|
On October 14 2010 05:20 Mintastic wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2010 05:10 partysnatcher wrote:
As a fan of buffing Zerg, and a huge fan of Fruitdealer, I still have to say listening to Fruitdealer in this issue feels wrong, he can't really be unbiased here.
It's a bit like listening to TLO ("I think Zerg is fine!") and then he "just happens" to be the Random master who "just happened" to go Terran only for sooome weird reason. Keep in mind that I have huge amounts of respect for TLO as well, but you can't say Zerg is fine when there were only 2 zergs left in the RO16.
Zergs have been working on their game for months and months, trying to find small holes, and Fruitdealer has certainly found them. Now with patch 1.2, it might be Terrans who have to play defensive, look for those small holes and polish their game to perfection.
Did you ever wonder, for instance, why scans and expos are more used in TvTs? Probably because that's where Terrans have had to evolve the most. Stop your QQ Terrans, there is heavy evidence that you have been balance-favored for months now.
Actually, he went from Random to race-picking Zerg and Terran for a while, then exclusively Terran. Not saying anything about balance but just wanted to correct the statement. Similar to TLO's or Idra's statements about balance, you probably shouldn't take too much out of Fruitdealer's talk about balance either. People who have something to gain from balance favoring them will never be unbiased.
My point is that TLO, Idra and Fruitdealer all have good points, but you still can't just swallow their opinions whole. I mean, take the most disgusting example of egoism, when we still see Terran players claiming SC2 is balanced and how they are completely sure that Zerg will become OP in 1.2 (despite the way Zergs get eliminated out of tournaments and Terrans dominating).
Take Idra. If you pick out the core of Idra's statements; the lack of options, scouting and harassment, that's just the truth. You can pick out one strategy at a time, count them, and conclude mathematically "T has more options than Z". That's just a fact.
You can also look at the amount of Terrans in top tournament tiers and see that Terran still dominate, even in 1.1.
|
On October 14 2010 00:28 GrazerRinge wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2010 10:07 abrasion wrote:On October 13 2010 10:05 Str1keFreedom wrote:
My main race is not Protoss, but in a Protoss v.s Terran match, Protoss has hard time dealing with Terran, so I’m disappointed that a fix for this issue was not part of the patch.
MARRY ME FRUITDEALER ROFL I hope roach doesnt become op by range buff...i think it has now range of 5, same as marine?
No.. it has range 3. It's almost a melee unit, and the attack animation is so slow that it's very hard to kite and micro with. It might get range 4 if Blizzard stick with their plan. Definitely not getting range 5.
|
On October 13 2010 13:00 dapierow wrote:
He did not get paid yet, that's fucking bullshit...
I have too agree.
They should be taking pictures of you with the pile of cash or the giant check right when you win.
|
On October 14 2010 04:48 Mintastic wrote:Are you sure you translated this correctly? Show nested quote +My main race is not Protoss, but in a Protoss v.s Terran match, Protoss has hard time dealing with Terran, so I’m disappointed that a fix for this issue was not part of the patch. Because this is completely opposite of what Blizzard implies in their patch blog: Show nested quote +Win % in Diamond (accounting for player skill)
49.6% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran.
52.8% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg.
49.6% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Platinum (accounting for player skill)
56.3% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran.
47.3% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg.
44.5% win for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Gold (accounting for player skill)
61.0% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran.
61.1% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg.
49.5% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Silver (accounting for player skill)
63.6% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran.
50.7% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg.
51.6% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Bronze (accounting for player skill)
59.0% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran.
55.1% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg.
45.4% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
As you can see there are some issues with protoss vs. terran in many of the leagues. From our own play experience, as well as feedback from the community, this matches pretty closely with what we're already aware of. We're working on solutions. So they're saying it's the Terrans having issues vs Protoss. If this is was correct translation then I can safely ignore all of Fruitdealer's opinions from now on knowing I'm not missing much.
