|
On August 04 2010 01:26 Defrag wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2010 23:35 cuppatea wrote:On August 03 2010 23:21 MythicalMage wrote:On August 03 2010 23:20 cuppatea wrote:
The last tournament Idra competed in was the IEM qualifyer on Sunday, where he was 2-0'd by Silver (a Canadian Terran). Just because a full time pro gamer who gets paid to spend 10 hours a day practicing wins the odd tournament doesn't mean Zerg is doing well right now. Is there a replay/VoD. I'm curious how the games went. http://www.nationalesl.com/us/sc2/download/22422362/ Anyone saying ZvT is fine should watch those two replays . If hydras got +10 health every time a top Zerg underestimated his opponent, they'd be ultralisks with 5 range and 12 damage per shot. Wouldn't oGs.Cool's loss to Andro be a more striking example? You know, if Andro wasn't Protoss.
Really, Blizzard would have patched the match-up if Zerg's weren't winning 50% of TvZ's in the top 1%. Or if the top Korean progamers Blizzard met with to discuss balance with thought it was a big problem.
|
I think the easiest and best solution would be to limit the number of orbital commands to 1. It would not affect Terran early game at all.
Then Terran players actually has to choose between scanning and using mules early game AND late game.
|
I think the MULE change suggestions are not a good idea, despite the MULE/Scan options being "the best" macro mechanic. Terran have to fumble with so many types of buildings, it's involved enough already, IMO.
Also, complaining that too much time spent microing is "bad" or scrubby is not productive. Some of the best plays have been done with micro. TLO wouldn't be where he is without the micro aspect of the game.
The Viking/Thor range decrease is something I've suggested before. It just doesn't make sense to me that Terran can often have the best ground army and the best air army due to damage, range, approachability, and flexibility. Let me further explore the flexibility aspect of it regarding air... vikings have incredible AA range, but can be used as effective worker/building harass. Thors are very good against light or stacked air units, but are also anti-infantry, and are occasionally good at worker/building harass.
Other than that, I wouldn't tweak the Terran too much or things would change too radically.
TvP
Viking range change could affect early game Voidray harass too much. Needs to be tested. I'm not that worried about carriers, and it may even "fix" carriers so that they'd be used a little more.
TvZ
Change Viking anti-air range then Anti-Broodlord tactics need to be tested for balance. Change Thor AA range and Muta harass needs to be looked at closely because that would change the matchup drastically.
TvT
Even if just Viking range was decreased the TvT match would be drastically altered. For the better???
|
On August 04 2010 01:31 Saracen wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2010 01:18 MythicalMage wrote:On August 04 2010 01:16 IdrA wrote:On August 04 2010 01:15 MythicalMage wrote:On August 04 2010 01:11 Ruthless wrote:
You win im done reading this thread haha, i hope mods do something about you :p. Name one thing I've done wrong and I'll apologize and correct it immediately. I've just put my thoughts into words in a public forum, the same as you. ya but you're horrible at it and your thoughts are wrong Everyone has their opinion. =] Thanks for yours! No, he's right. I appreciate your enthusiasm, but please think before you post. It's really painful to read page after page of bad advice and useless theorycrafting, only to find out that it's you contributing to the majority of it. There's a difference between posting what you think and posting constructively. ... if you don't know what you're talking about, it's probably best to remain quiet.
TBF, most posts in balance related threads are just bad theorycrafting. Words like "imba" and "broken" are used so much that one could think the game is a total disaster.
|
Heh, Idra came up at least over 50 times in this thread to support their argument  I couldn't even find any posts that he made  "cntrl+f ail"
Any who, I'd love to wait and see what happens with the match up after 3-5 months, instead of 5-7 days
|
The way to fix terran is simply increase tech lab build time. The problem with Terran right now is all the threats they have early/mid game that zerg has to deal with while zerg is in the dark the whole time. Zerg has to play completely reactionary with no scouting. The Tech Lab change would pretty much slow down Terran tech so that Zerg has more time to get Lair so that zerg doesn't have to play in the dark for the whole early game.
Also zerg needs an adequate way to deal with tanks similar to the defiler in broodwar. Terran gets all these new features (that are ridicolous, i mean sensor towers and marauders? come on) Blizzard pretty much removed only effective way of beating mech in BW (instead of muta which is useless now anyways because of thors) and didnt replace it with anything. Zerg has to have a good spellcasting abillity similar to Dark Swarm instead of this infested terran junk. It doesn't have to be extreme as dark swarm, but something AoE that punishes tanks
Banelings also need a nerf though as they completely prohibit bio play against zerg. I honestly have no clue how terran should deal with banelings instead of just saying "make tanks"
|
A good move against tanks is to throw infested terran into groups of them and watch the booms.
|
Any particular reason why mules have to cost energy? I understand that the other races get energy based macro mechanics but why does it have to be this way?
