|
United Kingdom20310 Posts
Now that they added these additional nerfs and reverted the mule nerf, it's just stupid
Terran units (stim bio, liberator) are already very strong when talking cost for cost.
it's just silly atm. Uphill battle both ways in the snow from the 2 minute mark to the end of the game simply because of the money mismatch, all unit balance aside.
Terran can just build workers, expand casually and maintain 20% income lead over a protoss who's chronoing nexus and spamming probes without losing any the whole game. They can bank mules and drop them all on a base that's new or otherwise unsecurable.
The mechanic overall just adds a ton of unneccesary power in a way that's really stupid and unfun for both sides IMO - it really sucks to play against for lots of reasons; looking from the terran POV, who wants to take a race that has a win rate too high and then go nerf the crap out of marines, stimpack, liberators etc so that terran goes 50/50 even though they have way more money at every stage of the game?
Economy issues are higher in the tree than unit issues, unit balance is meaningless without taking economy into account
|
On October 12 2015 13:14 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +Now that they added these additional nerfs and reverted the mule nerf, it's just stupid Terran units (stim bio, liberator) are already very strong when talking cost for cost. it's just silly atm. Uphill battle both ways in the snow from the 2 minute mark to the end of the game simply because of the money mismatch, all unit balance aside. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/KWqCiLv.png) This is not ok at all and i can't believe they want mules to be so important and powerful for terran income while demonising inject and chrono
And that's the problem with anecdotal evidence, never mind that it's at a sub-competitive level.
I just watched Avilo get out-economied by 3 Zergs in a row, one of those was a game where the Zerg built 9 Roaches on 2 bases and did zero damage, one was a bio game, and the last was a game where Avilo went for a fast third CC built on location. He was completely behind economically in the first two games, and roughly even in the third. How do we reconcile your observations of the economy with those?
The only high level players streaming LotV are Polt and ForGG. I'm honestly not sure why the entire community isn't tripping over itself to catch their games, because those games offer the only remotely meaningful observations to be made about the state of balance in LotV.
|
United Kingdom20310 Posts
I just watched Avilo get out-economied by 3 Zergs in a row
How do we reconcile your observations of the economy with those?
We don't, since i'm commenting on TvP
So Huk and other streams are not meaningful to you? Even right now Neeblet is playing @ GM with Naniwa, Fayth and others in chat discussing TvP.
|
On October 12 2015 13:51 Cyro wrote:We don't, since i'm commenting on TvP
I apologize. I must have conflated your post with the MMM Mule thread which is mostly about TvZ. I should have paid closer attention.
So Huk and other streams are not meaningful to you? Even right now Neeblet is playing @ GM with Naniwa, Fayth and others in chat discussing TvP.
Eh. They're at an ambiguously meaningful level. Obviously a lot of the issues they struggle with will also come up at the highest level of play... but at the same time, some won't. Avilo is a GM Terran, and he's been making mech work in TvP. Is that actually relevant to Code S level balance? Obviously HuK is a step above Avilo, but again... very ambiguous.
I'd rather start with top top top P play and then work our way down to Huk (and lower), which will clearly demonstrate which issues are so fundamental that they pervade every level of play, as opposed to starting with the low and... hoping, basically, that those issues are relevant and faithfully represented.
|
The nerfs to MULEs and to warp-ins were very necessary
|
On October 11 2015 13:55 Snooper23 wrote:
Yeah......tried to warn everybody about Cyclone + Liberator ZvT.
You kids have no idea how broken it was vs. how broken it's going to be.
There is not a single ground unit that can kill Cyclones in the Zerg arsenal unless you get off a fungal. You can't even go broodlord because of liberator + cyclone damage.
Corruptors won't even save you
.
Blizzard is just failing at this expansion. Ever wondered why Adepts were NEVER removed? They already released marketing material and pre-order skins. That unit isn't going anywhere either, no matter how poorly it was designed.
Uh no? Liberator+Cyclone is not only 3 supply each but 150/150. There is no way you are gonna get that rolling. I play mech myself and cyclone+liberator is not the ideal composition- Tank liberator Hellbat is way better than hellion/ cyclone+liberator is and will be.
