|
you can add oracle-voidray allin to the book, in case you end up on habitation station
|
y u no do dis fo terran?
pls terran
|
On April 02 2014 23:33 SC2John wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2014 23:22 DomeGetta wrote:On April 02 2014 22:49 SC2John wrote:On April 02 2014 22:40 Whitewing wrote:On April 02 2014 22:14 DomeGetta wrote:
I just want to first open with this is an incredible thread lol! That picture is one of the best gifs I've seen lololol.
Anyways - I want to get on my soap box for just a few moments here about this type of play in general. Obviously it would be pretty rare for anyone from Blizz to read the comments on this post regardless of how glorious it is but I digress.
All of these brutal timings that exist in the game - (to which protoss has an incredible sum, zerg slightly less and terran probably the least) should be eliminated via nerf! Speaking strictly to the good of the game and not at all to balance: The existence of these timings add chaos to the game and minimize the impact of the skill of the players on the outcome.
The "standard" builds that develop now have to incorporate inefficient safe-guards against all of this (and yes people talk about scouting but scouting for every timing that can kill you is inefficient it is an investment and if your opponent chooses to ignore it you will be very behind).
Now - if pro A chooses to scout for the timings and play safe and pro B chooses to say fuck it and greeds out pro B definitely wins all things equal. If pro A chooses to execute the timings and pro B chooses to say fuck it and greeds out pro A definitely wins. The outcome is predetermined and not at all in the spirit of the game imo.
I understand the positive impact that early aggressive timings can have on the game and maybe not 100% of them should be nerfed out but there really shouldn't be so many. It really does take away the aspect that the better player wins more of the time (i.e. duckeduck / billowy type nonsense).
In the spirit of competition don't we want the best player (macro / micro / multitask) to be the winner more of the time? Not just the player who guessed right 2 out of 3 times on that particular day??
Pls help Blizz QQ (;D)
Anyways cool thread lol - having the knowledge of these builds will surely help my cheese defense but make my standard play safer / less efficient and winrate in macro games go down lol. All of these builds can be scouted with appropriate play, they are not overpowered and broken, and good players who aren't playing too greedy can spot them coming and defend. I think he's trying to say that your opponent can play high variance builds like sOs (AKA proxy void ray one game, nexus first the next) and win a majority of the time. In fact, he suggests it might be the best way to play Protoss. However, if this were true, Rain and Zest wouldn't be the best Protoss players in the world right now. Bluntly stated: as long as you have good macro and mechanics, you can play safe and beat noobs on ladder playing high variance builds. Yah let me clarify some. I am a semi active - mid-masters level player on NA. I actually watch a whole lot more starcraft than I play now days. What I'm really saying is that I (as a viewer and a player) am really tired of seeing game outcomes predetermined based on who had more balls / less balls (depending on scenario) I'm not saying you can't sniff out these builds and react appropriately but what I am saying is that it's actually pretty easy to straight up lose games to build order counters (Innovation vs TLhero IEM - 11/11 vs zerg on 4 player maps unscouted etc). I just really don't see what it is that we think they add to the game. Nobody wants to see a 15 minute 3-0 stomping with 3 build order wins..it's not impressive or entertaining. You can argue all day long that "if you play safe and perfectly you can win" but you can't argue that if you play safe and your opponent plays greedy that you should win - again that's more chaos and less skill based. I've seen plenty of pro games to that effect as well. To make my question more clear I guess - How exactly does having so many different plausable cheese game enders improve the over all state of the game? If someone has a good answer I'm a pretty open minded dude I just can't think of one. Obviously no one wants the game to be 45 minute turtle-fest and I really am ok with the idea of early game action I just feel like there shouldn't be so many ways to just straight up lose based on what build you chose - there should be safe macro oriented builds that don't get blown out of the water by incredible greed (which I'm not saying we are that far off I'm just saying I really don't understand the point of having 3/4 of these timings exist (roach/bane / 1 base blink 2 base blink / 1 base DT/ 11/11 / 6pool etc). To me personally it doesn't add anything positive to the game - the only thing it does do is allow much lesser skilled individuals to climb higher up on the ladder than they should be and create "meta battles" in the highest level pro games - the latter which I am sort of OK with but I wish it was less frequent. I'm afraid there's no way to fix it other than to dynamically change the game design. Like, there's obviously these all-ins and such, but even if they somehow managed to remove them from the game while keeping the rest of the game balanced, there would still be the threat of other high variance builds. It's just how the game is constructed via the speed (of the game), the incredibly smooth pathing, the unit AI, mineral gathering, etc., etc. Without a complete overhaul of the core game mechanics, Blizzard can't do anything about high variance builds. We say that Protoss has the highest percentage of cheeses, but that's only because Protoss has more options available to them early on. If we go back to WoL, Protoss opened almost the same way every game. In fact, most matches looked identical, and the result was a very stale, boring game to watch. Certainly Blizzard needs to watch out and avoid creating too much early game variance, but the element of randomness is SC2 is somewhat a good thing. Like I said, though, I don't think we can completely eliminate the effects of randomness on the game because of the way SC2 is designed at its core.
Ya I hear you on this - my only thing to add would be that even though people bitch about MSC a lot - it sort of did what I'm talking about for Protoss. At least from a Terran perspective there is almost no early game threat for them outside of 11/11 (or if you fail to probe scout gas first and react accordingly). If they did something similar to this for T and Z it might help - but then again I really don't want to create a turtle-fest either.
|
On April 03 2014 00:52 DomeGetta wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2014 23:33 SC2John wrote:On April 02 2014 23:22 DomeGetta wrote:On April 02 2014 22:49 SC2John wrote:On April 02 2014 22:40 Whitewing wrote:On April 02 2014 22:14 DomeGetta wrote:
I just want to first open with this is an incredible thread lol! That picture is one of the best gifs I've seen lololol.
Anyways - I want to get on my soap box for just a few moments here about this type of play in general. Obviously it would be pretty rare for anyone from Blizz to read the comments on this post regardless of how glorious it is but I digress.
