|
On August 10 2011 17:52 HolyArrow wrote:
PvZ is what I least care about, actually. Protosses whining about Zergs being too strong and Zergs whining about Protosses being too strong are both being dumb because, at this point, looking at the winrate graph (http://i.imgur.com/bdP2e.png), I'm able to put my personal biases as a Protoss player aside and see that the metagame for PvZ simply shifts all the time. The statement about Z struggling for 3 months against P is a complete lie (and I love it when people lie like that, because the graph is right there to objectively back me up) - the longest Z has ever struggled against P is for 2 months (december to the beginning of februrary).
One thing that worries me a bit is that Z just came off of 2 months of having an advantage against Protoss, the metagame equalized, and Z is now at the advantage again - not the usual trend of advantages doing complete 180s. Still, it's clear that the advantage shifts heavily enough in the MU (though, clearly more in Z's favor than P's favor so I have zero idea what Zerg players are complaining about - likely it's their personal experience coloring their opinions rather than what actually goes on at the highest level in Korea where balance should be determined).
You don't have to look at Korea, PvZ statistics are like that outside of Korea too.
|
Just bring me back reaver and I will harass like you zergs advise me to.
|
On August 10 2011 17:57 tripper688 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2011 17:52 HolyArrow wrote:
PvZ is what I least care about, actually. Protosses whining about Zergs being too strong and Zergs whining about Protosses being too strong are both being dumb because, at this point, looking at the winrate graph (http://i.imgur.com/bdP2e.png), I'm able to put my personal biases as a Protoss player aside and see that the metagame for PvZ simply shifts all the time. The statement about Z struggling for 3 months against P is a complete lie (and I love it when people lie like that, because the graph is right there to objectively back me up) - the longest Z has ever struggled against P is for 2 months (december to the beginning of februrary).
One thing that worries me a bit is that Z just came off of 2 months of having an advantage against Protoss, the metagame equalized, and Z is now at the advantage again - not the usual trend of advantages doing complete 180s. Still, it's clear that the advantage shifts heavily enough in the MU (though, clearly more in Z's favor than P's favor so I have zero idea what Zerg players are complaining about - likely it's their personal experience coloring their opinions rather than what actually goes on at the highest level in Korea where balance should be determined). You don't have to look at Korea, PvZ statistics are like that outside of Korea too.
If they are, then fine. I was simply justifying my use of the Korea winrate graph 
|
On August 10 2011 17:53 Zzoram wrote:
Maybe Warp Prism build time needs to be reduced? Right now nobody builds them because it takes up too much Robo time.
That would help, but beyond build time, they just don't work as well as you think. To the people who think that increased hp would help, that's not the issue in PvZ - Zerg either has Mutas (in which case your warp prism will be taken out), or they don't, in which case you'll generally escape with it.
The problem is the units that get left behind. If you use a warp prism for a round of warp-ins, most of those units are forfeit. You can only save a few on the warp prism, and Protoss units are expensive. Is stopping the Zerg from mining for 30 seconds worth losing 5-6 zealots? Because that's the kind of trade you're looking at.
As it is, most Protoss find that they're already struggling to hold back the Zerg in an army to army fight mid-game. Losing units during econ. harass doesn't exactly help.
|
Ugh, swedish slaughter  Good thing I didn't get up at 6 I guess...
|
At the end of the day I don't think the balance of the game is as big of an issue as people seem to make out. There's plenty of zergs, terrans, and protosses right now at the top of the korean ladder right now, and sometimes GSL results are just GSL results. There aren't infinite games going on, and not everyone is equally as skilled as the other player, and sometimes it's just luck or coincidence. During today's games I clearly saw most of the players getting beat because they played worse, not because of race balance.
|
On August 10 2011 17:59 Itsmedudeman wrote:
At the end of the day I don't think the balance of the game is as big of an issue as people seem to make out. There's plenty of zergs, terrans, and protosses right now at the top of the korean ladder right now, and sometimes GSL results are just GSL results. There aren't infinite games going on, and not everyone is equally as skilled as the other player, and sometimes it's just luck or coincidence. During today's games I clearly saw most of the players getting beat because they played worse, not because of race balance.
