EPTPvT way to deal with EMP - Page 9
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
Cerion
213 Posts
| ||
|
D3lta
United States93 Posts
On June 13 2010 06:04 bls wrote: go watch brat tvp replays from last zotac. mass rines with couple ghosts + medivacs > everything huk could come up with. including dts and 4gate contain. he doesnt scout, doesnt adapt his pvt build in the whole tourney from what ive seen and his reaper does 0 damage. yet marines + medics + ghosts synergy destroys every p combo, especially shocking is the demolition of a bigger 4gate army while losing only couple marines. not dissing him for abusing it but its just sad to watch. wish i could provide more details but shit patch broke replay function :/ Like the 30 min game vs hasu orbs, where brat slowly out econs hasu? Or perhaps 9 min game where HuK raped him in 9 mins with an immo push. None of his games prove anything except the player that played better won. I'm through with this VR = ghost debate. If you can't see the massive difference between the way VR rushing effected tvp with the way ghosts do, than you are truly blinded by bias. The burden of prof is on the person claiming imbalance. Again, there hasn't been a shread of convincing evidence presented on this thread. As I stated earlier in posts i'm sure you didn't read on this thread. I do think EMP is comparable to storm in one prime way. Both can't be hard countered. You can micro to minimize the impact, but can not avoid it all together. Before one of you go one about "but the ghost range makes it impossible to storm," Maybe you should watch to replay bls so kindly suggested, where brat gets stormed by hasu all game long. As it turns out, you don't need to hard counter storm in order to beat a player using it, anymore than with EMP. | ||
|
whoopadeedoo
United States427 Posts
On June 13 2010 07:08 yarkO wrote: PvT as a whole is a balanced match-up. Lots of diversity and for the most part, entertaining to play. It just loses some of that entertainment when Terran busts out a unit/spell that you have nothing you can do about. Exactly. It's not about Terran or EMP being OP or imbalanced; It's not a Ghost vs HT (or any Toss unit) discussion. It's simply about a unit/spell that Toss has no solutions for. | ||
|
AncienTs
Japan227 Posts
I agree with several of the above posters who state that PvT as a whole is balanced There's a lot of back and forth aggression in PvT because of the various timing windows ushered by the emergence of units like Immortal, Ghost, Colossus, and even the reactor marine/tank push Generally in a standard, well-played game the timing where the ghost can truly be "OP" is very very short (if not non-existent altogether). Having certain "deviations" from your bread and butter play is like having one or two ghosts mixed in with your bioball... or having 1 or 2 immortals mixed in with your toss infantry ball... to claim that these deviations make the game completely out of control is just hyperbole For those still touting the ghost > high templar imbalance... Having that match-up means the protoss player CHOSE to build a twilight council -> tech to archives WITHOUT scouting the terran main! The robotics facility at least offers the observer so you can scout the early 2~3 ghost aggression but committing oneself to the T3 templar then complaining about eating EMP is pretty ridiculous. *** To the bit about the voidray speed upgrade... at what timing in the late-game will you research that upgrade? Getting that fleet beacon and upgrade is a hefty investment / considerable risk considering you and the opponent are having a fairly "even" game! So for a toss player to suddenly invest that... is almost incomprehensible to me (replay please?) | ||
|
trucejl
120 Posts
the diff betw ray rush n ghost is with ray rush all u gotta do is scout n build some marine/viking+micro while ghost means u scout n split the army to make him use 1 extra emp nobody is saying ray = ghost, ppl r just stating the double standard blizz is handling the situation with. they basically saying we gunna help u micro against A but not with B when A is easier to micro against. the only thing rays do in tvp is slow the development of the ground army since it forces the terran to get air to move out. u have to put into account that toss spent all that resource on stargate+rays while neglecting to grow the ground army also stating specific games doesnt usually mean much. just like statistics, they can be skewed to prove w/e pt u wanna prove | ||
|
whoopadeedoo
United States427 Posts
HT build is preferred to Robo since everything that comes out of the Robo is hard countered by T very quickly and easily. | ||
|
Novembermike
United States102 Posts
On June 13 2010 11:20 whoopadeedoo wrote: Um. If you scout ghosts, there's still absolutely nothing you can do to stop them from EMP'ing. THIS is the problem Toss players have with EMP ... there's absolutely nothing Toss can do to prevent EMP from going off and doing significant to severe damage. Exactly. If you see that the opponent is going for EMP there just isn't really much that you can do about it. They didn't put themselves at a significant economic disadvantage (they are behind about 3 marauders, and the ghost offsets one of those with similar damage). They didn't have to go out of their way to tech to it. They don't even have to use a rare building for it. There are generally fairly large disadvantages for anything that powerful. In SC1 emp required a tier 3 unit with an expensive upgrade from a fairly exclusive tech building. If your opponent is trying to get this by any reasonably early point in the game you can take advantage of the resources he had to put into it. Ghosts are a tier 1.5 unit and EMP doesn't need an upgrade, so all a terran player needs to get them is 300 minerals and 200 gas, and some of that cost gives you a unit that is around as good at combat as a marauder. | ||
