|
On October 07 2021 04:51 Moopower wrote:
Can you explain your reasoning why you don't think it needs a change?
Yes, indeed I can. I don't think it needs balance cause I find the game way more fun than any other the way it is - in its current messy state with all the overpowered units. I don't care for statistics or for results, I don't like this player rather than that one, I just wanna enjoy the show. Whether Last, Flash, Effort, you name it, wins ASL, to me is irrelevant. If zerg beats protoss 60% of the time or 50% it's all the same to me - as long as the games are intriguing I'm coming along. Also, I like an underdog so whenever p beats a highly skilled z, it's even more rewarding for the p. So from my POV, I couldn't care less if z beats p more than the other way around; the game still generates fun and it is still largely unknown who the winner's going to be.
|
If one player can dominate the matchup (bisu), then there's no issue. Be better. Jealous said everything else that needed to be said.
|
its never only about 50% but about gameplay depth, if you don't find it that much fun or interesting you'll prob stop playing
|
Remember when the Bisu build was unbeatable we shoulda nerfed corsairs.
|
All PvZs that end before the midgame suck, unless you're new to the game and you've not seen all the all-ins (failed or not) or some random new thing dependent on map.
|
A few thoughts:
1. I think overall balance is fine. As brought up earlier, I think the top tier zergs right now are just better than the top tier protosses. People seem to forget that Best and Snow were considered bad and maybe even meme-level pvzers. For the longest time, they were PvT specialists. Without Bisu or Rain, I guess Mini has the best pvz but his approach doesn't seem super scalable.
2. However, I do think that the match-up has some annoying quirks. I hate watching hydra and ling busts (whether they work or not). It just feels so rng at the pro-level who wins. I.e. does a probe pick a good scout? I think that mid and even late game pvz are actually really balanced and awesome to watch. Maxed out zerg with dark swarm is scary, but protoss with 5 gas and storm + reaver is actually pretty resilient.
3. Is it possible to just prevent rush frequency by slightly increasing map dimension? I.e. if rush distance is increased, does this hurt any important parts of the game? I guess maybe TvP is impacted poorly since longer push distances is rough for T.
|
On October 08 2021 04:55 angry_maia wrote:
A few thoughts:
1. I think overall balance is fine. As brought up earlier, I think the top tier zergs right now are just better than the top tier protosses. People seem to forget that Best and Snow were considered bad and maybe even meme-level pvzers. For the longest time, they were PvT specialists. Without Bisu or Rain, I guess Mini has the best pvz but his approach doesn't seem super scalable.
2. However, I do think that the match-up has some annoying quirks. I hate watching hydra and ling busts (whether they work or not). It just feels so rng at the pro-level who wins. I.e. does a probe pick a good scout? I think that mid and even late game pvz are actually really balanced and awesome to watch. Maxed out zerg with dark swarm is scary, but protoss with 5 gas and storm + reaver is actually pretty resilient.
3. Is it possible to just prevent rush frequency by slightly increasing map dimension? I.e. if rush distance is increased, does this hurt any important parts of the game? I guess maybe TvP is impacted poorly since longer push distances is rough for T.
Someone earlier in the thread asked "what is the ideal PvZ map" or something similar. I wrote up a ridiculous response just for fun and then deleted it because it was a bit shitposty, but here are my honest thoughts:
I don't think a long rush distance is absolutely necessary. I think that the solution (keep in mind, I am not saying there is necessarily a problem) is more 2 player maps that are harder for Zerg to split 60/40.
4 player maps make it harder to scout cheeses, and make it easier for Zerg to take a second main/nat. Maps like FS and CB allow for Zerg to effectively split the map 60/40 assuming everything goes their way, which isn't necessarily horrible balance as Zergs do need more bases. If we're talking about how to make the map more Protoss-favored, then I believe that there should be a way to make it 55/45 or 50/50 quite easily in a way that won't break the other match-ups too much.
I've long believed that 3 player maps are inherently Zerg favored due to the presence of the second main, thus further aiding that 60/40 divide. There are some exceptions, of course, and taking the second main on 3 player maps as an initial priority is not as common as it used to be IMO. However, for our purposes, let's focus on 2 player maps.