Ladder means nothing.
|
On August 10 2011 17:57 Azarkon wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2011 17:53 Zzoram wrote:
Maybe Warp Prism build time needs to be reduced? Right now nobody builds them because it takes up too much Robo time. That would help, but beyond build time, they just don't work as well as you think. To the people who think that increased hp would help, that's not the issue in PvZ - Zerg either has Mutas (in which case your warp prism will be taken out), or they don't, in which case you'll generally escape with it. The problem is the units that get left behind. If you use a warp prism for a round of warp-ins, most of those units are forfeit. You can only save a few on the warp prism, and Protoss units are expensive. Is stopping the Zerg from mining for 30 seconds worth losing 5-6 zealots? Because that's the kind of trade you're looking at.
i think the speed upgrade should be elsewhere. Don't know where, MAYBE cybercore. but 200/200 for bay, which opens up colossus which is good but another 200/200 for speed upgrade and takes awhile to research .
whilst warp prisms are fragile, i agree mainly with the robo time, fragility makes some sense, but the build time and its expense, is something of a huge bother.
|
On August 10 2011 17:55 Zzoram wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2011 17:55 Tachion wrote:On August 10 2011 17:47 namste wrote:On August 10 2011 17:43 Zzoram wrote:On August 10 2011 17:42 namste wrote:On August 10 2011 17:38 karpo wrote:On August 10 2011 17:32 namste wrote:On August 10 2011 17:31 Zzoram wrote:
Terrans and Zergs have both been dominating with multiprong attacks. Protoss still has the deathball mentality. Maybe with more multiprong attacks, Protoss can be more successful. Thank you for being smart and thinking the same as me <3 I don't want to join the protoss whining but both terran and zerg have alot more mobile and better harass units to do multipronged attack with. Zealots are slow and can more or less never be saved when the opponent actually comes to defend. A group of lings is easier to get out AND isn't as costly. Marine+Marauder drops can be saved and can even take out protoss defences if there's not a big number of zealots there do defend. Well, in the Sage vs Sirius game back in GSTL. The Zerg got absolutely demolished by constant Zealot warpings and Phoenix harrashment. I just don't understand why exactly Protosses don't warp stuff all around the map, they have this amazing warpgate ability but yet they dont make a single pylon outside their base unless they're pushing out or proxying a building somewhere. I assume it's because roaming zerglings can easily pick off stray pylons I do think that warp prisms have potential though. They should get an HP boost or something though, they're made of glass as it stands. Well having zealots killing expansions all around the map should keep the Zerg busy defending, if Zerg makes a lot of Spines, then you can just go in with Phoenixes to pick up all the lings. I don't know where this mentality of "Oh, I can't do anything to stop them from macroing, so I just sit in my base and build 170 food army and amove" has come from. It worked a while ago but it has been figured out. Time for Protoss to evolve their game now. Trickster vs Losira on metalopolis was one of the best displays of P multi-prong attacks I've prob ever seen. It was pretty brutal. Might just be a map specific strat though. What did he do? What map?
Was last GSL Ro8. Trickster did a stargate + 6 gates, using void rays to gain vision on the high ground of Losira's main with a pylon there to warp in on the high ground. He also had a pylon around Losira's third and would warp in at both of them for simultaneous attacks.
|
On August 10 2011 17:57 Azarkon wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2011 17:53 Zzoram wrote:
Maybe Warp Prism build time needs to be reduced? Right now nobody builds them because it takes up too much Robo time. That would help, but beyond build time, they just don't work as well as you think. To the people who think that increased hp would help, that's not the issue in PvZ - Zerg either has Mutas (in which case your warp prism will be taken out), or they don't, in which case you'll generally escape with it. The problem is the units that get left behind. If you use a warp prism for a round of warp-ins, most of those units are forfeit. You can only save a few on the warp prism, and Protoss units are expensive. Is stopping the Zerg from mining for 30 seconds worth losing 5-6 zealots? Because that's the kind of trade you're looking at.
terrans do it all the time, 100 gas for medicvac and lots of marines in it for a fresh suicide run. i still think its one of the most unexplored units currently.
for e.g, i see so many toss's complain about terrans 1-1-1 timing push, and yet not one of them makes a warp prism to drop zealots in terran base while hes siegeing up outside your expo..
against Z, not every z goes muta, so you could use them. Even if they do go muta, its possible to hide them and wait for the flock to be out of position, the great thing about the prisim is that you can move it out with 0 units, find a safe place, warp in a round of maybe hightemplars or zealot, then fly it off to someway safe and wait for a key moment to use it.
like for instance, Zergs are currently doing that, they wait for toss to be fully ingauged with fighting, then drop banelings on their probe lines..
|
On August 10 2011 17:52 HolyArrow wrote:
PvZ is what I least care about, actually. Protosses whining about Zergs being too strong and Zergs whining about Protosses being too strong are both being dumb because, at this point, looking at the winrate graph (http://i.imgur.com/bdP2e.png), I'm able to put my personal biases as a Protoss player aside and see that the metagame for PvZ simply shifts all the time. The statement about Z struggling for 3 months against P is a complete lie (and I love it when people lie like that, because the graph is right there to objectively back me up) - the longest Z has ever struggled against P is for 2 months (december to the beginning of februrary).
