|
On October 18 2011 03:05 Cloud9157 wrote:
From my pov, Protoss has improved themselves severely in the few weeks since patch.
Be it as it may, they may still be a little weak, but its not too bad anymore. This game will be balanced when we stop seeing 20 Terrans in Code S. I can see maybe 10-15 Terrans in Code S at a time, but when over half of Code S is Terran, you know theres something wrong.
Just what I think, feel free to take it worth a grain of salt.
People really need to stop using GSL as a determinant of balance one way or the other. If you are going to, at least wait for an extended amount of time to do so. Just the nature of GSL and Code S means that players will be cycling in and out on a monthly basis. Be realistic, don't expect there to be a 33/33/33% distribution every month...
|
P flexed some muscle at MLG , so yea, a little. Goddamn Terrans :|
|
On October 17 2011 04:14 Talin wrote:
No, the game is fine.
quoted for truth
|
On October 18 2011 03:47 SupLilSon wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2011 03:05 Cloud9157 wrote:
From my pov, Protoss has improved themselves severely in the few weeks since patch.
Be it as it may, they may still be a little weak, but its not too bad anymore. This game will be balanced when we stop seeing 20 Terrans in Code S. I can see maybe 10-15 Terrans in Code S at a time, but when over half of Code S is Terran, you know theres something wrong.
Just what I think, feel free to take it worth a grain of salt. People really need to stop using GSL as a determinant of balance one way or the other. If you are going to, at least wait for an extended amount of time to do so. Just the nature of GSL and Code S means that players will be cycling in and out on a monthly basis. Be realistic, don't expect there to be a 33/33/33% distribution every month...
in the current scheme of things there will always be more Terrans in Code S? why? Because a lot of the best koreans in sc2 atm play Terran. Its that simple.
|
Marines are still too strong and too frequently used across all match ups.
|
On October 17 2011 11:20 Doof wrote:
I feel I should preface this by saying I play Protoss, and thus may be a little biased...
I think there is a fundamental problem with the game balance as it stands. The problem is, of course, Terran. As a race, they are not only the best at being defensive, they are also the most flexible when it comes to tech. Siege mode and PFs make bases impenetrable to a HUGE variety of ground-based attacks. Bunkers are really good, salvageable, and require only a barracks to construct (Toss must have forge for our static D). Furthermore, Terran tech, due to the add-on mechanic, is extremely flexible. It's quite easy for them to swap reactors and tech labs to get out the exact right composition that they need. Combine this with the fact that they have the best ability to be defensive, and Terran can have the perfect composition in nearly every fight they choose to engage in.
Zerg is, of course, even more flexible than Terran in this regard, but the simple fact remains that Zerg units are (by design) weaker than Terran units. That's just how The Swarm operates. Meanwhile Protoss is so inflexible in their tech that once their chosen tech is sufficiently countered, they're no threat until they can get up another form of an advantage.
No one is playing perfectly right now (Nestea and MVP are damn close, though), and until players get near perfect, the true balance of the game can't be seen. All we have to go on is theorycrafting, and theoretically, I dont' see any way either of the other races can beat a Terran in a game where neither player makes mistakes.
You're pointing out things that Terran can do, but how about this. Protoss has the ability to build units basically anywhere on the map, can use chronoboost to get ahead in upgrades, tech, army, or economy, has a plethora of really strong openings that--if scouted are easy to stop--if they go unscouted they're nearly impossible to hold off. Plus, out of all units in the game (especially since Hellions and Infestors recently got nerfed), High Templar have the ability to change a battle in ridiculous ways.
Before I continue, let's look at a post that Jinro made on PredY's post regarding TvP:
On October 02 2011 11:09 Liquid`Jinro wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2011 07:11 eourcs wrote:
TvP is a really odd matchup, where I think someone with perfect control and macro will be unbeatable, regardless of how well the Protoss plays (this is barring 1-1-1 which I do think is imbalanced), but like 99% of players I don't have that, so the matchup is hard as fuck. At the highest level, it's possible that it's imbalanced, but at every other level, the people who complain about Terran are idiots. Lategame TvP is extremely hard, and personally, I have never seen anybody beat Hasuobs when he gets Templar/Collosus and a solid 3-4 base economy, regardless of how far behind he is. I feel the opposite - TvP is a matchup where if both players played perfectly, terran should never ever win. So dependant on getting good drops etc. Of course its pretty damn close to impossible to play the level of perfect that you can consistently every game deny every single drop which might even make it terran favored in reality. Anyway, I agree 100% with PredY's post, bio TvP makes me want to quit -_-
Personally I disagree with all the ultimatums getting thrown around ("Protoss will NEVER win," "Terran will NEVER win," ect.). But I think that Jinro has a pretty good point. TvP early game revolves around an uncountable number of all-ins from both sides that are constantly proven to be very strong (Protoss has them too, any Protoss who disagrees has clearly never watch MC or Alicia play). Late game TvP, on the other hand, involves high macro, and generally the Protoss sits back trying to tech while the Terran must constantly drop to get an edge before the final engagement.
