored in ZvP, so this change won't fix anything, only creating bigger imbalance in TvZ.
|
On September 17 2011 18:15 YaShock wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2011 18:01 Ryder. wrote:On September 17 2011 17:51 Pixel. wrote:
I think the change is good for zvp. but I am thinking about zvt, how can zerg win the late game against ghost/tank. There is no way to use NP after the patch on there ghost because emp/snipe have way longer range :/ And then we dont even talk about the tanks. With the range nerf its will kill the late game of zvt. I don't understand, zergs were whining originally because NP couldn't be used on massive, and apparently the only units worth NPing were massive, and NPing immortals, seige tanks, ghosts and HT wasn't worth it. Now that the original change was reverted and NP range was reduced from 9 to 7, zergs are suddenly saying that now they can't EMP tanks and ghosts because the range is too short, so now zerg is gonna be horribly helpless in the late game. Weren't these units not worth NPing in the first place? Why is it suddenly such a problem that you can't NP ghosts all of a sudden? Sounds like people just like whining for the sake of whining... There is 4 units that really worth NP-ig. These 4 are: Mothership, Thor, Siege Tank and Collos. NP which doesn't work on Massive would really destroy the whole spell (Think about that, the only unit would worth it is Siege Tank). I think -3 range is still MUCH better than the first NP change, but it will be problematic to NP tanks due to the range nerf. The problem with this change that it will affect ZvT more than ZvP whereas the T is favored in TvZ and zerg is favored in ZvP, so this change won't fix anything, only creating bigger imbalance in TvZ.
See, this is what I don't get. Watching Stephano play, whenever he goes to NP tanks he gets very close with his Infestors, they are almost never at 9range. I don't tend to watch a lot of TvZ so maybe this is just a one off thing, but would this change be that big of a problem in TvZ? At least from the games I watch It really doesn't look like it will be a huge issue.
|
On September 17 2011 17:47 Heavenly wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2011 17:23 Big J wrote:On September 17 2011 17:01 kheldorin wrote:On September 17 2011 16:07 Big J wrote:On September 17 2011 11:40 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On September 17 2011 10:45 Falcor wrote:On September 17 2011 10:34 AIRwar wrote:On September 17 2011 10:30 Xequecal wrote:
Guys, the idea behind range 7 is to make NPing colossi basically impossible, while still allowing thors to be NPed, That was the big problem with the massive change, thor/hellion was ridiculous.
Protoss need their colossi to function because they don't have a super-strong base unit like the marine or roach. Roaches utterly annihilate any combination of Protoss ground units that doesn't include colossus. This. Everyone listen to this person because he's smarter than most of you. except why should protoss in every situation just make colli? Why are colli better at killing roaches when immortal was built to kill roach/tanks/thor?? Protoss gateway units are pitiful. They are weak because of the Warpgate mechanic. I know I'm stating news from Feb. 2010, but Protoss needs something on the field to compensate. As army supplies grow, Protoss has more of those weaker gateway units, while the enemy's Tier 1-2, which is better, continues to bolster the enemy's army's power at a faster pace. Basically, the larger the armies grow, the worse off Protoss is. The issue with Immortals is you won't have enough. It's not like you're going to have 12 Immortals on the field. I'm the type who gets double robo once on a 3rd base, and I never have that many Immortals, and I love immortals. While robust, Immortals can easily be extinguished and they don't do splash damage... when most of the army is Tier 1 that is bad compared to the enemy's counterpart. Not having splash damage to compensate for a weaker army (nevermind to counteract Zerg splash damage from FG) is suicidal. The Protoss chose something different, they chose the impossible, they chose.... RAPTURE! uhh I mean COLOSSI! A unit where the Stalker would not fear the Hydra, where the army would not be bound by petty Fungal Growth, where the mighty Protoss would not be constrained by the Zerg. And with your minerals and gas, Colossus can become your unit as well! That's where the Colossi come in. Their good range and splash damage allow Protoss to fight effectively in the mid-late game. However, the Colossi are still very vulnerable to air-to-air units, Roach and Stim sprints, and other things well known by now. Fact of the matter is a Protoss without Tier 3 is a dead Protoss. They need Colossi and/or HT in most situations. Some things: The Stalker doesn't fear the Hydra. When will Protoss Players finally get that Stalkers beat the crap out of hydras, as long as you blink