1. that's for ladder.. none really cares about ladder
2. it's the NA ladder.. none whatsoever cares about the NA ladder ^^
|
Very nice to see zerg winning. I do agree with fruitdealer that the PvT matchups have not been improved. They are my worst match ups and it constantly feels like Tier 1 protoss units have little options vs. terran tier 1. I do love it when I get high templars though, they feast on marines  .
|
He has no worries about Terran at all. 15 hatch ftw patch 1.2
|
On October 14 2010 07:03 Euronyme wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2010 04:48 Mintastic wrote:Are you sure you translated this correctly? My main race is not Protoss, but in a Protoss v.s Terran match, Protoss has hard time dealing with Terran, so I’m disappointed that a fix for this issue was not part of the patch. Because this is completely opposite of what Blizzard implies in their patch blog: Win % in Diamond (accounting for player skill)
49.6% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran.
52.8% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg.
49.6% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Platinum (accounting for player skill)
56.3% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran.
47.3% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg.
44.5% win for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Gold (accounting for player skill)
61.0% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran.
61.1% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg.
49.5% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Silver (accounting for player skill)
63.6% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran.
50.7% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg.
51.6% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Bronze (accounting for player skill)
59.0% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran.
55.1% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg.
45.4% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
As you can see there are some issues with protoss vs. terran in many of the leagues. From our own play experience, as well as feedback from the community, this matches pretty closely with what we're already aware of. We're working on solutions. So they're saying it's the Terrans having issues vs Protoss. If this is was correct translation then I can safely ignore all of Fruitdealer's opinions from now on knowing I'm not missing much. 1. that's for ladder.. none really cares about ladder 2. it's the NA ladder.. none whatsoever cares about the NA ladder ^^
1. Blizzard cares, no one else matters.
2. See above.
|
On October 14 2010 08:05 Mintastic wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2010 07:03 Euronyme wrote:On October 14 2010 04:48 Mintastic wrote:Are you sure you translated this correctly? My main race is not Protoss, but in a Protoss v.s Terran match, Protoss has hard time dealing with Terran, so I’m disappointed that a fix for this issue was not part of the patch. Because this is completely opposite of what Blizzard implies in their patch blog: Win % in Diamond (accounting for player skill)
49.6% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran.
52.8% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg.
49.6% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Platinum (accounting for player skill)
56.3% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran.
47.3% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg.
44.5% win for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Gold (accounting for player skill)
61.0% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran.
61.1% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg.
49.5% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Silver (accounting for player skill)
63.6% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran.
50.7% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg.
51.6% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Bronze (accounting for player skill)
59.0% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran.
55.1% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg.
45.4% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
As you can see there are some issues with protoss vs. terran in many of the leagues. From our own play experience, as well as feedback from the community, this matches pretty closely with what we're already aware of. We're working on solutions. So they're saying it's the Terrans having issues vs Protoss. If this is was correct translation then I can safely ignore all of Fruitdealer's opinions from now on knowing I'm not missing much. 1. that's for ladder.. none really cares about ladder 2. it's the NA ladder.. none whatsoever cares about the NA ladder ^^ 1. Blizzard cares, no one else matters. 2. See above.
yeah sure, but I wouldn't say that protoss is overpowered because we have a 60% win ratio in the NA bronze league.. specially as it's on 49 in diamond..
also if you actually read the notes they're not nerfing protoss the slightest.. they dont really care about us.
imho the marauder and the viking should get a slight nerf, and maybe buff the carrier a little bit.. dunno.. those just give complete air and ground domination against protoss.
other than that i like the setup very much, and it's not like i'm forced to play protoss.
how do you make a nested quote by the way?
|
On October 13 2010 10:45 Grond wrote:
If BroodLords, Carriers and BC's all suck vs Terran, it's more likely the problem is the Viking and not all 3 of those units.