There is not much reason for lengthening the rush distance on 2 player maps because scouting, particularly scouting Zerg, is made much easier (since they aren't going to be proxying buildings). This also avoids the issue you present concerning PvT (although terrain is another deciding factor here). This isn't to say that long rush distance can't be used; Benzene is an example of a map that I feel is pretty decent for PvZ, for example. An example of a 2 player map with a relatively normal rush distance is Blue Storm, which solved the issue in a pretty interesting way, especially for the time.
I could go on and on about this but TL;DR I don't think map makers would be limited to manipulating rush distance in order to make P favored maps. There are plenty of features which can be added/removed/played around with to create more favorable scenarios for Protoss in the early game.
|
Map size would be interesting to play with tbh could be hard for T though yeah not sure would be interesting to see a 192x192 map on pro level wouldn't it^^ see how it goes. Not sure it would be any better for p vs z though but i just dont know what would happen
the scouting issue isn't just at the very start of the game
|
On October 08 2021 05:17 Jealous wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2021 04:55 angry_maia wrote:
A few thoughts:
1. I think overall balance is fine. As brought up earlier, I think the top tier zergs right now are just better than the top tier protosses. People seem to forget that Best and Snow were considered bad and maybe even meme-level pvzers. For the longest time, they were PvT specialists. Without Bisu or Rain, I guess Mini has the best pvz but his approach doesn't seem super scalable.
2. However, I do think that the match-up has some annoying quirks. I hate watching hydra and ling busts (whether they work or not). It just feels so rng at the pro-level who wins. I.e. does a probe pick a good scout? I think that mid and even late game pvz are actually really balanced and awesome to watch. Maxed out zerg with dark swarm is scary, but protoss with 5 gas and storm + reaver is actually pretty resilient.
3. Is it possible to just prevent rush frequency by slightly increasing map dimension? I.e. if rush distance is increased, does this hurt any important parts of the game? I guess maybe TvP is impacted poorly since longer push distances is rough for T.
Someone earlier in the thread asked "what is the ideal PvZ map" or something similar. I wrote up a ridiculous response just for fun and then deleted it because it was a bit shitposty, but here are my honest thoughts: I don't think a long rush distance is absolutely necessary. I think that the solution (keep in mind, I am not saying there is necessarily a problem) is more 2 player maps that are harder for Zerg to split 60/40. 4 player maps make it harder to scout cheeses, and make it easier for Zerg to take a second main/nat. Maps like FS and CB allow for Zerg to effectively split the map 60/40 assuming everything goes their way, which isn't necessarily horrible balance as Zergs do need more bases. If we're talking about how to make the map more Protoss-favored, then I believe that there should be a way to make it 55/45 or 50/50 quite easily in a way that won't break the other match-ups too much. I've long believed that 3 player maps are inherently Zerg favored due to the presence of the second main, thus further aiding that 60/40 divide. There are some exceptions, of course, and taking the second main on 3 player maps as an initial priority is not as common as it used to be IMO. However, for our purposes, let's focus on 2 player maps. There is not much reason for lengthening the rush distance on 2 player maps because scouting, particularly scouting Zerg, is made much easier (since they aren't going to be proxying buildings). This also avoids the issue you present concerning PvT (although terrain is another deciding factor here). This isn't to say that long rush distance can't be used; Benzene is an example of a map that I feel is pretty decent for PvZ, for example. An example of a 2 player map with a relatively normal rush distance is Blue Storm, which solved the issue in a pretty interesting way, especially for the time. I could go on and on about this but TL;DR I don't think map makers would be limited to manipulating rush distance in order to make P favored maps. There are plenty of features which can be added/removed/played around with to create more favorable scenarios for Protoss in the early game.