them. Additionally Stalkers are way more mobile. Yeah we get it, noone will ever build an OK unit like an immortal, when there is a "if I get 3 of this and he doesn't react perfectly I've won"-button right next to it. Upgraded Gateway Strategies are AWESOME... If you want to see HOW weak Gateway Units are, go to Unit test map and let them rape some other army compositions... Uhmm...Protoss players do go to the Unit Test to try it out. With equal upgrades, gateway units are weak. The math works out too. There is no reason why upgrades favor Protoss more than any other race. Protoss units are weaker because of the gateway mechanic and forcefields. Their weakness is balanced on the fact that Protoss army would not be fighing the entire enemy army due to forcefields. Again, you can try it out on the unit tester with an open field. WIth just gateway units and 1 round of forcefields, you barely break even. The reason why you think that stalkers beat hydra is that the blink stalker +1 timing attack hits when the hydra count is still low. But if you have spent equal amount of resources with a high supply count, hydras beat stalker easily. Which is obviously why, collosi are needed. Try going pure stalkers vs hyrdra/ling or hydra/roach. It's pathetic. do: 9 blinkstalkers = 1125/450 + 150/150 10 rangehydralisks = 1000/500 + 150/150 and blink single or small groups of stalkers... And you can do this with bigger or smaller amounts as well, the result is always the same: Stalkers win. In bigger ratios you can also add in 1-2 sentries just for the guardian shield... Not that I think, that gateway units rip everything zerg has, but of all the zerg units, the hydralisk is one of the worse anti gateway units... Hydra/ling works because of the zergling... THAT is a gateway killer! (once you get around the forcefields) Compare stalker versus marauder in a unit tester. Fortunately in real games it doesn't come down to pure stalker versus pure marauder, you add in chargelots, hts, etc. Zerglings are the equivalent of zealots in that they tank and deal decent DPS if they come into melee range. It's also easier for zerg to get 1000/500 than 1125/450 so the comparison is pointless because the protoss minerals and gas are more "precious" because you get less.
READ THE QUOTES BEFORE YOU WRITE USELESS STUFF
I never said that it comes down to pure hydra vs stalkers. I just said that hydras countering stalkers is bullshit.
Furthermore I hope you're not playing Protoss, because from what you write it sounds like you would have a serious macro problem...
|
On September 17 2011 18:01 Ryder. wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2011 17:51 Pixel. wrote:
I think the change is good for zvp. but I am thinking about zvt, how can zerg win the late game against ghost/tank. There is no way to use NP after the patch on there ghost because emp/snipe have way longer range :/ And then we dont even talk about the tanks. With the range nerf its will kill the late game of zvt. I don't understand, zergs were whining originally because NP couldn't be used on massive, and apparently the only units worth NPing were massive, and NPing immortals, seige tanks, ghosts and HT wasn't worth it. Now that the original change was reverted and NP range was reduced from 9 to 7, zergs are suddenly saying that now they can't EMP tanks and ghosts because the range is too short, so now zerg is gonna be horribly helpless in the late game. Weren't these units not worth NPing in the first place? Why is it suddenly such a problem that you can't NP ghosts all of a sudden? Sounds like people just like whining for the sake of whining...
Lol I never whined about the first change, Like that one more then this nerf. And I already say that I think its good for ZVP. U just dont understand the late game of zerg vs terran.
|
On September 17 2011 18:14 Dommk wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2011 17:59 Linoge20 wrote:
Long time reader, first time poster. ( So stupid but I always wanted to write this :D)
I am a zerg who just got into playing again I have though been watching alot of starcraft 2 though. So my opinion is more or less worthless. But I did see one thing here that makes me feel a little concerned. NP is at a range of 7 while feedback is at a range of 10. Now I am just a Diamon/plat scrub. But, Doesn't this mean that the protoss can keep his templar behind his colossus and still feedback the infestors, before NP goes off ? We are talking about a difference in 3 range which is a big deal imo.
I don't know, it might not be a big deal, maybe someone here who is way better then me can think about this for a few minutes.
I do see that the range is also a problem without taking into account ghosts and templars, but then it comes down to straight micro and positioning. Which will be harder for zerg, but then again we are talking about Mc'ing one of their units it should be hard. But the templar thing seems to be a big problem.