All of these brutal timings that exist in the game - (to which protoss has an incredible sum, zerg slightly less and terran probably the least) should be eliminated via nerf! Speaking strictly to the good of the game and not at all to balance: The existence of these timings add chaos to the game and minimize the impact of the skill of the players on the outcome.
The "standard" builds that develop now have to incorporate inefficient safe-guards against all of this (and yes people talk about scouting but scouting for every timing that can kill you is inefficient it is an investment and if your opponent chooses to ignore it you will be very behind).
Now - if pro A chooses to scout for the timings and play safe and pro B chooses to say fuck it and greeds out pro B definitely wins all things equal. If pro A chooses to execute the timings and pro B chooses to say fuck it and greeds out pro A definitely wins. The outcome is predetermined and not at all in the spirit of the game imo.
I understand the positive impact that early aggressive timings can have on the game and maybe not 100% of them should be nerfed out but there really shouldn't be so many. It really does take away the aspect that the better player wins more of the time (i.e. duckeduck / billowy type nonsense).
In the spirit of competition don't we want the best player (macro / micro / multitask) to be the winner more of the time? Not just the player who guessed right 2 out of 3 times on that particular day??
Pls help Blizz QQ (;D)
Anyways cool thread lol - having the knowledge of these builds will surely help my cheese defense but make my standard play safer / less efficient and winrate in macro games go down lol. All of these builds can be scouted with appropriate play, they are not overpowered and broken, and good players who aren't playing too greedy can spot them coming and defend. I think he's trying to say that your opponent can play high variance builds like sOs (AKA proxy void ray one game, nexus first the next) and win a majority of the time. In fact, he suggests it might be the best way to play Protoss. However, if this were true, Rain and Zest wouldn't be the best Protoss players in the world right now. Bluntly stated: as long as you have good macro and mechanics, you can play safe and beat noobs on ladder playing high variance builds. Yah let me clarify some. I am a semi active - mid-masters level player on NA. I actually watch a whole lot more starcraft than I play now days. What I'm really saying is that I (as a viewer and a player) am really tired of seeing game outcomes predetermined based on who had more balls / less balls (depending on scenario) I'm not saying you can't sniff out these builds and react appropriately but what I am saying is that it's actually pretty easy to straight up lose games to build order counters (Innovation vs TLhero IEM - 11/11 vs zerg on 4 player maps unscouted etc). I just really don't see what it is that we think they add to the game. Nobody wants to see a 15 minute 3-0 stomping with 3 build order wins..it's not impressive or entertaining. You can argue all day long that "if you play safe and perfectly you can win" but you can't argue that if you play safe and your opponent plays greedy that you should win - again that's more chaos and less skill based. I've seen plenty of pro games to that effect as well. To make my question more clear I guess - How exactly does having so many different plausable cheese game enders improve the over all state of the game? If someone has a good answer I'm a pretty open minded dude I just can't think of one. Obviously no one wants the game to be 45 minute turtle-fest and I really am ok with the idea of early game action I just feel like there shouldn't be so many ways to just straight up lose based on what build you chose - there should be safe macro oriented builds that don't get blown out of the water by incredible greed (which I'm not saying we are that far off I'm just saying I really don't understand the point of having 3/4 of these timings exist (roach/bane / 1 base blink 2 base blink / 1 base DT/ 11/11 / 6pool etc). To me personally it doesn't add anything positive to the game - the only thing it does do is allow much lesser skilled individuals to climb higher up on the ladder than they should be and create "meta battles" in the highest level pro games - the latter which I am sort of OK with but I wish it was less frequent. I'm afraid there's no way to fix it other than to dynamically change the game design. Like, there's obviously these all-ins and such, but even if they somehow managed to remove them from the game while keeping the rest of the game balanced, there would still be the threat of other high variance builds. It's just how the game is constructed via the speed (of the game), the incredibly smooth pathing, the unit AI, mineral gathering, etc., etc. Without a complete overhaul of the core game mechanics, Blizzard can't do anything about high variance builds. We say that Protoss has the highest percentage of cheeses, but that's only because Protoss has more options available to them early on. If we go back to WoL, Protoss opened almost the same way every game. In fact, most matches looked identical, and the result was a very stale, boring game to watch. Certainly Blizzard needs to watch out and avoid creating too much early game variance, but the element of randomness is SC2 is somewhat a good thing. Like I said, though, I don't think we can completely eliminate the effects of randomness on the game because of the way SC2 is designed at its core. Ya I hear you on this - my only thing to add would be that even though people bitch about MSC a lot - it sort of did what I'm talking about for Protoss. At least from a Terran perspective there is almost no early game threat for them outside of 11/11 (or if you fail to probe scout gas first and react accordingly). If they did something similar to this for T and Z it might help - but then again I really don't want to create a turtle-fest either.
No early game threat O.o?
-1-1-1
-mine drop (2 different types)
-proxy factory
-hellion marine
-3 reaper
-mass reaper
-marauder mine pressure
|
On April 02 2014 12:48 moofang wrote:The least you TL strategy writers (magnificent sons of a bitch) can do in penance for this great evil is to make a follow up "how to play against bullshit builds" thing  Even as protoss I'd kind of like to know how to optimally play against a 10-gate/3-gate, for eg, other than doing an even faster bullshit build x)
Let us know when you figure it out.
Identifying the particular brand of bullshit headed your way is the first step, and that's hard enough as it is.
|
On April 03 2014 01:15 -HuShang- wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2014 00:52 DomeGetta wrote:On April 02 2014 23:33 SC2John wrote:On April 02 2014 23:22 DomeGetta wrote:On April 02 2014 22:49 SC2John wrote:On April 02 2014 22:40 Whitewing wrote:On April 02 2014 22:14 DomeGetta wrote:
I just want to first open with this is an incredible thread lol! That picture is one of the best gifs I've seen lololol.
Anyways - I want to get on my soap box for just a few moments here about this type of play in general. Obviously it would be pretty rare for anyone from Blizz to read the comments on this post regardless of how glorious it is but I digress.
All of these brutal timings that exist in the game - (to which protoss has an incredible sum, zerg slightly less and terran probably the least) should be eliminated via nerf! Speaking strictly to the good of the game and not at all to balance: The existence of these timings add chaos to the game and minimize the impact of the skill of the players on the outcome.