The viking imo IS a problem. I think the game can be balanced with the viking the way it is, but i'd really prefer a change to this unit. Its range just feels so unnatural. I'm pretty sure what happened was, the collosus has range, so they gave the viking range too, and then nerfed it in speed to make up for it. Now the viking is super slow and boring. If the viking had acceptable range, and was fast in both movement AND transformation then we would see some sweet viking micro.
This being said, i understand why blizzard gave it so much range, making me think that the collossus is another problem. Its so easy to micro it and has super long range and fries everything. If it wasn't for vikings, they would demolish terran. Sure in bw the reaver was super effective, but it was SUPER slow, requiring a dropship and a LOT of micro.
Not to mention, collosi are huge and block vision of your own units underneath. Really not a spectator friendly unit. If it was removed and replaced with something else, i wouldnt miss it.
|
On October 14 2010 08:25 pzea469 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2010 10:45 Grond wrote:
If BroodLords, Carriers and BC's all suck vs Terran, it's more likely the problem is the Viking and not all 3 of those units. The viking imo IS a problem. I think the game can be balanced with the viking the way it is, but i'd really prefer a change to this unit. Its range just feels so unnatural. I'm pretty sure what happened was, the collosus has range, so they gave the viking range too, and then nerfed it in speed to make up for it. Now the viking is super slow and boring. If the viking had acceptable range, and was fast in both movement AND transformation then we would see some sweet viking micro. This being said, i understand why blizzard gave it so much range, making me think that the collossus is another problem. Its so easy to micro it and has super long range and fries everything. If it wasn't for vikings, they would demolish terran. Sure in bw the reaver was super effective, but it was SUPER slow, requiring a dropship and a LOT of micro. Not to mention, collosi are huge and block vision of your own units underneath. Really not a spectator friendly unit. If it was removed and replaced with something else, i wouldnt miss it.
speaking of easy to micro.. terran MMM 1A enemy base - win.
I wouldn't mind it being replaced, but in that case remove the marauder and the viking too. marauders own collosi anyway.. not to mention that they also own high templars, zealots, stalkers, sentries, immortals, and all buildings.
collosi and storms are good against marines.. that's it.
|
Patch 1.2 is a joke. Reapers are already next to useless because of the 5 second nerf. IMO, there are too many 'fixes' that are going to be implemented at one time. Try increasing roach range first, or try supply depot before barracks first, don't go "HOLY SHIT REAPERS IMBA" and then throw 30 nerfs at them. Blizzard. you lose.
|
As a complete newb to the game, and someone trying to learn the races, I have found zerg to be the most complex to learn. Terran are very simple, they have fewer hotkeys to worry about. Terran need to be able to push out units a little quick at the beggining as zerg produce zerglings SO quickly and protos zealots own marines (from what i've seen in my limited experience) as they have shields and can deal out damage quickly.
Zerg are killed VERY quickly by protos, I agree on that, however I don't think the ZvT matchup is unbalanced if you know how to play zerg properly. I've watched so many replays online from pro matches where zerg has owned terran, just as many as terran owning zerg.
I also agree that there are less zerg players, for whatever the reason, which is why less got into the top 200. Hellion harassment is just as viable as reaper harassment, same as zealot harassment and speedling/roach harassment.
I agree that needing a factory to get the upgrade makes sense, and the increase in roach range, however this thing about supply before rax is absolutely rediculous. This basically prevents any sort of chance to stop the early expansion from zerg. That in itself is going to make zerg so OP'd that everyone is going to switch and then in 6 months the "new thing" will be asking for protoss to be upgraded, and then back to Terran. Terran have already been nerfed huge in the last patch.
|
On October 14 2010 08:22 Euronyme wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2010 08:05 Mintastic wrote:On October 14 2010 07:03 Euronyme wrote:On October 14 2010 04:48 Mintastic wrote:Are you sure you translated this correctly? My main race is not Protoss, but in a Protoss v.s Terran match, Protoss has hard time dealing with Terran, so I’m disappointed that a fix for this issue was not part of the patch. Because this is completely opposite of what Blizzard implies in their patch blog: Win % in Diamond (accounting for player skill)
49.6% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran.