Sorry about this being a bit chaotic hopefully someone can read through my mess and come up with something. Isn't that the point? Obviously Blizzard feel that the ability gives Zerg too much of an edge in the match up and the goal of the nerf is to make it difficult to NP Colossus. The change before this was that you couldn't NP Massive at all, if they feel that strongly about the ability then whatever they eventually decide on will still be a pretty harsh nerf. I don't think the change to NP from not able to target massive to 7 range was meant to be any less of a nerf
Yeah I know, but how are we gonna deal with the deathball ? Before the infestor buff we died to it ( I am talking about the Colossus/voidray deathball) Back when I was a diamond player, before master league, that was the number one killer of zerg. But then came infestors with fungle and np to save the day. I can see that they are buffing the build time of ultras but is that enough ?
|
On September 17 2011 18:21 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2011 17:47 Heavenly wrote:On September 17 2011 17:23 Big J wrote:On September 17 2011 17:01 kheldorin wrote:On September 17 2011 16:07 Big J wrote:On September 17 2011 11:40 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On September 17 2011 10:45 Falcor wrote:On September 17 2011 10:34 AIRwar wrote:On September 17 2011 10:30 Xequecal wrote:
Guys, the idea behind range 7 is to make NPing colossi basically impossible, while still allowing thors to be NPed, That was the big problem with the massive change, thor/hellion was ridiculous.
Protoss need their colossi to function because they don't have a super-strong base unit like the marine or roach. Roaches utterly annihilate any combination of Protoss ground units that doesn't include colossus. This. Everyone listen to this person because he's smarter than most of you. except why should protoss in every situation just make colli? Why are colli better at killing roaches when immortal was built to kill roach/tanks/thor?? Protoss gateway units are pitiful. They are weak because of the Warpgate mechanic. I know I'm stating news from Feb. 2010, but Protoss needs something on the field to compensate. As army supplies grow, Protoss has more of those weaker gateway units, while the enemy's Tier 1-2, which is better, continues to bolster the enemy's army's power at a faster pace. Basically, the larger the armies grow, the worse off Protoss is. The issue with Immortals is you won't have enough. It's not like you're going to have 12 Immortals on the field. I'm the type who gets double robo once on a 3rd base, and I never have that many Immortals, and I love immortals. While robust, Immortals can easily be extinguished and they don't do splash damage... when most of the army is Tier 1 that is bad compared to the enemy's counterpart. Not having splash damage to compensate for a weaker army (nevermind to counteract Zerg splash damage from FG) is suicidal. The Protoss chose something different, they chose the impossible, they chose.... RAPTURE! uhh I mean COLOSSI! A unit where the Stalker would not fear the Hydra, where the army would not be bound by petty Fungal Growth, where the mighty Protoss would not be constrained by the Zerg. And with your minerals and gas, Colossus can become your unit as well! That's where the Colossi come in. Their good range and splash damage allow Protoss to fight effectively in the mid-late game. However, the Colossi are still very vulnerable to air-to-air units, Roach and Stim sprints, and other things well known by now. Fact of the matter is a Protoss without Tier 3 is a dead Protoss. They need Colossi and/or HT in most situations. Some things: The Stalker doesn't fear the Hydra. When will Protoss Players finally get that Stalkers beat the crap out of hydras, as long as you blink them. Additionally Stalkers are way more mobile. Yeah we get it, noone will ever build an OK unit like an immortal, when there is a "if I get 3 of this and he doesn't react perfectly I've won"-button right next to it. Upgraded Gateway Strategies are AWESOME... If you want to see HOW weak Gateway Units are, go to Unit test map and let them rape some other army compositions... Uhmm...Protoss players do go to the Unit Test to try it out. With equal upgrades, gateway units are weak. The math works out too. There is no reason why upgrades favor Protoss more than any other race. Protoss units are weaker because of the gateway mechanic and forcefields. Their weakness is balanced on the fact that Protoss army would not be fighing the entire enemy army due to forcefields. Again, you can try it out on the unit tester with an open field. WIth just gateway units and 1 round of forcefields, you barely break even. The reason why you think that stalkers beat hydra is that the blink stalker +1 timing attack hits when the hydra count is still low. But if you have spent equal amount of resources with a high supply count, hydras beat stalker easily. Which is obviously why, collosi are needed. Try going pure stalkers vs hyrdra/ling or hydra/roach. It's pathetic. do: 9 blinkstalkers = 1125/450 + 150/150 10 rangehydralisks = 1000/500 + 150/150 and blink single or small groups of stalkers... And you can do this with bigger or smaller amounts as well, the result is always the same: Stalkers win. In bigger ratios you can also add in 1-2 sentries just for the guardian shield... Not that I think, that gateway units rip everything zerg has, but of all the zerg units, the hydralisk is one of the worse anti gateway units... Hydra/ling works because of the zergling... THAT is a gateway killer! (once you get around the forcefields) Compare stalker versus marauder in a unit tester. Fortunately in real games it doesn't come down to pure stalker versus pure marauder, you add in chargelots, hts, etc. Zerglings are the equivalent of zealots in that they tank and deal decent DPS if they come into melee range. It's also easier for zerg to get 1000/500 than 1125/450 so the comparison is pointless because the protoss minerals and gas are more "precious" because you get less. READ THE QUOTES BEFORE YOU WRITE USELESS STUFF I never said that it comes down to pure hydra vs stalkers. I just said that hydras countering stalkers is bullshit. Furthermore I hope you're not playing Protoss, because from what you write it sounds like you would have a serious macro problem...
You wrote worthless theorycraft as well, and I explained why it's worthless theorycraft.
As for your second statement, try looking at a pro game and looking at the income tab? Zerg has a higher income in any standard game.
|
On September 17 2011 18:25 Linoge20 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2011 18:14 Dommk wrote:On September 17 2011 17:59 Linoge20 wrote:
Long time reader, first time poster. ( So stupid but I always wanted to write this :D)
I am a zerg who just got into playing again I have though been watching alot of starcraft 2 though. So my opinion is more or less worthless. But I did see one thing here that makes me feel a little concerned. NP is at a range of 7 while feedback is at a range of 10. Now I am just a Diamon/plat scrub. But, Doesn't this mean that the protoss can keep his templar behind his colossus and still feedback the infestors, before NP goes off ? We are talking about a difference in 3 range which is a big deal imo.
I don't know, it might not be a big deal, maybe someone here who is way better then me can think about this for a few minutes.
I do see that the range is also a problem without taking into account ghosts and templars, but then it comes down to straight micro and positioning. Which will be harder for zerg, but then again we are talking about Mc'ing one of their units it should be hard. But the templar thing seems to be a big problem.
Sorry about this being a bit chaotic hopefully someone can read through my mess and come up with something. Isn't that the point? Obviously Blizzard feel that the ability gives Zerg too much of an edge in the match up and the goal of the nerf is to make it difficult to NP Colossus. The change before this was that you couldn't NP Massive at all, if they feel that strongly about the ability then whatever they eventually decide on will still be a pretty harsh nerf. I don't think the change to NP from not able to target massive to 7 range was meant to be any less of a nerf Yeah I know, but how are we gonna deal with the deathball ? Before the infestor buff we died to it ( I am talking about the Colossus/voidray deathball) Back when I was a diamond player, before master league, that was the number one killer of zerg. But then came infestors with fungle and np to save the day. I can see that they are buffing the build time of ultras but is that enough ?
You rarely see NP being used in GSL but Zerg still rolls over Protoss :o
If they make a nerf this big, then I'm pretty sure Blizzard must be pretty confident that Zerg are capable of dealing with the Deathball, otherwies you would have seen more changes. I mean, the NP change is on top of a fungal growth nerf as well...
|
1. What unit changed ZvP and made ZvP winnable for zerg?
2. What is blizzard doing to it now?
3. What will happen next?
1. Infestor.
2. Nerfing it.
3. Roach/Hydra/Corruptor.
|
On September 17 2011 18:41 Olsson wrote:
1. What unit changed ZvP and made ZvP winnable for zerg?
2. What is blizzard doing to it now?
3. What will happen next?
1. Infestor.
2. Nerfing it.
3. Roach/Hydra/Corruptor.
Yeah bro, brb reverting back to January a-moving roach/hydra/corruptor because neural parasite which was almost never used in high level games has been nerfed.