Im no balance expert, but it might be interesting to make the mule available at the orbital for 75 minerals and 0 population. It would then be tailored to mine about 275 (net gain of 200 minerals) in its lifetime (maybe it could scrap itself instead of dying which would be kinda cool--> send an SCV to collect body for X minerals, idk). This would place a lot more emphasis on sniping them because not only would you lose the 75 you payed initially, but also the money you get to recoup them. So calling down 50 of them at an undefended expo would be disastrous if you were sniffed out and also be impossible unless you had a lot of minerals to blow on mules.
Then, to ensure that scan is still a choice, buff calldown supplies.
Id say something like the calldown supply depot of the campaign: SCV places a homing device and then is free to go back to work (saving you building time). After a few seconds (balance), a supply depot will fall from the sky. This depot will have 2x the normal supply and have about 1.5-2x more health than the average supply depot. This way, you can call them down quickly to get over a temporary supply block but it will also be about equivalent to a mule. It would have more health to defend them because they are a valuable target.
As for walling, supply depots are already very weak (from a toss player) so i think its fine, but honestly, it should not be instant raise. Lower, yes, but raise, no.
Then for viking/thor range, vikings should have 6-7 range possibly upgradable to 9. Honestly its no fun when you work your ass off to get a colossus out to deal with those lawlable marauders and then a terran just double pumps some vikings out and instantly dominates you. Its hard to use stalkers to counter them because of the marauders... I understand about voidrays but maybe vikings should do bonus to armored instead of massive?
Shorter range would help immensely. Thors probably should retain their large range because of their slow speed (ive been saying forever that thors are the stupidest unit ever to be championed as an anti air unit which should be fast and adaptable, but thors are slow and bulky and need stupid things like splash and huge range to compensate).
Maybe they should have to activate their splash damage though. For some energy, they could activate flak cannons for X seconds. Mutas could dance in and out until the thor is out of energy or catch him on a cooldown or something idk. Notice the only anti air splash in the game is:
Storm -- situational and difficult because of 3D engine, vulnerable to sniping
Archon -- situational because of slow mvmt and range (and gas-expensive)
Thor -- restricted in mvmt, but also 10 range.
(does fungal hit air? that should probably be changed...)
HSM -- situational because air can always run away
--am i missing something?--
Theyre all fairly situational except for thor.
|
A good move against tanks is to throw infested terran into groups of them and watch the booms.
since tanks dont overshoot anymore not that effective as u might think....
|
On August 04 2010 01:26 Defrag wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2010 23:35 cuppatea wrote:On August 03 2010 23:21 MythicalMage wrote:On August 03 2010 23:20 cuppatea wrote:
The last tournament Idra competed in was the IEM qualifyer on Sunday, where he was 2-0'd by Silver (a Canadian Terran). Just because a full time pro gamer who gets paid to spend 10 hours a day practicing wins the odd tournament doesn't mean Zerg is doing well right now. Is there a replay/VoD. I'm curious how the games went. http://www.nationalesl.com/us/sc2/download/22422362/ Anyone saying ZvT is fine should watch those two replays .
That first game's Thor Hellion Tank push is so obnoxious to deal with X.X . Ive faced it a couple of times and I'm not sure if I could stop it with any unit combination that comes that fast.
And that second game, well really, its lost temple. When a terran you know is non-hetero enough to block your natural with a bunker, you can be sure he will check out that ledge with a tank.
Remember kids, every time you block an expansion with a pylon or a bunker, you make Day9 get hit by a bus and get aids. Please think of your favourite caster ( and favourite way of transport, busses ... **** yeah! ).
As far as I am concerned. ZvP/PvZ match ups are balanced. PvT/TvP match ups are balanced. The only thing thats hard to beat is ZvT now. And I'm not talking about Bio terran, or Mech terran after Tier 3. I'm especially talking about that push in the first replay. Playing versus terran, although highly highly frustrating, is for the most part pertty balanced as far as I'm concerned. Its mostly the midgame thats very very hard to get through and I would go as far as saying that 80% of the zergs can't win in a midgame versus terran.
I like the supply depot change the most. As it gives the zerg a chance to do a run by when the terran is pushing out sort of, while hardly harming the TvP match up. And I would not mind seeing the terran macro mechanic a little harder to pull off somehow.