|
D3lta
United States93 Posts
On June 13 2010 11:17 trucejl wrote: i think most of us agree that playing around storm is many many times easier than playing around emp if u want to compare them the diff betw ray rush n ghost is with ray rush all u gotta do is scout n build some marine/viking+micro while ghost means u scout n split the army to make him use 1 extra emp nobody is saying ray = ghost, ppl r just stating the double standard blizz is handling the situation with. they basically saying we gunna help u micro against A but not with B when A is easier to micro against. the only thing rays do in tvp is slow the development of the ground army since it forces the terran to get air to move out. u have to put into account that toss spent all that resource on stargate+rays while neglecting to grow the ground army also stating specific games doesnt usually mean much. just like statistics, they can be skewed to prove w/e pt u wanna prove Obviously your suppose to able to counter voidrays, and by counter I mean kill. If don't kill or otherwise force the retreat of a VR, it destroys your base and you lose the game. Blizzard and many others saw that it was relatively difficult to micro against VR, compared to the skill level that was required to build them and attack. Thus amongst the lower ranks, VR commonly came to the T players base, destroyed all the units he built to counter them, and then his CC. Blizzard wanted to help players that built the units designed to stop this. The flaw in the VR compared to ghost logic, is it assumes that your suppose to able counter, as in avoid, EMP. It is not in anyway obvious that this is what blizzard wants, or is what is suppose to happen. It is actually quite apparent that landing an EMP is suppose to be fairly easy. Just as it is to land storm or fungal growth (you can move out of storm, that doesn't make it ineffective or hard to land). I didn't bring up games randomly to support my point. I asked for ANY evidence that EMP made it impossible for protoss to win fights where it was dropped, or was otherwise clearly op. I was referred to Brat's games from the zotac cup. Out of the 2 games i watched, it became blatantly obvious that the remarks about unstoppable ghost pushes were utter BS. So I ask again: is there really any convincing evidence that EMP is overpowered? Both replays and statistics so far have not shown anything even mildly convincing IMO. You say replays and statics aren't valid...compared to what? this unsubstantiated whining? | ||
|
trucejl
120 Posts
On June 13 2010 13:53 D3lta wrote: Obviously your suppose to able to counter voidrays, and by counter I mean kill. If don't kill or otherwise force the retreat of a VR, it destroys your base and you lose the game. Blizzard and many others saw that it was relatively difficult to micro against VR, compared to the skill level that was required to build them and attack. Thus amongst the lower ranks, VR commonly came to the T players base, destroyed all the units he built to counter them, and then his CC. Blizzard wanted to help players that built the units designed to stop this. The flaw in the VR compared to ghost logic, is it assumes that your suppose to able counter, as in avoid, EMP. It is not in anyway obvious that this is what blizzard wants, or is what is suppose to happen. It is actually quite apparent that landing an EMP is suppose to be fairly easy. Just as it is to land storm or fungal growth (you can move out of storm, that doesn't make it ineffective or hard to land). I didn't bring up games randomly to support my point. I asked for ANY evidence that EMP made it impossible for protoss to win fights where it was dropped, or was otherwise clearly op. I was referred to Brat's games from the zotac cup. Out of the 2 games i watched, it became blatantly obvious that the remarks about unstoppable ghost pushes were utter BS. So I ask again: is there really any convincing evidence that EMP is overpowered? Both replays and statistics so far have not shown anything even mildly convincing IMO. You say replays and statics aren't valid...compared to what? this unsubstantiated whining? so wat ur saying is toss needs to fight with no shield n have no "counter" to emp? if ur ok with some things in a supposely "balanced" game have no opposition then that is a problem in itself. also landing emp is way easier than storm bc of its range n mobility of the ghost. but with "counter" i mean lessening the effect of something not avoid. there IS no way to avoid emp at least not the way u can with storm. if the terran wants to emp something, hes gunna get it also landing a storm n emp is very diff. landing a storm means u hit them but like u said ppl move out of the spot most of the time. hence it doesnt do its full 80 dmg making it ineffective. most of the time toss will be happy to be able to do 40 dmg. all the while emp is an automatic instant -50 most of the time(toss army contains mostly zealot n stalker all the time) however there is not much point in comparing storm to emp since most unbiased ppl c the clear diff replays n statistic is irrelevant bc of the content in which it is used. ppl will only point out spots where it benefits their argument. this happens everywhere, if u dont understand that then u need to be around more things. u say all this emp stuff is "unsubstantiated" whining but ppl dont whine out of nothing. maybe 1-2 ppl do bc they r just bad but when a large amount of ppl argue over it, there is something wrong 1 way or another. with the ray situation, with the ppl complaining. many were able to say if u do A u will do quite well against it. there is no such solution for emp. hell there is something of that nature for everything else in the game right now. that is the very definition of balance. ppl saying feedback, phoenix, spreading out army have obv not tried doing so n do not realize how much it fails. the only "decent" way is having a heavy zealot army which brings its own problem. | ||