Right now, cyclone doesn't even do that AA job well while it does the force engagement job decently. You have no idea what you are talking about.
|
On October 12 2015 14:28 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2015 13:51 Cyro wrote:I just watched Avilo get out-economied by 3 Zergs in a row How do we reconcile your observations of the economy with those? We don't, since i'm commenting on TvP I apologize. I must have conflated your post with the MMM Mule thread which is mostly about TvZ. I should have paid closer attention. Show nested quote +So Huk and other streams are not meaningful to you? Even right now Neeblet is playing @ GM with Naniwa, Fayth and others in chat discussing TvP. Eh. They're at an ambiguously meaningful level. Obviously a lot of the issues they struggle with will also come up at the highest level of play... but at the same time, some won't. Avilo is a GM Terran, and he's been making mech work in TvP. Is that actually relevant to Code S level balance? Obviously HuK is a step above Avilo, but again... very ambiguous. I'd rather start with top top top P play and then work our way down to Huk (and lower), which will clearly demonstrate which issues are so fundamental that they pervade every level of play, as opposed to starting with the low and... hoping, basically, that those issues are relevant and faithfully represented.
honestly I think you should take most of what Avilo says with a grain of salt, I mean avilo plays sooooooo passively that his view of balance in some situation is pretty off, not saying he's always wrong or anything like that but yeah I'd look at more terrans opinion than that
for what it's worth at the moment I do feel that P>T, I don't have the biggest sample size PvT wise but it feels by far the easiest match up of all 3 for me, and I barely make any adept
also I don't know if many terrans have tried it but I'm just throwing it out there, I think cyclones/widowmines could be a possibility, and add some other units depending on what you see but stick to mainly cyclones and mines, I feel it might be worth testing out
|
On October 12 2015 18:05 ROOTFayth wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2015 14:28 pure.Wasted wrote:On October 12 2015 13:51 Cyro wrote:I just watched Avilo get out-economied by 3 Zergs in a row How do we reconcile your observations of the economy with those? We don't, since i'm commenting on TvP I apologize. I must have conflated your post with the MMM Mule thread which is mostly about TvZ. I should have paid closer attention. So Huk and other streams are not meaningful to you? Even right now Neeblet is playing @ GM with Naniwa, Fayth and others in chat discussing TvP. Eh. They're at an ambiguously meaningful level. Obviously a lot of the issues they struggle with will also come up at the highest level of play... but at the same time, some won't. Avilo is a GM Terran, and he's been making mech work in TvP. Is that actually relevant to Code S level balance? Obviously HuK is a step above Avilo, but again... very ambiguous. I'd rather start with top top top P play and then work our way down to Huk (and lower), which will clearly demonstrate which issues are so fundamental that they pervade every level of play, as opposed to starting with the low and... hoping, basically, that those issues are relevant and faithfully represented. honestly I think you should take most of what Avilo says with a grain of salt, I mean avilo plays sooooooo passively that his view of balance in some situation is pretty off, not saying he's always wrong or anything like that but yeah I'd look at more terrans opinion than that for what it's worth at the moment I do feel that P>T, I don't have the biggest sample size PvT wise but it feels by far the easiest match up of all 3 for me, and I barely make any adept also I don't know if many terrans have tried it but I'm just throwing it out there, I think cyclones/widowmines could be a possibility, and add some other units depending on what you see but stick to mainly cyclones and mines, I feel it might be worth testing out
Indeed I don't pay much attention to his balance complaints. He's on a level below foreign pros and like I said foreign pros' experience is only partly representative of competitive SC, so his is even less so.
That's why I said that right now I think the only streamers providing consistently meaningful data are Polt and ForGG, and people should be focusing on their games as much as possible.
In fairness to Avilo, he's been talking more about game design than balance of late, and I've found most of his reasoning pretty sound. For example, he sees Parasitic Bomb as fundamemtally problematic because it hard counters Vikings which are needed to counter Brood Lords. Even if Brood Lords never become relevant in competitive TvZ and so this never ever becomes a balance issue, we can still identify the poor foundation in place, THREATENING imbalance.
|
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On October 10 2015 18:04 ROOTFayth wrote:
I don't see why they didn't keep 2 seconds warp in with power pylons and nexus... and 5 seconds warpin with WP
does seem like a really obvious change, yes
|
for what it's worth at the moment I do feel that P>T, I don't have the biggest sample size PvT wise but it feels by far the easiest match up of all 3 for me, and I barely make any adept
How do you play the match-up? can you share a replay or something. i struggle in PvT since the recent adept nerf cos i was used to mass adept mid game ( with imo / void / templar support).