And here's the real problem with the whole "perfect-player-vs-perfect-player" scenario. Terran relies on drops, and frankly, good drop play relies on you noticing your opponent's weaknesses and exploiting them. If the person you're playing is perfect, then they have the ability to deflect all those drops. Then, because of chronoboost, a Protoss should be able to out-upgrade their Terran opponent, and since he did no damage with drops the Protoss is able to completely roll them with their Gateway/Colossus/Templar ball.
So really, I don't think that the scenario in itself has flaws, but if both players play perfectly, the Protoss should win late game. But since you really want "perfect games," let's look at some of the best played games I've ever watched. First example:  ThorZaIN vs  MC on Tal'Darim Altar in TSL3. It was my favorite game to watch ever because both players executed everything they did so well, yet MC wound up winning the game. Or how about  IdrA vs Bomber Game 1 last MLG. I don't want to say that either player played perfectly, but IdrA played the best I've ever seen him and Bomber played incredibly. They both made mistakes, but the macro of each was completely off the chain. Easily one of the best games of the whole tournament, and guess what. The Zerg won.
That being said, I think the game is pretty balanced. I don't really think that there is a whole lot wrong with the game, but Protoss certainly isn't the weakest race. They just need more innovation.
On October 17 2011 11:35 sciberbia wrote:
I've thought terran is OP for a while now and still do, but I play zerg so yea...
Just wanna note a fact about the Boxer v. Idra series:
Boxer's record when doing a proxy 2-rax: 3-0 (metal counts)
Boxer's record when not proxying: 0-4
Boxer still has three pages worth of Brood War accolades in TLPD, is the first bonjwa, and is basically the father of E-Sports. Cheesing is part of the game, and BoxeR happens to be really good at it. And on Tal'Darim they weren't proxied raxs and on Metalopolis it wasn't the 2 rax that won him the game and it basically did nothing. IdrA just reacted poorly in that game.
Though if you really want to get into a balance debate about TvZ, how about this: a Korean Terran can't beat an American Zerg unless he cheeses, because Z is OP late game. Personally I think that sounds silly, but no more or less silly than what you wrote. Don't complain about balance then point to a series where a Zerg won and NEVER bash BoxeR.
|
On October 18 2011 01:32 VirgilSC2 wrote:
I'm very hesitant to comment on balance, as I'm coming off of a 2-Day ban for balance whine, but:
I really think High Templars need something. As of now they have no defense mechanic like Infestors/Ghosts, on top of being the slowest of the 3.
Infestors: Always deal full effectiveness of Fungal Growth if landed properly (impossible to micro out of), average movespeed, burrow AND movement, energy upgrade as well as two up-gradable spells, AoE spell available without research.
Ghosts: Always deal full effectiveness of EMP if landed properly (impossible to micro out of), average movespeed, Cloak, able to attack, energy upgrade, AoE spell, as well as snipe available without research, nuke available upon creation
High Templar: Storms do not always deal full effectiveness if landed properly (possible to micro out of), slow movespeed, unable to defend themselves or hide, able to morph into Archon with even numbers, AoE spell requires research, no Energy upgrade, no effective third spell
I think that's a fair analysis of the three, if it comes off biased I apologize. I won't even begin to bring up the range issue.
I think if High Templars get a bit of an adjustment (perhaps a movespeed buff/storm available instantly/some sort of defensive mechanic) then I'll feel a bit better about the game.
You forgot to mention that High Templar's spell has the highest chance of killing units (fungal growth needs to be chained due to low damage and EMP will never kill a unit) and they can be built in 5 seconds anywhere on the map. Those are pretty important pieces of information. Plus I see Protoss players using Feedback to kill Ghosts and Infestors all the time. So really what you wrote wasn't "fair" at all seeing as you left out every good part about High Templar.
I don't know a lot about ZvP, so I'm going to make the rest of this comment about TvP exclusively. Let's look at two different scenarios:
- TvP, Similar Army sizes, Protoss has High Templar, Terran has no Ghosts: Assuming that the Protoss lands good storms, even if some of the damage is avoided, this fight is really up to the Protoss to lose. Sure if the Terran player really out-micros the Protoss, they may win, but chances are they'll lose.