52.8% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg.
49.6% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Platinum (accounting for player skill)
56.3% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran.
47.3% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg.
44.5% win for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Gold (accounting for player skill)
61.0% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran.
61.1% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg.
49.5% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Silver (accounting for player skill)
63.6% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran.
50.7% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg.
51.6% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
Win % in Bronze (accounting for player skill)
59.0% win rate for Protoss when fighting Terran.
55.1% win rate for Protoss when fighting Zerg.
45.4% win rate for Terran when fighting Zerg.
As you can see there are some issues with protoss vs. terran in many of the leagues. From our own play experience, as well as feedback from the community, this matches pretty closely with what we're already aware of. We're working on solutions. So they're saying it's the Terrans having issues vs Protoss. If this is was correct translation then I can safely ignore all of Fruitdealer's opinions from now on knowing I'm not missing much. 1. that's for ladder.. none really cares about ladder 2. it's the NA ladder.. none whatsoever cares about the NA ladder ^^ 1. Blizzard cares, no one else matters. 2. See above. yeah sure, but I wouldn't say that protoss is overpowered because we have a 60% win ratio in the NA bronze league.. specially as it's on 49 in diamond.. also if you actually read the notes they're not nerfing protoss the slightest.. they dont really care about us. imho the marauder and the viking should get a slight nerf, and maybe buff the carrier a little bit.. dunno.. those just give complete air and ground domination against protoss. other than that i like the setup very much, and it's not like i'm forced to play protoss. how do you make a nested quote by the way?
If you read the notes they mention that they're working on solutions, not necessarily addressing it with the next patch. Fixing the zerg is probably their higher priority right now.
You make nested quotes by using quote tags inside other quotes.
|
Zerg needs a unit like hi templar? Fungal growth > Psi Storm... Any well placed fungals or NPs can easily turn the tide of a battle.
That being said, good to see Z isn't completely helpless to early game terran anymore
|
On October 13 2010 10:35 ckw wrote:
Oh gawd, he wins the first GSL and now everyone looks to him for what balance should be which I think is a terrible idea. He thinks BroodLords need a buff and now all of a sudden on the ladder all I hear is "You're lucky my BroodLords are UP or you would have been roflstomped!" Oh boy it's getting pretty pathetic, I understand, the guy is a great great player but that doesn't mean that his biased opinion on what balance is for Zerg is any better than IdrA or MorroW or anyone else that is a respectable player. I think the most obnoxious ideas for balance have come from this guy and if things were his way we would have a very very OP Zerg and him saying things are perfect..
Also, his thoughts on PvT are accurate until late game when I really beleive that Terran has the harder time winning. I'm not saying it's unbalanced, only that it's a pretty good game at that point.
Calm down, they were just asking how he felt about it... it's not like Blizzard came to him for direction on balance.
|
Some funny points I have to make about this: "Zerg need units like the high templar" Zerg can literally have the high templar in their arsenal, just neural parasite one...or two or a colossus. ALSO the point about zerg having horrible scouting... How can anyone say that? Are you kidding me they have some if not ThE best scouting in the game... They have overlords..burrow..mutalisk..zergling.... (Practically flying supply depots and/or pylons) that can be used for scouting all over the map.( Think Fruit-seller spotting every one of IntotheRainbows drop's because of scattered overlords) Zerg are the only units able to spot a drop immediately because they have overlords all over the outsides of the map. They also have zerglings which are the most inexpensive/fast unit in the game to spread and/or burrow all over the map and put on all the xel naga towers. Lets not forget overseers whose initial line of sight is huge, plus they have the ability to make change-lings and stop units/upgrades with its abilities. Zerg can make an overseer out of an already available overlord which is there already from supply necessity's(think changing a pylon/supply depot into something useful?) and why does no one use spore colonies for detection?