1. What race has been losing internationally versus zerg in the matchup since April?
1. Not terran.
Btw I like how these discussion threads are always PvZ ragefests (which are fun though). Terrans know better than to get involved so they just let both races vent against each other, then Blizzard sees the community discussions on forums and things like State of the Game (which always seems to be about protoss and zerg) so they switch stuff with the PvZ matchup. Then terran loses 5 seconds on barracks build time and one obscenely powerful unit get nerfed, then get a couple other buffs. Tricky terrans.
|
On September 17 2011 18:41 Olsson wrote:
1. What unit changed ZvP and made ZvP winnable for zerg?
2. What is blizzard doing to it now?
3. What will happen next?
1. Infestor.
2. Nerfing it.
3. Roach/Hydra/Corruptor.
But that's wrong.
PvZ became much easier because every protoss aggressiv opening has been nerfed.
Warpgate timing and spore root time made it almost impossible to pressure a zerg after a forge fast expand.
Watch Korean PvZ, they don't need the infestor to absolutely murder Protoss.
Foreigner Zergs are using heavily Infestors, because they are piss easy to use and
don't require any understanding of the game at all, because infestors molest everything.
|
On September 17 2011 11:04 Falcor wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2011 11:01 Tump wrote:On September 17 2011 10:45 Falcor wrote:On September 17 2011 10:34 AIRwar wrote:On September 17 2011 10:30 Xequecal wrote:
Guys, the idea behind range 7 is to make NPing colossi basically impossible, while still allowing thors to be NPed, That was the big problem with the massive change, thor/hellion was ridiculous.
Protoss need their colossi to function because they don't have a super-strong base unit like the marine or roach. Roaches utterly annihilate any combination of Protoss ground units that doesn't include colossus. This. Everyone listen to this person because he's smarter than most of you. except why should protoss in every situation just make colli? Why are colli better at killing roaches when immortal was built to kill roach/tanks/thor?? Splash damage? Immortals are nice for smaller fights, but huge supply fights Colossus are really nice...and splash damage synergy with forcefield is pretty great. it was a rhetorical question....there shouldnt be 1 unit you get no matter what. Which was why infestors were a problem before the patch imo.
Do be fair, protoss players always build probes. And I don't know of any protoss strategies that don't include at least 1 stalker or at least 1 zealot.
|
anyone know when this patch is goign to be realised??
|
On September 17 2011 18:15 YaShock wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2011 18:01 Ryder. wrote:On September 17 2011 17:51 Pixel. wrote:
I think the change is good for zvp. but I am thinking about zvt, how can zerg win the late game against ghost/tank. There is no way to use NP after the patch on there ghost because emp/snipe have way longer range :/ And then we dont even talk about the tanks. With the range nerf its will kill the late game of zvt. I don't understand, zergs were whining originally because NP couldn't be used on massive, and apparently the only units worth NPing were massive, and NPing immortals, seige tanks, ghosts and HT wasn't worth it. Now that the original change was reverted and NP range was reduced from 9 to 7, zergs are suddenly saying that now they can't EMP tanks and ghosts because the range is too short, so now zerg is gonna be horribly helpless in the late game. Weren't these units not worth NPing in the first place? Why is it suddenly such a problem that you can't NP ghosts all of a sudden? Sounds like people just like whining for the sake of whining... There is 4 units that really worth NP-ig. These 4 are: Mothership, Thor, Siege Tank and Collos. NP which doesn't work on Massive would really destroy the whole spell (Think about that, the only unit would worth it is Siege Tank). I think -3 range is still MUCH better than the first NP change, but it will be problematic to NP tanks due to the range nerf. The problem with this change that it will affect ZvT more than ZvP whereas the T is favored in TvZ and zerg is favored in ZvP, so this change won't fix anything, only creating bigger imbalance in TvZ.
-2 range, ffs guys is it really hard to actually ensure what you are saying is the truth before you say it?
|
On September 09 2011 17:25 Imalengrat wrote:
Honestly...It might of being cool if the change involved the range of the Neural lower, instead of just making it useless against the units it was designed for. Change it to like 6 or 5 but don't destroy the ability all together.