The "standard" builds that develop now have to incorporate inefficient safe-guards against all of this (and yes people talk about scouting but scouting for every timing that can kill you is inefficient it is an investment and if your opponent chooses to ignore it you will be very behind).
Now - if pro A chooses to scout for the timings and play safe and pro B chooses to say fuck it and greeds out pro B definitely wins all things equal. If pro A chooses to execute the timings and pro B chooses to say fuck it and greeds out pro A definitely wins. The outcome is predetermined and not at all in the spirit of the game imo.
I understand the positive impact that early aggressive timings can have on the game and maybe not 100% of them should be nerfed out but there really shouldn't be so many. It really does take away the aspect that the better player wins more of the time (i.e. duckeduck / billowy type nonsense).
In the spirit of competition don't we want the best player (macro / micro / multitask) to be the winner more of the time? Not just the player who guessed right 2 out of 3 times on that particular day??
Pls help Blizz QQ (;D)
Anyways cool thread lol - having the knowledge of these builds will surely help my cheese defense but make my standard play safer / less efficient and winrate in macro games go down lol. All of these builds can be scouted with appropriate play, they are not overpowered and broken, and good players who aren't playing too greedy can spot them coming and defend. I think he's trying to say that your opponent can play high variance builds like sOs (AKA proxy void ray one game, nexus first the next) and win a majority of the time. In fact, he suggests it might be the best way to play Protoss. However, if this were true, Rain and Zest wouldn't be the best Protoss players in the world right now. Bluntly stated: as long as you have good macro and mechanics, you can play safe and beat noobs on ladder playing high variance builds. Yah let me clarify some. I am a semi active - mid-masters level player on NA. I actually watch a whole lot more starcraft than I play now days. What I'm really saying is that I (as a viewer and a player) am really tired of seeing game outcomes predetermined based on who had more balls / less balls (depending on scenario) I'm not saying you can't sniff out these builds and react appropriately but what I am saying is that it's actually pretty easy to straight up lose games to build order counters (Innovation vs TLhero IEM - 11/11 vs zerg on 4 player maps unscouted etc). I just really don't see what it is that we think they add to the game. Nobody wants to see a 15 minute 3-0 stomping with 3 build order wins..it's not impressive or entertaining. You can argue all day long that "if you play safe and perfectly you can win" but you can't argue that if you play safe and your opponent plays greedy that you should win - again that's more chaos and less skill based. I've seen plenty of pro games to that effect as well. To make my question more clear I guess - How exactly does having so many different plausable cheese game enders improve the over all state of the game? If someone has a good answer I'm a pretty open minded dude I just can't think of one. Obviously no one wants the game to be 45 minute turtle-fest and I really am ok with the idea of early game action I just feel like there shouldn't be so many ways to just straight up lose based on what build you chose - there should be safe macro oriented builds that don't get blown out of the water by incredible greed (which I'm not saying we are that far off I'm just saying I really don't understand the point of having 3/4 of these timings exist (roach/bane / 1 base blink 2 base blink / 1 base DT/ 11/11 / 6pool etc). To me personally it doesn't add anything positive to the game - the only thing it does do is allow much lesser skilled individuals to climb higher up on the ladder than they should be and create "meta battles" in the highest level pro games - the latter which I am sort of OK with but I wish it was less frequent. I'm afraid there's no way to fix it other than to dynamically change the game design. Like, there's obviously these all-ins and such, but even if they somehow managed to remove them from the game while keeping the rest of the game balanced, there would still be the threat of other high variance builds. It's just how the game is constructed via the speed (of the game), the incredibly smooth pathing, the unit AI, mineral gathering, etc., etc. Without a complete overhaul of the core game mechanics, Blizzard can't do anything about high variance builds. We say that Protoss has the highest percentage of cheeses, but that's only because Protoss has more options available to them early on. If we go back to WoL, Protoss opened almost the same way every game. In fact, most matches looked identical, and the result was a very stale, boring game to watch. Certainly Blizzard needs to watch out and avoid creating too much early game variance, but the element of randomness is SC2 is somewhat a good thing. Like I said, though, I don't think we can completely eliminate the effects of randomness on the game because of the way SC2 is designed at its core. Ya I hear you on this - my only thing to add would be that even though people bitch about MSC a lot - it sort of did what I'm talking about for Protoss. At least from a Terran perspective there is almost no early game threat for them outside of 11/11 (or if you fail to probe scout gas first and react accordingly). If they did something similar to this for T and Z it might help - but then again I really don't want to create a turtle-fest either. No early game threat O.o? -1-1-1 -mine drop (2 different types) -proxy factory -hellion marine -3 reaper -mass reaper -marauder mine pressure
Did you catch this part ? "(or if you fail to probe scout gas first and react accordingly). "
Which of these isn't shut down by a forge and a cannon at each mineral line?
2 stalkers pretty well shut down 3 reaper.
I didn't say it was perfect for toss I just said that toss can open macro vs. T with relatively little fear.
|
On April 03 2014 01:15 -HuShang- wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2014 00:52 DomeGetta wrote:On April 02 2014 23:33 SC2John wrote:On April 02 2014 23:22 DomeGetta wrote:On April 02 2014 22:49 SC2John wrote:On April 02 2014 22:40 Whitewing wrote:On April 02 2014 22:14 DomeGetta wrote:
I just want to first open with this is an incredible thread lol! That picture is one of the best gifs I've seen lololol.
Anyways - I want to get on my soap box for just a few moments here about this type of play in general. Obviously it would be pretty rare for anyone from Blizz to read the comments on this post regardless of how glorious it is but I digress.
All of these brutal timings that exist in the game - (to which protoss has an incredible sum, zerg slightly less and terran probably the least) should be eliminated via nerf! Speaking strictly to the good of the game and not at all to balance: The existence of these timings add chaos to the game and minimize the impact of the skill of the players on the outcome.