|
space_yes
United States548 Posts
I wish I could EMP this thread. | ||
|
space_yes
United States548 Posts
On June 13 2010 14:20 trucejl wrote: replays n statistic is irrelevant bc of the content in which it is used. ppl will only point out spots where it benefits their argument. this happens everywhere, if u dont understand that then u need to be around more things. u say all this emp stuff is "unsubstantiated" whining but ppl dont whine out of nothing. maybe 1-2 ppl do bc they r just bad but when a large amount of ppl argue over it, there is something wrong 1 way or another. Of course! I realize now actual evidence is irrelevant to the discussion! The real evidence is the numerous posters like you  . Clearly we should ignore the fairly balanced ladder/tournament results from the beta thus far and rely entirely on this thread to balance PvT. I worry for the future of SC2  | ||
|
D3lta
United States93 Posts
Player B says "show my a replay" Player A says "Brat vs toss in the zotac cup" Player B says "Brat won the first game I saw after 30 mins of out-econing the toss, and lost the second in 9 minutes to an immortal push" Player C say s"Replays don't mean anything guys, you'll just bring up what matches support your point" As for the ridiculous statements about storm being ineffective vs micro (and of course, also hard to land), and the same old broken "blizzard changed VR so they'll change ghosts"argument. there's plenty I've already stated on this thread. | ||
|
whoopadeedoo
United States427 Posts
And folks, citing pro replays as evidence is not the entire story of balance. Pros play at a level well beyond 99.9999% of all players, so their ability to micro/macro does not translate to everyone else. The game needs to be balanced for all levels of play. You shouldn't require pro level micro/macro to counter EMP (which is extremely easy to execute). It's exactly why the VR was nerfed (as stated by Blizzard). The same should apply to EMP. | ||
|
Ryuu314
United States12679 Posts
On June 13 2010 15:07 whoopadeedoo wrote: Can we accept that EMP is NOT imbalanced/OP but needs reworking so Toss actually can do something about it? And folks, citing pro replays as evidence is not the entire story of balance. Pros play at a level well beyond 99.9999% of all players, so their ability to micro/macro does not translate to everyone else. The game needs to be balanced for all levels of play. You shouldn't require pro level micro/macro to counter EMP (which is extremely easy to execute). It's exactly why the VR was nerfed (as stated by Blizzard). The same should apply to EMP. Interesting argument, but it's one that shouldn't be relied on. If Blizzard balances too heavily based on casual level play, then the game's future as an esport will be severely hindered. I already disagree with all the nerfs done purely to help noobs play the game because they're pointless, stupid, and have repercussions beyond what Blizzard intends. EMP is crazy strong and in my opinion is much, much better than storm and is perhaps one of the best spells in the game. It's probably OP and imba, but I don't think it really needs to be changed, except maybe a cast range or radius nerf, but even in its current incarnation it's fine. Playing PvT has always required a lot of ability and effort in proper micro and positioning on both sides, especially for Protoss once the game gets into mid-late game ever since BW. I see no reason why that should be a problem. | ||
|
space_yes
United States548 Posts
On June 13 2010 15:26 Ryuu314 wrote: Interesting argument, but it's one that shouldn't be relied on. If Blizzard balances too heavily based on casual level play, then the game's future as an esport will be severely hindered. I already disagree with all the nerfs done purely to help noobs play the game because they're pointless, stupid, and have repercussions beyond what Blizzard intends. EMP is crazy strong and in my opinion is much, much better than storm and is perhaps one of the best spells in the game. It's probably OP and imba, but I don't think it really needs to be changed, except maybe a cast range or radius nerf, but even in its current incarnation it's fine. Playing PvT has always required a lot of ability and effort in proper micro and positioning on both sides, especially Protoss once the game gets into mid-late game ever since BW. I see no reason why that should be a problem. Yeah seriously don't balance the game based on casual play. If you keep reducing the skill ceiling then SC2 won't be the esport BW is. | ||
|
whoopadeedoo
United States427 Posts
Right now, the Toss solution is to micro and macro much higher than Terran to work around EMP. That works fine on pro levels where these skills are very high and on relative par from player to player. In non-pro gameplay, it does not work whatsoever. This is another form of imbalance which must not be ignored IMO. I'm still a fan of my GS idea (several pages back) because I think it would result in very competitive pro plays for both Toss and Terran. | ||
|