One thing that worries me a bit is that Z just came off of 2 months of having an advantage against Protoss, the metagame equalized, and Z is now at the advantage again - not the usual trend of advantages doing complete 180s. Still, it's clear that the advantage shifts heavily enough in the MU (though, clearly more in Z's favor than P's favor so I have zero idea what Zerg players are complaining about - likely it's their personal experience coloring their opinions rather than what actually goes on at the highest level in Korea where balance should be determined).
everyone bitches about everything, to be honest. it's venting for the most part, rational thought never comes into play.
|
On August 10 2011 17:54 Blitz Beat wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2011 17:53 Zzoram wrote:
Maybe Warp Prism build time needs to be reduced? Right now nobody builds them because it takes up too much Robo time. wrong. nobody builds them because they're fragile - and there are no good harrass units that compliment them well. their build time is just fine.
not really, it's just there are several requirements to do well in warp prism drops.
you need the robo, which is better off getting colossus.
you need to make sure you don't delay your observers.
it cannot build fast enough like medivac and overlords
it isn't the build time, it is taking up robo space for getting the actual colossus production that protoss wants
|
On August 10 2011 17:57 Galek wrote:
Just bring me back reaver and I will harass like you zergs advise me to.
colossi + archon drops? jkjk
On August 10 2011 17:57 Azarkon wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2011 17:53 Zzoram wrote:
Maybe Warp Prism build time needs to be reduced? Right now nobody builds them because it takes up too much Robo time. That would help, but beyond build time, they just don't work as well as you think. To the people who think that increased hp would help, that's not the issue in PvZ - Zerg either has Mutas (in which case your warp prism will be taken out), or they don't, in which case you'll generally escape with it. The problem is the units that get left behind. If you use a warp prism for a round of warp-ins, most of those units are forfeit. You can only save a few on the warp prism, and Protoss units are expensive. Is stopping the Zerg from mining for 30 seconds worth losing 5-6 zealots? Because that's the kind of trade you're looking at. As it is, most Protoss find that they're already struggling to hold back the Zerg in an army to army fight mid-game. Losing units during econ. harass doesn't exactly help.
That's true, the only thing I can really see comparable to T and Z in terms of economic damage potential (at the moment anyway) would be storm drops...and those are much later and more costly than their counterparts.
On August 10 2011 17:59 Itsmedudeman wrote:
At the end of the day I don't think the balance of the game is as big of an issue as people seem to make out. There's plenty of zergs, terrans, and protosses right now at the top of the korean ladder right now, and sometimes GSL results are just GSL results. There aren't infinite games going on, and not everyone is equally as skilled as the other player, and sometimes it's just luck or coincidence. During today's games I clearly saw most of the players getting beat because they played worse, not because of race balance.
That's pretty much it. It's kind of like the results from Anaheim...it didn't really show T > all, just KR > all.
|
On August 10 2011 18:01 d(O.o)a wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2011 17:59 Itsmedudeman wrote:
At the end of the day I don't think the balance of the game is as big of an issue as people seem to make out. There's plenty of zergs, terrans, and protosses right now at the top of the korean ladder right now, and sometimes GSL results are just GSL results. There aren't infinite games going on, and not everyone is equally as skilled as the other player, and sometimes it's just luck or coincidence. During today's games I clearly saw most of the players getting beat because they played worse, not because of race balance. Ladder means nothing.
It shows what each race is capable of after hundreds of games. It's still pretty important to bring up and tournament results aren't always the best when lots of shit can happen with being matched up against much better players and so forth. Top 2 last GSL were zergs, does that mean zerg is the best race? Before that it was like 8 terrans, and then before that it was pretty even but nestea won against a protoss. Shit changes month to month in the GSL.
|
On August 10 2011 17:59 Itsmedudeman wrote:
At the end of the day I don't think the balance of the game is as big of an issue as people seem to make out. There's plenty of zergs, terrans, and protosses right now at the top of the korean ladder right now, and sometimes GSL results are just GSL results. There aren't infinite games going on, and not everyone is equally as skilled as the other player, and sometimes it's just luck or coincidence. During today's games I clearly saw most of the players getting beat because they played worse, not because of race balance.
If you look beyond the "player x vs player y" part, sit down and dissect the game and look at it from a analytical point of view you will come across some things that just dont make sense. I know its a taboo to discuss or even think about balance in this community, but smart people will always question stuff and try to figure out and analyze things.