The "standard" builds that develop now have to incorporate inefficient safe-guards against all of this (and yes people talk about scouting but scouting for every timing that can kill you is inefficient it is an investment and if your opponent chooses to ignore it you will be very behind).
Now - if pro A chooses to scout for the timings and play safe and pro B chooses to say fuck it and greeds out pro B definitely wins all things equal. If pro A chooses to execute the timings and pro B chooses to say fuck it and greeds out pro A definitely wins. The outcome is predetermined and not at all in the spirit of the game imo.
I understand the positive impact that early aggressive timings can have on the game and maybe not 100% of them should be nerfed out but there really shouldn't be so many. It really does take away the aspect that the better player wins more of the time (i.e. duckeduck / billowy type nonsense).
In the spirit of competition don't we want the best player (macro / micro / multitask) to be the winner more of the time? Not just the player who guessed right 2 out of 3 times on that particular day??
Pls help Blizz QQ (;D)
Anyways cool thread lol - having the knowledge of these builds will surely help my cheese defense but make my standard play safer / less efficient and winrate in macro games go down lol. All of these builds can be scouted with appropriate play, they are not overpowered and broken, and good players who aren't playing too greedy can spot them coming and defend. I think he's trying to say that your opponent can play high variance builds like sOs (AKA proxy void ray one game, nexus first the next) and win a majority of the time. In fact, he suggests it might be the best way to play Protoss. However, if this were true, Rain and Zest wouldn't be the best Protoss players in the world right now. Bluntly stated: as long as you have good macro and mechanics, you can play safe and beat noobs on ladder playing high variance builds. Yah let me clarify some. I am a semi active - mid-masters level player on NA. I actually watch a whole lot more starcraft than I play now days. What I'm really saying is that I (as a viewer and a player) am really tired of seeing game outcomes predetermined based on who had more balls / less balls (depending on scenario) I'm not saying you can't sniff out these builds and react appropriately but what I am saying is that it's actually pretty easy to straight up lose games to build order counters (Innovation vs TLhero IEM - 11/11 vs zerg on 4 player maps unscouted etc). I just really don't see what it is that we think they add to the game. Nobody wants to see a 15 minute 3-0 stomping with 3 build order wins..it's not impressive or entertaining. You can argue all day long that "if you play safe and perfectly you can win" but you can't argue that if you play safe and your opponent plays greedy that you should win - again that's more chaos and less skill based. I've seen plenty of pro games to that effect as well. To make my question more clear I guess - How exactly does having so many different plausable cheese game enders improve the over all state of the game? If someone has a good answer I'm a pretty open minded dude I just can't think of one. Obviously no one wants the game to be 45 minute turtle-fest and I really am ok with the idea of early game action I just feel like there shouldn't be so many ways to just straight up lose based on what build you chose - there should be safe macro oriented builds that don't get blown out of the water by incredible greed (which I'm not saying we are that far off I'm just saying I really don't understand the point of having 3/4 of these timings exist (roach/bane / 1 base blink 2 base blink / 1 base DT/ 11/11 / 6pool etc). To me personally it doesn't add anything positive to the game - the only thing it does do is allow much lesser skilled individuals to climb higher up on the ladder than they should be and create "meta battles" in the highest level pro games - the latter which I am sort of OK with but I wish it was less frequent. I'm afraid there's no way to fix it other than to dynamically change the game design. Like, there's obviously these all-ins and such, but even if they somehow managed to remove them from the game while keeping the rest of the game balanced, there would still be the threat of other high variance builds. It's just how the game is constructed via the speed (of the game), the incredibly smooth pathing, the unit AI, mineral gathering, etc., etc. Without a complete overhaul of the core game mechanics, Blizzard can't do anything about high variance builds. We say that Protoss has the highest percentage of cheeses, but that's only because Protoss has more options available to them early on. If we go back to WoL, Protoss opened almost the same way every game. In fact, most matches looked identical, and the result was a very stale, boring game to watch. Certainly Blizzard needs to watch out and avoid creating too much early game variance, but the element of randomness is SC2 is somewhat a good thing. Like I said, though, I don't think we can completely eliminate the effects of randomness on the game because of the way SC2 is designed at its core. Ya I hear you on this - my only thing to add would be that even though people bitch about MSC a lot - it sort of did what I'm talking about for Protoss. At least from a Terran perspective there is almost no early game threat for them outside of 11/11 (or if you fail to probe scout gas first and react accordingly). If they did something similar to this for T and Z it might help - but then again I really don't want to create a turtle-fest either. No early game threat O.o? -1-1-1 -mine drop (2 different types) -proxy factory -hellion marine -3 reaper -mass reaper -marauder mine pressure
You must piss yourself with fear thinking about all of those!
|
On April 02 2014 21:18 Waise wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2014 14:58 Ben... wrote:
because the risks they pulled were so stupid that you didn't think they would be dumb enough to do them classic excuse of someone who doesn't scout well No. not even close. I'm talking stuff like nexus off no units other than an oracle or cutting crazy corners in unsafe ways. Stupid metagamey builds that you face once and you know how to handle them after playing against them. PvP has always been full of that kinda stuff. Rather than having to deal with that once in a while I'd rather simply end the game quickly and go on to play a different matchup that's actually fun because I do not enjoy anything about macro PvP.
|
On April 02 2014 05:19 Staboteur wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2014 04:53 Z-BosoN wrote:
lol, people are so sensitive.
That's what you get for making a racist joke. LOL well played. And yes colossus friendly fire please. And chance for them to trip and fucking explode when pathing over friendly / enemy units / cliffs. please.
this
|
the pvp builds are so gimicky. most of these builds are, even the macro ones. in high levels (master and up) dont rely on this bthings.
|
Did you catch this part ? "(or if you fail to probe scout gas first and react accordingly).
Which of these isn't shut down by a forge and a cannon at each mineral line?
All of these require different responses zzz...
1) You can't scout 1-1-1 until 7:20 obs. You can't scout minedrop till 7:20 obs. You can't scout late mine drop till 7:20 obs.
(keep in mind its really easy to kill the obs and barely any terrans do it)
2) Terran can show gas and get a reactor and no reapers
3) 1-1-1 and mass reaper both lose to blind cannons and look the same as all these other builds.