I'm not a massive fan of quoting myself but...awesome.
|
On September 17 2011 18:33 Dommk wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2011 18:25 Linoge20 wrote:On September 17 2011 18:14 Dommk wrote:On September 17 2011 17:59 Linoge20 wrote:
Long time reader, first time poster. ( So stupid but I always wanted to write this :D)
I am a zerg who just got into playing again I have though been watching alot of starcraft 2 though. So my opinion is more or less worthless. But I did see one thing here that makes me feel a little concerned. NP is at a range of 7 while feedback is at a range of 10. Now I am just a Diamon/plat scrub. But, Doesn't this mean that the protoss can keep his templar behind his colossus and still feedback the infestors, before NP goes off ? We are talking about a difference in 3 range which is a big deal imo.
I don't know, it might not be a big deal, maybe someone here who is way better then me can think about this for a few minutes.
I do see that the range is also a problem without taking into account ghosts and templars, but then it comes down to straight micro and positioning. Which will be harder for zerg, but then again we are talking about Mc'ing one of their units it should be hard. But the templar thing seems to be a big problem.
Sorry about this being a bit chaotic hopefully someone can read through my mess and come up with something. Isn't that the point? Obviously Blizzard feel that the ability gives Zerg too much of an edge in the match up and the goal of the nerf is to make it difficult to NP Colossus. The change before this was that you couldn't NP Massive at all, if they feel that strongly about the ability then whatever they eventually decide on will still be a pretty harsh nerf. I don't think the change to NP from not able to target massive to 7 range was meant to be any less of a nerf Yeah I know, but how are we gonna deal with the deathball ? Before the infestor buff we died to it ( I am talking about the Colossus/voidray deathball) Back when I was a diamond player, before master league, that was the number one killer of zerg. But then came infestors with fungle and np to save the day. I can see that they are buffing the build time of ultras but is that enough ? You rarely see NP being used in GSL but Zerg still rolls over Protoss :o If they make a nerf this big, then I'm pretty sure Blizzard must be pretty confident that Zerg are capable of dealing with the Deathball, otherwies you would have seen more changes. I mean, the NP change is on top of a fungal growth nerf as well...
I don't watch that much GSL 
But yeah I know that fungal is being nerfed as-well, which is also cause for concern. I stated many times that I am bad so I don't know how to overcome this.
It's kinda funny because I am discussing something that I am not qualified for, yet I still do it. Must of my games are won because of macro and not unit comp. So it's kinda pointless for me to even speculate on it. I won against pure mech with only zerglings/banes. He thought I would go muta's and built alot of turrets and I just a-moved into his base and army causing me to win.
Is there somewhere I can see what the pro's opinion is on the changes ?
|
On September 17 2011 18:30 Heavenly wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2011 18:21 Big J wrote:On September 17 2011 17:47 Heavenly wrote:On September 17 2011 17:23 Big J wrote:On September 17 2011 17:01 kheldorin wrote:On September 17 2011 16:07 Big J wrote:On September 17 2011 11:40 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On September 17 2011 10:45 Falcor wrote:On September 17 2011 10:34 AIRwar wrote:On September 17 2011 10:30 Xequecal wrote:
Guys, the idea behind range 7 is to make NPing colossi basically impossible, while still allowing thors to be NPed, That was the big problem with the massive change, thor/hellion was ridiculous.