Like Jinro said, it just looks like protoss ends up behind no matter what they do, and if you thought about the different possibilities by analysing the arsenal of avaible units/tech given to protoss, you get the feeling that there just isnt much you can do about it.
|
Sad day for foreigners
|
On August 10 2011 18:05 quiet noise wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2011 17:59 Itsmedudeman wrote:
At the end of the day I don't think the balance of the game is as big of an issue as people seem to make out. There's plenty of zergs, terrans, and protosses right now at the top of the korean ladder right now, and sometimes GSL results are just GSL results. There aren't infinite games going on, and not everyone is equally as skilled as the other player, and sometimes it's just luck or coincidence. During today's games I clearly saw most of the players getting beat because they played worse, not because of race balance. If you look beyond the "player x vs player y" part, sit down and break down the game and look at it from a analytical point of view you will come across some things that just dont make sense. I know its a taboo to discuss or even think about balance in this community, but smart people will always question stuff and try to figure out and analyze things. Like Jinro said, it just looks like protoss ends up behind no matter what they do, and if you thought about the different possibilities by analysing the arsenal of avaible units/tech given to protoss, you get the feeling that there just isnt much you can do about it.
to be honest the infestor buff kind of forces protosses down a tech tree that up until now has been relatively unexplored PvZ, so it's not that odd to see a lot of confusion about how to open/pressure/expand and such with the new styles they've been forced into.
colossus stalker balls don't really work anymore and that's what pretty much everyone was doing every game, sometimes adding void rays for funsies, up until the infestor buff.
|
Koreans own white dudes T_T;
|
On August 10 2011 18:03 jinixxx123 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2011 17:57 Azarkon wrote:On August 10 2011 17:53 Zzoram wrote:
Maybe Warp Prism build time needs to be reduced? Right now nobody builds them because it takes up too much Robo time. That would help, but beyond build time, they just don't work as well as you think. To the people who think that increased hp would help, that's not the issue in PvZ - Zerg either has Mutas (in which case your warp prism will be taken out), or they don't, in which case you'll generally escape with it. The problem is the units that get left behind. If you use a warp prism for a round of warp-ins, most of those units are forfeit. You can only save a few on the warp prism, and Protoss units are expensive. Is stopping the Zerg from mining for 30 seconds worth losing 5-6 zealots? Because that's the kind of trade you're looking at. terrans do it all the time, 100 gas for medicvac and lots of marines in it for a fresh suicide run. i still think its one of the most unexplored units currently. for e.g, i see so many toss's complain about terrans 1-1-1 timing push, and yet not one of them makes a warp prism to drop zealots in terran base while hes siegeing up outside your expo.. against Z, not every z goes muta, so you could use them. Even if they do go muta, its possible to hide them and wait for the flock to be out of position, the great thing about the prisim is that you can move it out with 0 units, find a safe place, warp in a round of maybe hightemplars or zealot, then fly it off to someway safe and wait for a key moment to use it. like for instance, Zergs are currently doing that, they wait for toss to be fully ingauged with fighting, then drop banelings on their probe lines..
That's completely different...it takes zealots forever to kill mineral lines compared to blings/stimmed rines/bfh. It gets a little better with speed but that takes gas away from support bay, immortals, colossi, templar, etc. Not to mention, templar tech usually comes way later than stim/bf or lair tech.
|
On August 10 2011 18:02 NExt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2011 17:57 Azarkon wrote:On August 10 2011 17:53 Zzoram wrote:
Maybe Warp Prism build time needs to be reduced? Right now nobody builds them because it takes up too much Robo time. That would help, but beyond build time, they just don't work as well as you think. To the people who think that increased hp would help, that's not the issue in PvZ - Zerg either has Mutas (in which case your warp prism will be taken out), or they don't, in which case you'll generally escape with it. The problem is the units that get left behind. If you use a warp prism for a round of warp-ins, most of those units are forfeit. You can only save a few on the warp prism, and Protoss units are expensive. Is stopping the Zerg from mining for 30 seconds worth losing 5-6 zealots? Because that's the kind of trade you're looking at. i think the speed upgrade should be elsewhere. Don't know where, MAYBE cybercore. but 200/200 for bay, which opens up colossus which is good but another 200/200 for speed upgrade and takes awhile to research . whilst warp prisms are fragile, i agree mainly with the robo time, fragility makes some sense, but the build time and its expense, is something of a huge bother.
Warp Prism speed may be the solution. In Broodwar, Shuttle speed was essential for it to get in and out of Zerg bases alive. Warp Prisms just move too slow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