space_yes
United States548 Posts
On June 13 2010 15:44 whoopadeedoo wrote: Balancing for non-pro play (this goes for everyone in Diamond, which I was top 10 in before and after the reset) doesn't have to mean lowering the skill cap. In fact, it could increase the skill cap. It seems you're looking at this from a Terran POV (ie giving Toss a solution would mean it's easier for Toss). Dig deeper. Making EMP harder to use would obviously not reduce the skill cap for Terran; It would increase it. And if you give it more critical thought, giving Toss an EMP solution would require as much if not more skill from Toss too (just shifting skillset). Right now, the Toss solution is to micro and macro much higher than Terran to work around EMP. That works fine on pro levels where these skills are very high and on relative par from player to player. In non-pro gameplay, it does not work whatsoever. This is another form of imbalance which must not be ignored IMO. I'm still a fan of my GS idea (several pages back) because I think it would result in very competitive pro plays for both Toss and Terran. Where would you get the idea that the protoss has to macro at a higher level at the terran? Was that a typo? Micro is debatable but you think macro is harder for the toss? Seriously? I don't want to derail the thread on this point but I can't help but point it out b/c I think it undermines your credibility The lack of a direct protoss EMP solution isn't evidence of imbalance. If T > P statistically on ladder and in most tournaments/pro-leagues b/c of substantiated EMP usage then that would be evidence of imbalance but we really haven't seen that (as a result of EMP). I think the whole point of EMP is to help the terran compensate for the general strength of the protoss army and other MU nuances. Blizzard wants the protoss to get EMP'd. I can see why you would think making it dodgeable would add micro to the game (it would) but it would be at the cost of balance and strategic diversity. One of the tricky things about balance is how it affects different skill levels. For example, if EMP were hard to dodge, but dodgeable most gosu protoss would consistently dodge it and ghosts would disappear from high level play. Sure, this scenario is great for the casual gamer but bad for the high level terran. Without reliable EMP bio builds become much less viable and the general strategic diversity of high level play suffers. How much fun is Warcraft 3 to watch? Is this what we really want for PvT everyone doing the same build? This is what I was getting at with my comment about skill ceiling and balance adjustments. I want SC2 to succeed as an e-sport and things that further newbify an already too-easy game I'm strongly against. I'm open to being convinced but I from all of the games I've played and the replays I've watched (most Zotac, ESL etc.) I just don't see any evidence that EMP is imbalanced in high level play so I don't understand why its need more nerfing (it was nerfed once if you recall). It kind of reminds me of irradiate from BW in TvZ. There was literally nothing the zerg could do about but try and snipe vessels (which can be very difficult). The reason late game TvZ wasn't completely imba was b/c other factors besides irradiate. Specifically dark swarm and ultralisks. If irradiate was directly counter-able (dodgeable, removable in some way) late game zerg would always overrun the terran. I can't help but feel EMP is vaguely analogous in some regards. EDIT: I'll point out too that we're ignoring the economic costs of ghost play for terran. These are not insignificant and can't be debated by just adding up the gas cost and being like "oh wow it only costs X gas, that's really not very much." Gas costs are relative to build orders, production capabilities, and stage of the game. They can only be understood in the union these contexts. If it were demonstrated (it hasn't in this thread at least) EMP was imbalanced one potential nerf would be a cloak nerf or slight range nerf. That would make ghosts easier to snipe which would add a tactical element to game play. Other possible nerfs include decreasing the rate ghosts recharge energy. But again, I don't think Blizzard should mess with EMP without evidence of PvT imbalance as a result of EMP. Who knows, maybe their internal statistics prove me completely wrong. Idk. | ||
|
space_yes
United States548 Posts
Additionally I think the long range is to make it possible to EMP deeper into the protoss army without making your ghost too easily snipable. If it were easy to snipe the ghost you'd see them disappear from high level play. This is why I think Blizzard has it as an instant cast with 10 range. Nerfing the range or making it dodgeable would would significantly hamper its utility which is why the last nerf was a radius nerf. | ||
|
DragonDefonce
United States790 Posts
| ||
|
space_yes
United States548 Posts
On June 13 2010 17:56 DragonDefonce wrote: Theres is absolutely zero chance in a evenly matched game that terran will get less than 3 or 4 emps out in a late game battle. Its just how it is. You try to counter with colo or storm. Feedbacking the ghosts are a huge fail move, its just too micro intensive, you don't even know if that ghost already used their mana or not, and ghost and cloak to counter it, as well as bing tiny enough to be really hard to pick out of an army. Lol!! I'm quitting this thread. I'm not even sure why I wasted so much time posting. This post just reminded me why I hate the sc2 strategy forums. Thanks for rewinding 3-4 pages DragonDefonce just when what seemed to be an actual discussion started to occur. GG guys | ||
| ||