Typical terran being naive and thinking only their race is hard. Just build 2 cannons in each mineral line.. o boy.. I tell you what. Build 2 turrets in your mineral line. That defends dt and oracle. eZ right? xD.............
You must piss yourself with fear thinking about all of those!
-3 rax no fact
-11-11
-1 base medivac marine
-proxy tank(polar night)
|
On April 03 2014 01:15 -HuShang- wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2014 00:52 DomeGetta wrote:On April 02 2014 23:33 SC2John wrote:On April 02 2014 23:22 DomeGetta wrote:On April 02 2014 22:49 SC2John wrote:On April 02 2014 22:40 Whitewing wrote:On April 02 2014 22:14 DomeGetta wrote:
I just want to first open with this is an incredible thread lol! That picture is one of the best gifs I've seen lololol.
Anyways - I want to get on my soap box for just a few moments here about this type of play in general. Obviously it would be pretty rare for anyone from Blizz to read the comments on this post regardless of how glorious it is but I digress.
All of these brutal timings that exist in the game - (to which protoss has an incredible sum, zerg slightly less and terran probably the least) should be eliminated via nerf! Speaking strictly to the good of the game and not at all to balance: The existence of these timings add chaos to the game and minimize the impact of the skill of the players on the outcome.
The "standard" builds that develop now have to incorporate inefficient safe-guards against all of this (and yes people talk about scouting but scouting for every timing that can kill you is inefficient it is an investment and if your opponent chooses to ignore it you will be very behind).
Now - if pro A chooses to scout for the timings and play safe and pro B chooses to say fuck it and greeds out pro B definitely wins all things equal. If pro A chooses to execute the timings and pro B chooses to say fuck it and greeds out pro A definitely wins. The outcome is predetermined and not at all in the spirit of the game imo.
I understand the positive impact that early aggressive timings can have on the game and maybe not 100% of them should be nerfed out but there really shouldn't be so many. It really does take away the aspect that the better player wins more of the time (i.e. duckeduck / billowy type nonsense).
In the spirit of competition don't we want the best player (macro / micro / multitask) to be the winner more of the time? Not just the player who guessed right 2 out of 3 times on that particular day??
Pls help Blizz QQ (;D)
Anyways cool thread lol - having the knowledge of these builds will surely help my cheese defense but make my standard play safer / less efficient and winrate in macro games go down lol. All of these builds can be scouted with appropriate play, they are not overpowered and broken, and good players who aren't playing too greedy can spot them coming and defend. I think he's trying to say that your opponent can play high variance builds like sOs (AKA proxy void ray one game, nexus first the next) and win a majority of the time. In fact, he suggests it might be the best way to play Protoss. However, if this were true, Rain and Zest wouldn't be the best Protoss players in the world right now. Bluntly stated: as long as you have good macro and mechanics, you can play safe and beat noobs on ladder playing high variance builds. Yah let me clarify some. I am a semi active - mid-masters level player on NA. I actually watch a whole lot more starcraft than I play now days. What I'm really saying is that I (as a viewer and a player) am really tired of seeing game outcomes predetermined based on who had more balls / less balls (depending on scenario) I'm not saying you can't sniff out these builds and react appropriately but what I am saying is that it's actually pretty easy to straight up lose games to build order counters (Innovation vs TLhero IEM - 11/11 vs zerg on 4 player maps unscouted etc). I just really don't see what it is that we think they add to the game. Nobody wants to see a 15 minute 3-0 stomping with 3 build order wins..it's not impressive or entertaining. You can argue all day long that "if you play safe and perfectly you can win" but you can't argue that if you play safe and your opponent plays greedy that you should win - again that's more chaos and less skill based. I've seen plenty of pro games to that effect as well. To make my question more clear I guess - How exactly does having so many different plausable cheese game enders improve the over all state of the game? If someone has a good answer I'm a pretty open minded dude I just can't think of one. Obviously no one wants the game to be 45 minute turtle-fest and I really am ok with the idea of early game action I just feel like there shouldn't be so many ways to just straight up lose based on what build you chose - there should be safe macro oriented builds that don't get blown out of the water by incredible greed (which I'm not saying we are that far off I'm just saying I really don't understand the point of having 3/4 of these timings exist (roach/bane / 1 base blink 2 base blink / 1 base DT/ 11/11 / 6pool etc). To me personally it doesn't add anything positive to the game - the only thing it does do is allow much lesser skilled individuals to climb higher up on the ladder than they should be and create "meta battles" in the highest level pro games - the latter which I am sort of OK with but I wish it was less frequent. I'm afraid there's no way to fix it other than to dynamically change the game design. Like, there's obviously these all-ins and such, but even if they somehow managed to remove them from the game while keeping the rest of the game balanced, there would still be the threat of other high variance builds. It's just how the game is constructed via the speed (of the game), the incredibly smooth pathing, the unit AI, mineral gathering, etc., etc. Without a complete overhaul of the core game mechanics, Blizzard can't do anything about high variance builds. We say that Protoss has the highest percentage of cheeses, but that's only because Protoss has more options available to them early on. If we go back to WoL, Protoss opened almost the same way every game. In fact, most matches looked identical, and the result was a very stale, boring game to watch. Certainly Blizzard needs to watch out and avoid creating too much early game variance, but the element of randomness is SC2 is somewhat a good thing. Like I said, though, I don't think we can completely eliminate the effects of randomness on the game because of the way SC2 is designed at its core. Ya I hear you on this - my only thing to add would be that even though people bitch about MSC a lot - it sort of did what I'm talking about for Protoss. At least from a Terran perspective there is almost no early game threat for them outside of 11/11 (or if you fail to probe scout gas first and react accordingly). If they did something similar to this for T and Z it might help - but then again I really don't want to create a turtle-fest either. No early game threat O.o? -1-1-1 -mine drop (2 different types) -proxy factory -hellion marine -3 reaper -mass reaper -marauder mine pressure
1/1/1, mine drop, proxy factory, hellion marine are all 1/1/1, different variations, but all 1/1/1.