Hmm, so 2 player maps help early game since Protoss has better scouting?
|
blizzard won’t patch the game, and absolutely should not.
that being said, protoss players have been struggling with how potent zerg busts have become in the last few years. with their main defense against the busts being static defense, it makes the decision making difficult due to the ambiguity of whether zerg will commit, not commit, and how much.
i’m not sure whether there is a solution to this conundrum in the standard structure of the matchup on Protoss’ end unless they’re willing to experiment like Mini.
|
On October 08 2021 11:48 angry_maia wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2021 05:17 Jealous wrote:On October 08 2021 04:55 angry_maia wrote:
A few thoughts:
1. I think overall balance is fine. As brought up earlier, I think the top tier zergs right now are just better than the top tier protosses. People seem to forget that Best and Snow were considered bad and maybe even meme-level pvzers. For the longest time, they were PvT specialists. Without Bisu or Rain, I guess Mini has the best pvz but his approach doesn't seem super scalable.
2. However, I do think that the match-up has some annoying quirks. I hate watching hydra and ling busts (whether they work or not). It just feels so rng at the pro-level who wins. I.e. does a probe pick a good scout? I think that mid and even late game pvz are actually really balanced and awesome to watch. Maxed out zerg with dark swarm is scary, but protoss with 5 gas and storm + reaver is actually pretty resilient.
3. Is it possible to just prevent rush frequency by slightly increasing map dimension? I.e. if rush distance is increased, does this hurt any important parts of the game? I guess maybe TvP is impacted poorly since longer push distances is rough for T.
Someone earlier in the thread asked "what is the ideal PvZ map" or something similar. I wrote up a ridiculous response just for fun and then deleted it because it was a bit shitposty, but here are my honest thoughts: I don't think a long rush distance is absolutely necessary. I think that the solution (keep in mind, I am not saying there is necessarily a problem) is more 2 player maps that are harder for Zerg to split 60/40. 4 player maps make it harder to scout cheeses, and make it easier for Zerg to take a second main/nat. Maps like FS and CB allow for Zerg to effectively split the map 60/40 assuming everything goes their way, which isn't necessarily horrible balance as Zergs do need more bases. If we're talking about how to make the map more Protoss-favored, then I believe that there should be a way to make it 55/45 or 50/50 quite easily in a way that won't break the other match-ups too much. I've long believed that 3 player maps are inherently Zerg favored due to the presence of the second main, thus further aiding that 60/40 divide. There are some exceptions, of course, and taking the second main on 3 player maps as an initial priority is not as common as it used to be IMO. However, for our purposes, let's focus on 2 player maps. There is not much reason for lengthening the rush distance on 2 player maps because scouting, particularly scouting Zerg, is made much easier (since they aren't going to be proxying buildings). This also avoids the issue you present concerning PvT (although terrain is another deciding factor here). This isn't to say that long rush distance can't be used; Benzene is an example of a map that I feel is pretty decent for PvZ, for example. An example of a 2 player map with a relatively normal rush distance is Blue Storm, which solved the issue in a pretty interesting way, especially for the time. I could go on and on about this but TL;DR I don't think map makers would be limited to manipulating rush distance in order to make P favored maps. There are plenty of features which can be added/removed/played around with to create more favorable scenarios for Protoss in the early game. Hmm, so 2 player maps help early game since Protoss has better scouting?
I think so, to an extent of course. You still have to control your worker scout. There is still a metagame when it comes to both players knowing it is a 2 player map and the consequent reactions to that fact (Hatcheries can be blocked, cheeses can be scouted, etc.). I do think it substantially changes the early game in the match-up.
EDIT: There are also a ton of factors that can make a map better or worse for both races that are independent of the number of player spawn locations, so blanket statements like "2 player maps help early game Protoss" while true within reason IMO, is not necessarily the rule. Think of how bad Tears of the Protoss went, not due to the number of players on the map, but due to the layout of the natural. That is a key factor in making balanced PvZ maps by itself. Just making a 2 player map does not inherently benefit Protoss.
|
On October 08 2021 01:02 WGT-Baal wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2021 23:53 oxKnu wrote:On October 07 2021 21:44 Jealous wrote:
The reason why your arguments are so readily dismissed is because in every era of post-patch Brood War there were low level whiners with tooootally valid analysis for why X match-up is broken and needs to be fixed, otherwise Brood War is DOOMED! However, as players rise and fall, new ideas come to the forefront, and old meta becomes outdated, it becomes clear that the issue wasn't the race balance, or one specific build. Maps were updated, new strategies and timings are developed, and the pendulum swings again. This is why your rants fall on deaf ears - everyone who has been around long enough has seen this thread a hundred times in the past two decades. Your [i]specific[i] issues and hypotheses are functionally irrelevant when looked at through this lens, one that takes in the entirety of Brood War history.