Protoss need their colossi to function because they don't have a super-strong base unit like the marine or roach. Roaches utterly annihilate any combination of Protoss ground units that doesn't include colossus. This. Everyone listen to this person because he's smarter than most of you. except why should protoss in every situation just make colli? Why are colli better at killing roaches when immortal was built to kill roach/tanks/thor?? Protoss gateway units are pitiful. They are weak because of the Warpgate mechanic. I know I'm stating news from Feb. 2010, but Protoss needs something on the field to compensate. As army supplies grow, Protoss has more of those weaker gateway units, while the enemy's Tier 1-2, which is better, continues to bolster the enemy's army's power at a faster pace. Basically, the larger the armies grow, the worse off Protoss is. The issue with Immortals is you won't have enough. It's not like you're going to have 12 Immortals on the field. I'm the type who gets double robo once on a 3rd base, and I never have that many Immortals, and I love immortals. While robust, Immortals can easily be extinguished and they don't do splash damage... when most of the army is Tier 1 that is bad compared to the enemy's counterpart. Not having splash damage to compensate for a weaker army (nevermind to counteract Zerg splash damage from FG) is suicidal. The Protoss chose something different, they chose the impossible, they chose.... RAPTURE! uhh I mean COLOSSI! A unit where the Stalker would not fear the Hydra, where the army would not be bound by petty Fungal Growth, where the mighty Protoss would not be constrained by the Zerg. And with your minerals and gas, Colossus can become your unit as well! That's where the Colossi come in. Their good range and splash damage allow Protoss to fight effectively in the mid-late game. However, the Colossi are still very vulnerable to air-to-air units, Roach and Stim sprints, and other things well known by now. Fact of the matter is a Protoss without Tier 3 is a dead Protoss. They need Colossi and/or HT in most situations. Some things: The Stalker doesn't fear the Hydra. When will Protoss Players finally get that Stalkers beat the crap out of hydras, as long as you blink them. Additionally Stalkers are way more mobile. Yeah we get it, noone will ever build an OK unit like an immortal, when there is a "if I get 3 of this and he doesn't react perfectly I've won"-button right next to it. Upgraded Gateway Strategies are AWESOME... If you want to see HOW weak Gateway Units are, go to Unit test map and let them rape some other army compositions... Uhmm...Protoss players do go to the Unit Test to try it out. With equal upgrades, gateway units are weak. The math works out too. There is no reason why upgrades favor Protoss more than any other race. Protoss units are weaker because of the gateway mechanic and forcefields. Their weakness is balanced on the fact that Protoss army would not be fighing the entire enemy army due to forcefields. Again, you can try it out on the unit tester with an open field. WIth just gateway units and 1 round of forcefields, you barely break even. The reason why you think that stalkers beat hydra is that the blink stalker +1 timing attack hits when the hydra count is still low. But if you have spent equal amount of resources with a high supply count, hydras beat stalker easily. Which is obviously why, collosi are needed. Try going pure stalkers vs hyrdra/ling or hydra/roach. It's pathetic. do: 9 blinkstalkers = 1125/450 + 150/150 10 rangehydralisks = 1000/500 + 150/150 and blink single or small groups of stalkers... And you can do this with bigger or smaller amounts as well, the result is always the same: Stalkers win. In bigger ratios you can also add in 1-2 sentries just for the guardian shield... Not that I think, that gateway units rip everything zerg has, but of all the zerg units, the hydralisk is one of the worse anti gateway units... Hydra/ling works because of the zergling... THAT is a gateway killer! (once you get around the forcefields) Compare stalker versus marauder in a unit tester. Fortunately in real games it doesn't come down to pure stalker versus pure marauder, you add in chargelots, hts, etc. Zerglings are the equivalent of zealots in that they tank and deal decent DPS if they come into melee range. It's also easier for zerg to get 1000/500 than 1125/450 so the comparison is pointless because the protoss minerals and gas are more "precious" because you get less. READ THE QUOTES BEFORE YOU WRITE USELESS STUFF I never said that it comes down to pure hydra vs stalkers. I just said that hydras countering stalkers is bullshit. Furthermore I hope you're not playing Protoss, because from what you write it sounds like you would have a serious macro problem... You wrote worthless theorycraft as well, and I explained why it's worthless theorycraft. As for your second statement, try looking at a pro game and looking at the income tab? Zerg has a higher income in any standard game.
I simply responded to someone saying hydras kill stalkers and pointed out that it isn't that way and you can simply test it...
There are different phases in each game. Protoss has higher income than Zerg (20-25workers vs 15-20) until the second hatchery kicks in, which is between 5:30-6:30 , if P doesn't go FFE or Nexus first. A 1gate expand will then still keep up with a Zerg until minute ~8.
True, an opening that is depending on Zergs reacting wrong to pressure (3gate) or one that is supposed to do damage early (stargate, DT), will start to fall behind against a macro zerg before that.
In case of a Nexus first or a FFE, Zerg usually catches up at around minute 8-10, depending on how much harass and corner cutting is going on. (amount of workers P cuts to build canons early, chronoboosting, 2 or 3 hatch zerg, stargate harass etc...)
Then there is usually the 3 base vs 2 base phase in which zerg gets an advantage of up to 10drones.