And all countered with basic scouting.
3 reaper? MSC/Stalkermicro
Mass Reaper? MSC/anything really after scouting
Marauder Mine? Overcharge/basic scouting
Problem with TvP for Terrans is, you can't go for an all in/pressure build because they're all so easy to counter.
Blink all ins still succeed often even if scouted and prepared for. Oracles can still deal some damage to make up for their cost. Cannon in the mineral line? Guess failed mine drop into gg.
|
On April 03 2014 02:14 -HuShang- wrote:Show nested quote +Did you catch this part ? "(or if you fail to probe scout gas first and react accordingly).
Which of these isn't shut down by a forge and a cannon at each mineral line? All of these require different responses zzz... 1) You can't scout 1-1-1 until 7:20 obs. You can't scout minedrop till 7:20 obs. You can't scout late mine drop till 7:20 obs. (keep in mind its really easy to kill the obs and barely any terrans do it) 2) Terran can show gas and get a reactor and no reapers 3) 1-1-1 and mass reaper both lose to blind cannons and look the same as all these other builds. Typical terran being naive and thinking only their race is hard. Just build 2 cannons in each mineral line.. o boy.. I tell you what. Build 2 turrets in your mineral line. That defends dt and oracle. eZ right? xD............. -3 rax no fact -11-11 -1 base medivac marine -proxy tank(polar night)
How frustrated exactly are you?
1) MSC/Hallucination/Stalkerpoke/Probe seeing no natural nexus
2) Yes he can. You can count gas, and in case of no reaper, you can poke up. You can stay in his base till 3.05 easily, which is when a marine pops.
3) Mass Reaper doesn't lose to mass cannons, nor does a 1/1/1 all in.
-3 rax no fact, scout it, overcharge + make some units.
-11/11 Any standard build holds this is it doesn't start in your base or get a bunker done on highground.
-Proxy Tank? Counter it with Proxy Carrier or some basic scouting.
Turrets don't defend vs Oracle/DT btw, and delay terran midgame which is the part you're lining everything up to. Cannons hardly delay you as Protoss is limited mostly by gas and construction time.
|
On April 03 2014 02:14 -HuShang- wrote:Show nested quote +Did you catch this part ? "(or if you fail to probe scout gas first and react accordingly).
Which of these isn't shut down by a forge and a cannon at each mineral line? All of these require different responses zzz... 1) You can't scout 1-1-1 until 7:20 obs. You can't scout minedrop till 7:20 obs. You can't scout late mine drop till 7:20 obs. (keep in mind its really easy to kill the obs and barely any terrans do it) 2) Terran can show gas and get a reactor and no reapers 3) 1-1-1 and mass reaper both lose to blind cannons and look the same as all these other builds. Typical terran being naive and thinking only their race is hard. Just build 2 cannons in each mineral line.. o boy.. I tell you what. Build 2 turrets in your mineral line. That defends dt and oracle. eZ right? xD............. -3 rax no fact -11-11 -1 base medivac marine -proxy tank(polar night)
lolol i'm kind of hesitant to even respond to this bc I can't tell if you are trolling.
1) You can't scout 1-1-1 until 7:20 obs. You can't scout minedrop till 7:20 obs. You can't scout late mine drop till 7:20 obs.
(keep in mind its really easy to kill the obs and barely any terrans do it)
You don't need to scout mine drop or 1-1-1 - put a cannon in both of ur mineral lines - MSC holds any 1-1-1.
2) Terran can show gas and get a reactor and no reapers
Gas first is different than gas for reapers - watch ur reps.
3) 1-1-1 and mass reaper both lose to blind cannons and look the same as all these other builds.
I'm sorry how does msc and cannons with stlakers lose to mass reapers?
"Typical terran being naive and thinking only their race is hard. Just build 2 cannons in each mineral line.. o boy.. I tell you what. Build 2 turrets in your mineral line. That defends dt and oracle. eZ right? xD............."
This is my favorite part - do me a favor - explain to me what I would build 2 turrets in my mineral lines in response to??
Twilight? So if you are going blink I just lose right?
Stargate?? So you can just take a third while I turtle and defend on 2base? rofl.
Anyways wasn't supposed to be a balance discussion - the point is MSC is a step in the right direction imo for minimizing cheese nonsense and T and Z need something similar
|
On April 03 2014 02:30 SC2Toastie wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2014 01:15 -HuShang- wrote:On April 03 2014 00:52 DomeGetta wrote:On April 02 2014 23:33 SC2John wrote:On April 02 2014 23:22 DomeGetta wrote:On April 02 2014 22:49 SC2John wrote:On April 02 2014 22:40 Whitewing wrote:On April 02 2014 22:14 DomeGetta wrote:
I just want to first open with this is an incredible thread lol! That picture is one of the best gifs I've seen lololol.
Anyways - I want to get on my soap box for just a few moments here about this type of play in general. Obviously it would be pretty rare for anyone from Blizz to read the comments on this post regardless of how glorious it is but I digress.
All of these brutal timings that exist in the game - (to which protoss has an incredible sum, zerg slightly less and terran probably the least) should be eliminated via nerf! Speaking strictly to the good of the game and not at all to balance: The existence of these timings add chaos to the game and minimize the impact of the skill of the players on the outcome.
The "standard" builds that develop now have to incorporate inefficient safe-guards against all of this (and yes people talk about scouting but scouting for every timing that can kill you is inefficient it is an investment and if your opponent chooses to ignore it you will be very behind).
Now - if pro A chooses to scout for the timings and play safe and pro B chooses to say fuck it and greeds out pro B definitely wins all things equal. If pro A chooses to execute the timings and pro B chooses to say fuck it and greeds out pro A definitely wins. The outcome is predetermined and not at all in the spirit of the game imo.
I understand the positive impact that early aggressive timings can have on the game and maybe not 100% of them should be nerfed out but there really shouldn't be so many. It really does take away the aspect that the better player wins more of the time (i.e. duckeduck / billowy type nonsense).
In the spirit of competition don't we want the best player (macro / micro / multitask) to be the winner more of the time? Not just the player who guessed right 2 out of 3 times on that particular day??