- PvT, Similar Army sizes, Terran has Ghosts, Protoss has no High Templar: I think that this one is a bit more difficult to call. If the Zealots have Charge or the Protoss has better upgrades, they may still win this sort of fight (it's happened to me before, and I've seen other Terrans lose this sort of fight too). If both players micro evenly, the Terran should win this fight, but unless the Protoss is relying heavily upon Forcefield/Sentry energy, and they manage to micro better than the Terran, they should win this fight.
What I'm trying to say is that Ghosts are especially good at killing/negating High Templar, but they aren't nearly as good at killing Zealots and Stalkers as High Templar are at killing Marines or Marauders. Plus, if you micro your Templar well and put them in Warp Prism then you can basically negate EMP. Saying Templar are weak units or that they aren't powerful is ridiculous.
|
I still have doubts on what solid Protoss openings look like. Even at MLG, there was never a time where Protoss felt safe. I'm not talking about the 'well if he proxy rax's or 6 pool I'm dead', I'm talking about 'i'm gonna die if he does a 2 rax fact push, or, I'm gonna die if he makes roaches and attacks.'
But mid-late game, I think Protoss is doing great. Terrible maps just have to be removed. Xelnaga Caverns - OUT! Dual Sight - lol wut ZvP! Tournaments are so reliant on GSL for maps and as a result are months behind on latest map balance. SC2 has got to the point where a map is no longer 'fine' if all races can play a macro game (not the Xelnaga and Dual Sight achieve this). Antiga Shipyard is incredibly imbalanced as Zerg has no easy 4th whilst Terran has easy 4 bases. Bomber's play vs Idra on that was soo beautiful and the game would have been even more one sided had Bomber scouted the hidden expos (wit or without baneling speed). The fact that some tournaments allow horizontal positions is completely unacceptable.
|
Yes, I'm now sure that balance is a caracteristic of that game.
|
mlg orlando first major tourny in 3 months where a protoss was in the final. last one was eu battle net invitational where nani lost to ret... so it was about time a protoss comes through again. lets see how long it will take for the next protoss to reach the final. naniwa and huk dont have bad chances at mlg providence because the spawn so deep in the winnerbracket... im excited to see how the placements will be!
|
No, Protoss is still significantly weaker than Terran. 1/1/1 is defensible now, but EMP still needs a fix.
Terran > Zerg > Protoss
What needs to be done:
1) EMP range nerf from 10 to 9 (for PvT)
2) Restore Khaydarin Amulet with research cost 300/300 (for PvT)
3) Nerf Terran reactor's production speed to 90% of the original. Build time buff from 50 - > 40 (for TvZ)
|
On October 18 2011 06:41 f0X wrote:
mlg orlando first major tourny in 3 months where a protoss was in the final. last one was eu battle net invitational where nani lost to ret... so it was about time a protoss comes through again. lets see how long it will take for the next protoss to reach the final. naniwa and huk dont have bad chances at mlg providence because the spawn so deep in the winnerbracket... im excited to see how the placements will be!
Umm Code A? Oz was just in the finals and Puzzle vs Tassadar was 2 seasons before that.
|
I still think Protoss feels very "incomplete" possibly because they lack a unit which is better at defense than it is offence. The sentry may be a "defensive" unit, but it actually seems more useful offensively to me. Versus the queen (an extreme example) or the siege tank... actually I suppose the siege tank is comparable but it just seems like PvP still ends too quickly because each player is being offensive unlike most matchups where there is both an aggressor and a defender. Zerg also feels somewhat incomplete but not as much as protoss.
So in answer, no, I think Terran is slightly overpowered because of the plethora of possible strategies.
|
Nop, Zerg is still overpowered
|
nope nothing wrong with balance
|
Game has always been balanced. Even when people really started taking advantage of blue flame helions zerg could still win. Its all in the metagame learn all the trends and common builds, and be ready for them and you won't loose.
|
Yes.
I used to think Protoss could be carefully outplayed by zerg/terran by just decision making. Now I'm not so sure. (MLG Orlando, particularly Sheth vs SaSe, HuK vs TheSTC, MC vs TheSTC and SaSe vs Bomber series).
It really seemed that the margin of error for T/Z players has become much smaller. That being said, disregarding timing attacks, Protoss really is becoming a turtle-till-max race.. Kind of?
For Code A : I will be much surprised if less than 3 toss make it through the up and downs. And MC is back in Code S! Things are looking much better than 2-3 months ago.
|
Just EMP please, but everything else is pretty swell.
|
No.
Terran still looks too weak late game and unless they outplay their opponent greatly or do some good timing pushes early (that tend to get countered more and more frequently as the patch gets older), victory is impossible. PvZ's are ok, although Protoss still has the deathball advantage late game. All the mirror matchups remain dependent on decision making and strategy used.
|
No, the game is still far from balanced.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