|
On October 13 2010 15:14 RHMVNovus wrote:
As a Zerg (surprise), I don't think he's that off the mark when it comes to tide-shifting units. I say this not just because all the Zerg late-game options are utterly meh, but because the Zerg spellcasters are significantly more boring than the Protoss or Terran casters. Depending on how strenuously one defines 'caster,' we have the following list for casters of the three races:
Strict Definition (multiple spells):
Terran: Raven, Ghost
Protoss: Mothership, HT
Zerg: Queen, Overseer, Infestor
Loose Definition (single spell):
Terran: Marine, Marauder, Ghost, Thor, Banshee, Medivac, Cattlebruiser
Protoss: Zealot, Stalker, HT, Phoenix, Mothership, DT
Zerg: Queen, Overseer, Infestor, Corruptor
Things that are technically casters but probably shouldn't be there are Thors (due to rarity of use), Banshees, and DTs due to cloak. The top list is probably more interesting, honestly. Queens only have real one combat spell, and are mostly economic spellcasters. Overseers are useful but have no real military application. So, we have Infestors vs. Ghost/Raven vs. HT/Mothership.
Bottom line: the game require more spellcasters.
You forgot about sentries!!! 
|
platinum level random player here...
-I think they should go with either the supply depot before rax or the factory before nitro... probably not both.
But I'd go with factory before nitro. Yeah Protoss have to make a pylon before a gateway, but zealots are beasts in the earliest stages of the game and that makes up for it long enough to get stalkers/sentries? Fac before nitro means that roach speed has a bit more time to finish before 5rr speed. I think that nerfing quick tech to reaper speed will probably balance out early game for both tvz and tvp.
-broodlords: pick ONLY ONE: increase movement speed, increase health, quicker morph, or make em cheaper.
-thanks blizz for fg stopping blink... blinking out of fg is ghey
-thanks blizz for zerg tech buildings getting tougher, so marauder drops don't insta kill all zerg tech
imo, balance out 1v1 first and then keep the base game the same while balancing out teamplay mechanics. 3v3 and 4v4 are basically like FFA in terms of how much your personal skill level determines the outcome of the match, so don't worry about them being too balanced imo. Please bring back team melee from scbw.
Blizzard: Do 3 patches (one for early game, one for midgame, and one for endgame) and then give it time. Allow the game to balance itself out a little bit before making anymore changes (aside from debugging or UI changes- chat lobbies pl0x)
DISCLAIMER: I wholeheartedly believe that the balancing team at Blizzard knows what they're doing far better than any of us shitheads. Just because you spend 16/day hours on sc2 doesn't mean you know anything about balancing. (Myself included of course, though i'm lucky to even play an hour a day.) THIS IS ALL IMHO
|
On October 13 2010 10:05 Str1keFreedom wrote:
Q: The patch notes for patch 1.2 have been revealed. What are your thoughts on its boost for Zerg?
I heard about the patch and I welcome it. I’m not exactly sure what will happen until the patch is done. I think I’ll be able to decide how I feel about it once it is released. My main race is not Protoss, but in a Protoss v.s Terran match, Protoss has hard time dealing with Terran, so I’m disappointed that a fix for this issue was not part of the patch.
Damn right!!! Seems that I have to play twice as good as the Terrans while they can make mistakes and I need prefect forcefields to havea chance vs an early push.
I do wonder how Zerg will play in this patch, hopefully a great deal more changes will be included including chat rooms.
|
On October 14 2010 11:17 zoogaezee wrote:
ALSO the point about zerg having horrible scouting... How can anyone say that? Are you kidding me they have some if not ThE best scouting in the game...
Obviously that is talking about early game, duh. Lategame scouting options are perfectly fine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