Pls help Blizz QQ (;D)
Anyways cool thread lol - having the knowledge of these builds will surely help my cheese defense but make my standard play safer / less efficient and winrate in macro games go down lol. All of these builds can be scouted with appropriate play, they are not overpowered and broken, and good players who aren't playing too greedy can spot them coming and defend. I think he's trying to say that your opponent can play high variance builds like sOs (AKA proxy void ray one game, nexus first the next) and win a majority of the time. In fact, he suggests it might be the best way to play Protoss. However, if this were true, Rain and Zest wouldn't be the best Protoss players in the world right now. Bluntly stated: as long as you have good macro and mechanics, you can play safe and beat noobs on ladder playing high variance builds. Yah let me clarify some. I am a semi active - mid-masters level player on NA. I actually watch a whole lot more starcraft than I play now days. What I'm really saying is that I (as a viewer and a player) am really tired of seeing game outcomes predetermined based on who had more balls / less balls (depending on scenario) I'm not saying you can't sniff out these builds and react appropriately but what I am saying is that it's actually pretty easy to straight up lose games to build order counters (Innovation vs TLhero IEM - 11/11 vs zerg on 4 player maps unscouted etc). I just really don't see what it is that we think they add to the game. Nobody wants to see a 15 minute 3-0 stomping with 3 build order wins..it's not impressive or entertaining. You can argue all day long that "if you play safe and perfectly you can win" but you can't argue that if you play safe and your opponent plays greedy that you should win - again that's more chaos and less skill based. I've seen plenty of pro games to that effect as well. To make my question more clear I guess - How exactly does having so many different plausable cheese game enders improve the over all state of the game? If someone has a good answer I'm a pretty open minded dude I just can't think of one. Obviously no one wants the game to be 45 minute turtle-fest and I really am ok with the idea of early game action I just feel like there shouldn't be so many ways to just straight up lose based on what build you chose - there should be safe macro oriented builds that don't get blown out of the water by incredible greed (which I'm not saying we are that far off I'm just saying I really don't understand the point of having 3/4 of these timings exist (roach/bane / 1 base blink 2 base blink / 1 base DT/ 11/11 / 6pool etc). To me personally it doesn't add anything positive to the game - the only thing it does do is allow much lesser skilled individuals to climb higher up on the ladder than they should be and create "meta battles" in the highest level pro games - the latter which I am sort of OK with but I wish it was less frequent. I'm afraid there's no way to fix it other than to dynamically change the game design. Like, there's obviously these all-ins and such, but even if they somehow managed to remove them from the game while keeping the rest of the game balanced, there would still be the threat of other high variance builds. It's just how the game is constructed via the speed (of the game), the incredibly smooth pathing, the unit AI, mineral gathering, etc., etc. Without a complete overhaul of the core game mechanics, Blizzard can't do anything about high variance builds. We say that Protoss has the highest percentage of cheeses, but that's only because Protoss has more options available to them early on. If we go back to WoL, Protoss opened almost the same way every game. In fact, most matches looked identical, and the result was a very stale, boring game to watch. Certainly Blizzard needs to watch out and avoid creating too much early game variance, but the element of randomness is SC2 is somewhat a good thing. Like I said, though, I don't think we can completely eliminate the effects of randomness on the game because of the way SC2 is designed at its core. Ya I hear you on this - my only thing to add would be that even though people bitch about MSC a lot - it sort of did what I'm talking about for Protoss. At least from a Terran perspective there is almost no early game threat for them outside of 11/11 (or if you fail to probe scout gas first and react accordingly). If they did something similar to this for T and Z it might help - but then again I really don't want to create a turtle-fest either. No early game threat O.o? -1-1-1 -mine drop (2 different types) -proxy factory -hellion marine -3 reaper -mass reaper -marauder mine pressure 1/1/1, mine drop, proxy factory, hellion marine are all 1/1/1, different variations, but all 1/1/1. And all countered with basic scouting. 3 reaper? MSC/Stalkermicro Mass Reaper? MSC/anything really after scouting Marauder Mine? Overcharge/basic scouting Problem with TvP for Terrans is, you can't go for an all in/pressure build because they're all so easy to counter. Blink all ins still succeed often even if scouted and prepared for. Oracles can still deal some damage to make up for their cost. Cannon in the mineral line? Guess failed mine drop into gg.
All of the things you're complaining about: blink, oracle and dt all don't have a robo and make mine drop very strong against them. If toss plays super safe then of course he should be able to defend everything. If toss couldn't defend everything then that would be broken.
Cannon in the mineral line? Guess failed mine drop into gg.
Turret at the front of terrans base? Guess dt into gg. -facepalm-
I guess there really is no arguing with diamond players though :/
|
On April 03 2014 02:41 -HuShang- wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2014 02:30 SC2Toastie wrote:On April 03 2014 01:15 -HuShang- wrote:On April 03 2014 00:52 DomeGetta wrote:On April 02 2014 23:33 SC2John wrote:On April 02 2014 23:22 DomeGetta wrote:On April 02 2014 22:49 SC2John wrote:On April 02 2014 22:40 Whitewing wrote:On April 02 2014 22:14 DomeGetta wrote:
I just want to first open with this is an incredible thread lol! That picture is one of the best gifs I've seen lololol.
Anyways - I want to get on my soap box for just a few moments here about this type of play in general. Obviously it would be pretty rare for anyone from Blizz to read the comments on this post regardless of how glorious it is but I digress.
All of these brutal timings that exist in the game - (to which protoss has an incredible sum, zerg slightly less and terran probably the least) should be eliminated via nerf! Speaking strictly to the good of the game and not at all to balance: The existence of these timings add chaos to the game and minimize the impact of the skill of the players on the outcome.
The "standard" builds that develop now have to incorporate inefficient safe-guards against all of this (and yes people talk about scouting but scouting for every timing that can kill you is inefficient it is an investment and if your opponent chooses to ignore it you will be very behind).
Now - if pro A chooses to scout for the timings and play safe and pro B chooses to say fuck it and greeds out pro B definitely wins all things equal. If pro A chooses to execute the timings and pro B chooses to say fuck it and greeds out pro A definitely wins. The outcome is predetermined and not at all in the spirit of the game imo.