What Protoss needs, if it needs anything at all, is innovation. We saw it with the return of Shuttle-oriented PvT (with modernization, of course). We saw it with GFE in PvZ. Innovations may have slowed to some extent, at least in the eyes of the casual viewer like you and I, due to the nature of competitive Brood War in 2021. But, that may be just appearances. I don't think competitive BW is done evolving, the right players just need the right incentive. For example, with the retirement/leaving of many old heads from the scene, new power dynamics and ideas may come to the forefront. We could be looking at a (relatively) dramatically different BW in the next few years, both in terms of who is at the top and how the match-ups are being played by those individuals, which will in turn trickle down to us plebians.
In summary, stop balance whining. It's not productive in any sense of the word and it's beyond a dead horse or even glue topic at this point. Think instead about how Protoss can change the dynamic. Practice instead, for the purposes of improving your play. Innovation with what? Severely restricting the opening builds of one race and your take is: more innovation is needed. If that one race is locked in at all times in the early part of the game into one small portion of the game-tree than how will that foster innovation? Are the Zergs supposed to play like mindless drones and execute the same strategies until Protoss adapts and somehow bridges that gap? You don't seem to grasp how game theory works. And saying that some new Protoss has to come along and be as good as Bisu was but also introduce new elements and execute them flawlessly is pretty far-fetched. Balance is settled on the performance of average Tier 1 players, not outliers. In the whole history of this game no one has looked comfortable in PvZ except Bisu in his glory days, and that says a lot. Somehow expecting that to morph into some new age where meta-changes will over-haul that historical fact after such a long time with the game being actively played as an esport is delusional. There's plenty of data available and that reality suggests otherwise. Jealous has been around forever, as well as several people who posted in this thread. what he says makes sense. You are never "locked" in a build. The meta just seems that way, until someone breaks it. 1-1-1 or the goliath build for TvZ were massive meta changes, Bisu's reaver opening dismantling of the 973 a couple years ago was equally amazing, even if it didnt catch on. Arbiter play in PvT, and shuttles now. Dark Archons vs Mutas, 2 hatch muta timings ZvT due to T adapting to 3 hatch timings over time etc. Everything changes eventually. 973 isnt even an "old" strat. We are seeing a lot of 6 hatch hydra play nowadays too. I remember when i started Hydras were actually a decent ZvP strats, and you fought it with mass archons/zealots. Those were the days. You also opened one base play. Any sort of FE was considered either utter madness on the maps then or pure genius, depending on execution. If 973 is still a major issue in a couple years on every type of map, then yes we can have the discussion. But the current PvZ winrates seem pretty decent. Now if 2 AI with perfect control played each other and 973 100% crushed P then yeah maybe, but BW isnt a game of perfect play. Gate FE forces mistakes. You re saying drone drills or ling micro should deal with it, and it does, but the catch is while you do it you re not doing anything else. Maps also help, specifically distance to a base and natural layout. If you play bloodbath, 4 pool will kill you given even skill. It s not a balance issue, just a map issue. Nobody looked as good as Bisu during the entirety of the game? That s just plain wrong, check out Free's stats in that era. Your perception is warped because Jangbi and Best were PvT monsters, but PvT is not always every P s best MU. Kal and Free had great PvZ, Nal_ra was amazing with his FFE and sair/reaver back then too. Even before that Garimto was also very famous for his PvZ. Bisu had the flashiest, most entertaining PvZ, style-wise, so he is remembered more. As for the meta, a lot of Korean pros spent tons of hours on a select few builds and are not keen on changing unless they are already championship level, innovative (think Shine) or in a Bo1 sniping situation. With the loss of proleague the dedicated sniping builds and prep vanished, which doesnt help the problem.