Funny story: last PvT i did was vs a terran only massing marines the whole game with few ghosts and medivacs.
So i played mass adept like i did in the past and he crushed me in a direct engagement with 50 marines 6 medivac 2 ghost (50 supply worth of fighting units) vs 40 adepts 2 imo and few voids( 30 more supply or so). got EMP'ed but only half of my army.
I think the last adept nerf was too much they hardly counter marine anymore in the midgame and they are bad as shit vs speedlings.
Versus anything non light they are trash ofc . They're definitely a bad fighting unit outside of some all-in on 2 bases and killing workers.
|
Adept might as well be removed from the game at this point. It's no longer a core gateway unit that fills a role the other gateway units couldn't fill. What the community requested was a gateway unit that can trade evenly in smaller numbers vs enemies (something that stalkers and zealots are unable to do). That's no longer the case.
Overall this is the first time when I honestly think the design team has no clue. They're not improving the game this expansion (still a complete lack of necessary UI features, and game balance), and considering we're at an all time low in interest towards SC2 tournaments and streamers some improvements are needed.
|
I hoped so very much, that Blizz would take the opportunity to completly change the warpin mechanic for protoss gateways.
In my opinion (and i know many others agree), at the current state it is just a clusterfuck, and all the patches are now exactly what the name suggests, they "patch" an inherently broken thing, not fix it.
Since Wings of Liberty it was obvious that something is wrong with the general concept of warpgates. Why would you include a switchable tech that is absolutely mandatory in 99% of protoss games (aside from cannon rushes and proxy 2gates).
Since wings of liberty warp-gate upgrade is simply a no-brainer, you just get it because it is better. There was so much potential for the idea that warp-gate upgrade unlocks the warp-in tech, but also has some downsides. Most obviously the cooldown between warpins should be longer than the build time from Gateways.
I can very clearly remember my first games in WoL Beta back in the day, when my friend and i first played around with all the new stuff, and he was like "Oh look, i can warp in units everywhere on the map." and i was like "that is insane, how much longer is the cooldown for a unit compared to a build in the gateway?" and he goes: "I think it is even shorter, that can't be correct, right?!" It made no sense back then and it still does not...
Protoss players should have to THINK STRATEGICALLY how many of their Gateways they want to have as Warpgates.
Maybe only a couple for harass defense to quickly warp in some stalker in a mineral line?
Or when protoss attacks make all Gateways to Warpgates to reinforce at the frontline?
Oh protoss is behind and pushed back to defense, make all Warpgates back to Gatways to produce more units faster.
Btw.: i am well aware of the fact, that at the time WoL was released the reasoning of blizz was, that the downside of the Warpgate was "not beeing able to queue" your unit buildings, therefore they claimed it is harder to macro with warpgates.
Which of course is completly unrelevant to every player above gold league...
At the current state, i would bet that the "Morph Warpgate back to Gateway"-Button is the least pressed button in the entire game, because it makes absolutely no sense. And that is a shame.
|
On October 12 2015 20:26 reapsen wrote:
I hoped so very much, that Blizz would take the opportunity to completly change the warpin mechanic for protoss gateways.
In my opinion (and i know many others agree), at the current state it is just a clusterfuck, and all the patches are now exactly what the name suggests, they "patch" an inherently broken thing, not fix it.
Since Wings of Liberty it was obvious that something is wrong with the general concept of warpgates. Why would you include a switchable tech that is absolutely mandatory in 99% of protoss games (aside from cannon rushes and proxy 2gates).
Since wings of liberty warp-gate upgrade is simply a no-brainer, you just get it because it is better. There was so much potential for the idea that warp-gate upgrade unlocks the warp-in tech, but also has some downsides. Most obviously the cooldown between warpins should be longer than the build time from Gateways.
I can very clearly remember my first games in WoL Beta back in the day, when my friend and i first played around with all the new stuff, and he was like "Oh look, i can warp in units everywhere on the map." and i was like "that is insane, how much longer is the cooldown for a unit compared to a build in the gateway?" and he goes: "I think it is even shorter, that can't be correct, right?!" It made no sense back then and it still does not...
Protoss players should have to THINK STRATEGICALLY how many of their Gateways they want to have as Warpgates.
Maybe only a couple for harass defense to quickly warp in some stalker in a mineral line?
Or when protoss attacks make all Gateways to Warpgates to reinforce at the frontline?