I understand the positive impact that early aggressive timings can have on the game and maybe not 100% of them should be nerfed out but there really shouldn't be so many. It really does take away the aspect that the better player wins more of the time (i.e. duckeduck / billowy type nonsense).
In the spirit of competition don't we want the best player (macro / micro / multitask) to be the winner more of the time? Not just the player who guessed right 2 out of 3 times on that particular day??
Pls help Blizz QQ (;D)
Anyways cool thread lol - having the knowledge of these builds will surely help my cheese defense but make my standard play safer / less efficient and winrate in macro games go down lol. All of these builds can be scouted with appropriate play, they are not overpowered and broken, and good players who aren't playing too greedy can spot them coming and defend. I think he's trying to say that your opponent can play high variance builds like sOs (AKA proxy void ray one game, nexus first the next) and win a majority of the time. In fact, he suggests it might be the best way to play Protoss. However, if this were true, Rain and Zest wouldn't be the best Protoss players in the world right now. Bluntly stated: as long as you have good macro and mechanics, you can play safe and beat noobs on ladder playing high variance builds. Yah let me clarify some. I am a semi active - mid-masters level player on NA. I actually watch a whole lot more starcraft than I play now days. What I'm really saying is that I (as a viewer and a player) am really tired of seeing game outcomes predetermined based on who had more balls / less balls (depending on scenario) I'm not saying you can't sniff out these builds and react appropriately but what I am saying is that it's actually pretty easy to straight up lose games to build order counters (Innovation vs TLhero IEM - 11/11 vs zerg on 4 player maps unscouted etc). I just really don't see what it is that we think they add to the game. Nobody wants to see a 15 minute 3-0 stomping with 3 build order wins..it's not impressive or entertaining. You can argue all day long that "if you play safe and perfectly you can win" but you can't argue that if you play safe and your opponent plays greedy that you should win - again that's more chaos and less skill based. I've seen plenty of pro games to that effect as well. To make my question more clear I guess - How exactly does having so many different plausable cheese game enders improve the over all state of the game? If someone has a good answer I'm a pretty open minded dude I just can't think of one. Obviously no one wants the game to be 45 minute turtle-fest and I really am ok with the idea of early game action I just feel like there shouldn't be so many ways to just straight up lose based on what build you chose - there should be safe macro oriented builds that don't get blown out of the water by incredible greed (which I'm not saying we are that far off I'm just saying I really don't understand the point of having 3/4 of these timings exist (roach/bane / 1 base blink 2 base blink / 1 base DT/ 11/11 / 6pool etc). To me personally it doesn't add anything positive to the game - the only thing it does do is allow much lesser skilled individuals to climb higher up on the ladder than they should be and create "meta battles" in the highest level pro games - the latter which I am sort of OK with but I wish it was less frequent. I'm afraid there's no way to fix it other than to dynamically change the game design. Like, there's obviously these all-ins and such, but even if they somehow managed to remove them from the game while keeping the rest of the game balanced, there would still be the threat of other high variance builds. It's just how the game is constructed via the speed (of the game), the incredibly smooth pathing, the unit AI, mineral gathering, etc., etc. Without a complete overhaul of the core game mechanics, Blizzard can't do anything about high variance builds. We say that Protoss has the highest percentage of cheeses, but that's only because Protoss has more options available to them early on. If we go back to WoL, Protoss opened almost the same way every game. In fact, most matches looked identical, and the result was a very stale, boring game to watch. Certainly Blizzard needs to watch out and avoid creating too much early game variance, but the element of randomness is SC2 is somewhat a good thing. Like I said, though, I don't think we can completely eliminate the effects of randomness on the game because of the way SC2 is designed at its core. Ya I hear you on this - my only thing to add would be that even though people bitch about MSC a lot - it sort of did what I'm talking about for Protoss. At least from a Terran perspective there is almost no early game threat for them outside of 11/11 (or if you fail to probe scout gas first and react accordingly). If they did something similar to this for T and Z it might help - but then again I really don't want to create a turtle-fest either. No early game threat O.o? -1-1-1 -mine drop (2 different types) -proxy factory -hellion marine -3 reaper -mass reaper -marauder mine pressure 1/1/1, mine drop, proxy factory, hellion marine are all 1/1/1, different variations, but all 1/1/1. And all countered with basic scouting. 3 reaper? MSC/Stalkermicro Mass Reaper? MSC/anything really after scouting Marauder Mine? Overcharge/basic scouting Problem with TvP for Terrans is, you can't go for an all in/pressure build because they're all so easy to counter. Blink all ins still succeed often even if scouted and prepared for. Oracles can still deal some damage to make up for their cost. Cannon in the mineral line? Guess failed mine drop into gg. All of the things you're complaining about: blink, oracle and dt all don't have a robo and make mine drop very strong against them. If toss plays super safe then of course he should be able to defend everything. If toss couldn't defend everything then that would be broken. Turret at the front of terrans base? Guess dt into gg. -facepalm- I guess there really is no arguing with diamond players though :/
Stargate openers have detection, DT into macro has detection + a base up, Blink kills Terran while you lose 2 probes / 40 seconds :D?
Also, Mine Drops delay natural CC for a long time, DT's dont.
|
whhyyyyy no terran.
terran so extinct yo
|
On April 03 2014 02:52 nobodywonder wrote:
whhyyyyy no terran.
terran so extinct yo
Terran isn't extinct anymore man xD
|
United States4883 Posts
Whoa whoa whoa, guys. Let's not make this a discussion on balance or whether or not Terran has any power. The subject matter here is not Terran.
The subject is:
#blinktoss
#OP
#WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOYOLO
|
On April 03 2014 03:16 SC2John wrote:
Whoa whoa whoa, guys. Let's not make this a discussion on balance or whether or not Terran has any power. The subject matter here is not Terran.
The subject is:
#blinktoss
#OP
#WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOYOLO
#blinktoss *wrong build, too lazy to change it to the correct one I posted on page 10*
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