4pool kills you any given skill on bloodbath ?
Joke ?
I dont want to be rude, but what is the point of pages long texts. If in everyone you find more than questionable statements. Sometimes i wonder, if i either missed something important, while playing the game. Or if the people posting again and again for the sake of entertainment actually have ever played the game/ actaully believe the non sense they are posting, myself including.
|
My best mu is vs protoss but the reason I believe is because most of my games are against protoss so I just get to practice more vs them, ladder lacks terran a lot. They are also the easiest players to predict, the game plan is often the same and straight forward, push zeze, 2 bases obs mass unit push and if it doesn't work take third, I can't blame them since it is very efficient but once you have grasped a good build order that fits you, you can dispose of 90% of them with a rank similar as yours. Also I don't understand why they don't do +1 corsair opening more often, it makes zerg life much harder coze you just can't leave you over undefended and that bothers us a lot.
|
Saying that Benzene is good for Protoss vs Zerg is one of the most nonsensical things I've heard in a long time.
Like, pick any two PvZs from last season of ASL...they were embarrassing to watch let alone somehow conjure up some theory that it is remotely playable for Protoss.
|
No one says that TvP is imbalanced (except Artosis :D)
Very few consider ZvT imbalanced.
There has historically been numerous objections regarding PvZ imbalance. It's not huge, but it is there. For P, it is almost unheard of to dominate Zs for a long time. P heading into a semi or a final v Z as a heavy favourite is almost unheard of. The risk/gain ratio for Z in early game is simply too good, while it is terrible for P.
Solution for me: cannons should warp-in faster. Irrelevant for PvT, almost irrelevant for PvP, but it would help P not die outright or fall too far behind in the early game.
|
On October 08 2021 20:51 Rainalcar wrote:
No one says that TvP is imbalanced (except Artosis :D)
Very few consider ZvT imbalanced.
There has historically been numerous objections regarding PvZ imbalance. It's not huge, but it is there. For P, it is almost unheard of to dominate Zs for a long time. P heading into a semi or a final v Z as a heavy favourite is almost unheard of. The risk/gain ratio for Z in early game is simply too good, while it is terrible for P.
Solution for me: cannons should warp-in faster. Irrelevant for PvT, almost irrelevant for PvP, but it would help P not die outright or fall too far behind in the early game.
Irrelevant in PvT: not so sure about that.
Vulture raids are used to kill off late expansions on maps like Polypoid and it would favor Protoss to protect those bases easier since P armies are quite imobile. Terran has no other way to harass since they have to keep their tanks together and dropships are too expensive so quick vulture attacks of 6 to 10 almost always get the job done against fresh bases with warping cannons.
|
Scouts should be cheaper and have shorter build time so p could harass by air against Zerg.
Scouts suck versus p and t, so this would be a good balance patch. 150/100, Corsair build-time and speed upgrade via core.
Mu solved gg no re
|
Russian Federation139 Posts
On October 08 2021 21:44 Timebon3s wrote:
Scouts should be cheaper and have shorter build time so p could harass by air against Zerg.
Scouts suck versus p and t, so this would be a good balance patch. 150/100, Corsair build-time and speed upgrade via core.
Mu solved gg no re
If scouts would be cheaper and have shorter build time then it woul be necessary to exclude observers from the game and give detection ability to arbiters. That would be fair i guess. With current maps meta protoss are in favour to zerg.
|
United Kingdom12024 Posts
On October 07 2021 06:10 [sc1f]eonzerg wrote:
yeah. remove protoss from the game.
I'd rather them remove zerg in all honesty. :D
|
On October 08 2021 21:58 Qikz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2021 06:10 [sc1f]eonzerg wrote:
yeah. remove protoss from the game. I'd rather them remove zerg in all honesty. :D
Remove both problem fixed.No more short games :D
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