Oh protoss is behind and pushed back to defense, make all Warpgates back to Gatways to produce more units faster.
Btw.: i am well aware of the fact, that at the time WoL was released the reasoning of blizz was, that the downside of the Warpgate was "not beeing able to queue" your unit buildings, therefore they claimed it is harder to macro with warpgates.
Which of course is completly unrelevant to every player above gold league...
At the current state, i would bet that the "Morph Warpgate back to Gateway"-Button is the least pressed button in the entire game, because it makes absolutely no sense. And that is a shame.
I love your post man, if only Blizz actually listened to the community. Mad man david is gonna make each warpin take 16 seconds, except for the first one after you morphed your gateways, so there is finally a reason to press that button. Not a Strategic descision, just a reason. And then Blizz will say, "We heard ya'll", morph back button should be more usefull now.
|
Yeah.. i mean how fucking cool would it be, to see protoss players getting ready for an attack and then morph all their gateways to warpgates with that cool morphing sound effect and all the casters go nuts like "ooh shit son, this attack is about get fucking real".
Or a protoss players builds some gateways in an area that is likely to get scanned and the terran player is like: "ah look, he has gateways, this fucker wants to defend or expand" but in reality he has like 6 more but in warpgate mode and bam goes all out attack.
In my opinion that would be WAY more enjoyable than just:
1. Scout
2. Count Warpgates and Bases
3. If Warpgate > 6 and Bases < 3 then DEFEND YOUR ASS LIKE CRAZY, HERPDY DERP
4. Game ends 3 Minutes later no matter what.
|
Two things this game badly needs are:
1) Massive highground advantage. If I were Blizz, I would nerf any kind of damage (yes, even spells) from low to highground by 1/3.
2) A drastic change to the clumping behaviour of units. Instead of "natural clumping", units should leave some space between them and you should have to invest APM to clump them.
The first change negates the "steamrolle" syndrome, which means that games end too quickly after a single botched battle, and the utter lack of importance of positioning in SC2 compared to BW.
The second change should reduce the "terrible, terrible damage" syndrome, which has plagued this game from the beginning.
|
United Kingdom20310 Posts
Eh. They're at an ambiguously meaningful level.
HuK and MC won the only meaningful LOTV tournament so far and you consider terran streamers far superior players
|
On October 12 2015 19:50 owlman wrote:Show nested quote +for what it's worth at the moment I do feel that P>T, I don't have the biggest sample size PvT wise but it feels by far the easiest match up of all 3 for me, and I barely make any adept
How do you play the match-up? can you share a replay or something. i struggle in PvT since the recent adept nerf cos i was used to mass adept mid game ( with imo / void / templar support). Funny story: last PvT i did was vs a terran only massing marines the whole game with few ghosts and medivacs. So i played mass adept like i did in the past and he crushed me in a direct engagement with 50 marines 6 medivac 2 ghost (50 supply worth of fighting units) vs 40 adepts 2 imo and few voids( 30 more supply or so). got EMP'ed but only half of my army. I think the last adept nerf was too much they hardly counter marine anymore in the midgame and they are bad as shit vs speedlings. Versus anything non light they are trash ofc . They're definitely a bad fighting unit outside of some all-in on 2 bases and killing workers.
I just play pretty safe, I make 1 adept and then no more, just stalkers, quick blink, few obs, then robo bay, start making disruptors and get 3rd, 2nd robo and just pump disruptors and stalkers, you can trade very well against bio/libs/mines or anything really assuming you fire 1 ball of disruptor at a time, I usually manage to pick off some liberators here and there with the blink stalkers without losing anything while I shoot disruptor balls, and during all that I make 3 stargate and start pumping carriers, warp prism roaming around to harass while you do that is pretty good too
|
Thank your for your answers 
I make 3 stargate and start pumping carriers
In my experience carriers were a bad choice vs good terran playing bio (mostly marine) + mass liberator. Do you agree?
In that situation i would probably 3Sg + tempest
|
The buff to the MULE broke TvZ, its way to powerfull in early game.
Zerg needs 4 larva if this stays.
|
On October 13 2015 03:36 Daizer wrote:
The buff to the MULE broke TvZ, its way to powerfull in early game.
Zerg needs 4 larva if this stays.
Sure give zerg a way to go easily on their OP T3 with 8 armor ultra and Viper Op versatility especially parasitc bomb who just crush Terran Bio and Mech.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