From there on it is a simple question of gameplan and composition, how many workers P and Z will have, as a roaching Zerg can't have too many drones (~60), due to the supply cap, while a Zerg that senses huge ecoplay by Protoss, may get up to around ~80-90drones at a time when P has 60-70.
|
On September 17 2011 20:03 Linoge20 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2011 18:33 Dommk wrote:On September 17 2011 18:25 Linoge20 wrote:On September 17 2011 18:14 Dommk wrote:On September 17 2011 17:59 Linoge20 wrote:
Long time reader, first time poster. ( So stupid but I always wanted to write this :D)
I am a zerg who just got into playing again I have though been watching alot of starcraft 2 though. So my opinion is more or less worthless. But I did see one thing here that makes me feel a little concerned. NP is at a range of 7 while feedback is at a range of 10. Now I am just a Diamon/plat scrub. But, Doesn't this mean that the protoss can keep his templar behind his colossus and still feedback the infestors, before NP goes off ? We are talking about a difference in 3 range which is a big deal imo.
I don't know, it might not be a big deal, maybe someone here who is way better then me can think about this for a few minutes.
I do see that the range is also a problem without taking into account ghosts and templars, but then it comes down to straight micro and positioning. Which will be harder for zerg, but then again we are talking about Mc'ing one of their units it should be hard. But the templar thing seems to be a big problem.
Sorry about this being a bit chaotic hopefully someone can read through my mess and come up with something. Isn't that the point? Obviously Blizzard feel that the ability gives Zerg too much of an edge in the match up and the goal of the nerf is to make it difficult to NP Colossus. The change before this was that you couldn't NP Massive at all, if they feel that strongly about the ability then whatever they eventually decide on will still be a pretty harsh nerf. I don't think the change to NP from not able to target massive to 7 range was meant to be any less of a nerf Yeah I know, but how are we gonna deal with the deathball ? Before the infestor buff we died to it ( I am talking about the Colossus/voidray deathball) Back when I was a diamond player, before master league, that was the number one killer of zerg. But then came infestors with fungle and np to save the day. I can see that they are buffing the build time of ultras but is that enough ? You rarely see NP being used in GSL but Zerg still rolls over Protoss :o If they make a nerf this big, then I'm pretty sure Blizzard must be pretty confident that Zerg are capable of dealing with the Deathball, otherwies you would have seen more changes. I mean, the NP change is on top of a fungal growth nerf as well... I don't watch that much GSL But yeah I know that fungal is being nerfed as-well, which is also cause for concern. I stated many times that I am bad so I don't know how to overcome this. It's kinda funny because I am discussing something that I am not qualified for, yet I still do it. Must of my games are won because of macro and not unit comp. So it's kinda pointless for me to even speculate on it. I won against pure mech with only zerglings/banes. He thought I would go muta's and built alot of turrets and I just a-moved into his base and army causing me to win. Is there somewhere I can see what the pro's opinion is on the changes ?
State of the game 49, the last 5-10mins:
+ Show Spoiler +Agreement that Protoss was destroying Zerg earlier. And now that Infestors got buffed and baneling drops and roach/ling rushes were developed, there is instantly a patch, before Protoss players really started to use a lot of new strategies, instead of deathballs.
I think they said something like, the Infestornerf might be necessary, but it comes way to early.
On the same day Destiny and Liquid'Shet both agreed during their charity 24hour stream, that they have huge troubles with Protoss players, that use a lot of warp prism harass.
|
On September 17 2011 18:44 Heavenly wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2011 18:41 Olsson wrote:
1. What unit changed ZvP and made ZvP winnable for zerg?
2. What is blizzard doing to it now?
3. What will happen next?
1. Infestor.
2. Nerfing it.
3. Roach/Hydra/Corruptor. Yeah bro, brb reverting back to January a-moving roach/hydra/corruptor because neural parasite which was almost never used in high level games has been nerfed. 1. What race has been losing internationally versus zerg in the matchup since April? 1. Not terran. Btw I like how these discussion threads are always PvZ ragefests (which are fun though). Terrans know better than to get involved so they just let both races vent against each other, then Blizzard sees the community discussions on forums and things like State of the Game (which always seems to be about protoss and zerg) so they switch stuff with the PvZ matchup. Then terran loses 5 seconds on barracks build time and one obscenely powerful unit get nerfed, then get a couple other buffs. Tricky terrans.
To be fair Terrans don't have much to complain about, and historically they almost never have.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