If I had to pick anything out of any nerf I could pick for terran though, it would definitely be the Planetary Fortress priority. For those who don't know, When you a move an army ( and really, who would not a move against a terran, nobody picks off individual tanks that easily ), the army will automatically flock around the planetary fortress and only attack that. Add in some repairing SCV's and you have an automated mouse trap with infinite cheese.
|
I've had some pretty effective results with 3-4 infestors and 20+ infested terran.
|
On August 04 2010 01:26 Defrag wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2010 23:35 cuppatea wrote:On August 03 2010 23:21 MythicalMage wrote:On August 03 2010 23:20 cuppatea wrote:
The last tournament Idra competed in was the IEM qualifyer on Sunday, where he was 2-0'd by Silver (a Canadian Terran). Just because a full time pro gamer who gets paid to spend 10 hours a day practicing wins the odd tournament doesn't mean Zerg is doing well right now. Is there a replay/VoD. I'm curious how the games went. http://www.nationalesl.com/us/sc2/download/22422362/ Anyone saying ZvT is fine should watch those two replays .
the banter between the two in the beginning of the second game was pretty amusing, but omg the gameplay was painful to watch (not because they sucked)
|
PvT/TvP match ups are balanced.
is it? really? emp? marauder? same problem with tanks as zerg and if someone only mentions the word immortal i gonna punsh a hole in one of my walls.
|
On August 04 2010 01:26 Defrag wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2010 23:35 cuppatea wrote:On August 03 2010 23:21 MythicalMage wrote:On August 03 2010 23:20 cuppatea wrote:
The last tournament Idra competed in was the IEM qualifyer on Sunday, where he was 2-0'd by Silver (a Canadian Terran). Just because a full time pro gamer who gets paid to spend 10 hours a day practicing wins the odd tournament doesn't mean Zerg is doing well right now. Is there a replay/VoD. I'm curious how the games went. http://www.nationalesl.com/us/sc2/download/22422362/ Anyone saying ZvT is fine should watch those two replays .
Well, this more than reminds me how everyone used to post qxc vs Sheth (I belive) saying:"Watch this, imablance..." This is not a good argument. If you say Idra is 10x times better than Silver and that is why TvZ is imbalanced, this is pure ignorance. Silver also beat HuK in finals, so it seems hes not bad at all?
Also, I hardly belive Siege tank will be nerfed, because they did it once and it didnt work, here we are again in the same situation - people asking for Siege tank nerf. You say -10 is nothing, but do you think they would do something like -20? That would be ridiculous.. And they aren't going to remove smart AI either, just not gonna happen. That would screw mech play vs Protoss pretty hard.
|
i just felt like i should point out one more time that these complaints are the very same complaints people made in PvZ imbalance threads before.
1. Zerg had too many openings which Protoss had to prepare for
2. Lurker contain was stupidly effective and hard to break
now, let's think about this for a second. back when PvZ imbalance was a hot topic we had a pretty mature progaming scene. we had guys practicing 12 hours a day in progaming teams exchanging a plethora of builds and ideas, we had guys like nal_ra and anytime, full-fledge starleague winners who STILL had a hard time breaking from conventional PvZ.
at the time even in progaming ZvP stats would favor Z. take a look at map stats for maps from 05-06 maps like rush hour 2 or peaks of baekdu had 60%+ winrates in favor of zerg ZvP. i remember at the time the standard opening in PvZ to be either 2gate zealot or 1base reaver or sair dt. we had TONS of threads in BW strat about the possible imbalance in PvZ and by the end of the discussion damn near every protoss player thought it was impossible to win and that there was something fundamentally flawed with their race. we had suggestions to buff scouts, buff maelstrom, buff DAs, pretty much every damn thing you could think of.
all that retarded shit went down the drain the moment some up and coming protoss kid from MBC dethroned the motherfucking bonjwa with one build. it's fine to be discussing this but to think 2 weeks after release we understand a matchup more than progamers understood their livelihood in 2005-2006 is pretty damn stupid.
oh yeah, people also complained about the versatility and insane dps of cracklings late-game. so muhc so that it was a serious idea to make the zealot have 1x16 attack instead of 2x8 so late game zealots could two hit cracklings. COULD YOU IMAGINE THAT NOW?
|
Suggestion: Lower mule energy cost to 10 or 15 (I suggest 15).
I don't like this suggestion or the overall idea of making Terran macro-mechanics harder. Having to call down a mule every 10-15 second would be too complicated IMO. If anything make it easier for the other races - e.g. make spawn larva and chrono boost cost 50 energy but double its effect. Perhaps make it so that if the spawn larva ability on queens is activated then the queen uses it on the nearest hatchery, so you don't have to switch screens. Chrono Boost is harder, but I think making it cost more energy + boosting its effect is a way to make it simpler to use.
Suggestion: Make the possibility of lowering/lifting individual supply depots into an Orbital Command ability. Proposed energy cost: 15-25 (i like 25).
Not liking this idea at all. The proposed energy cost is beyond silly, you're basicly making it cost half a mule (worth about 120-150 minerals) just to lower a supply depot. People would just opt to lift the other buildings used to wall off or not wall off at all. And as said earlie, I don't agree with the overall idea of making the mechanics more complicated.
Suggestion: This section is twofold. First about bunker salvage, then about bunker construction.
I think getting back 100% of its cost may be a bit too OP. I don't think bunkers are used to their full potential in the game yet but I suspect in time they may prove to be a bit overpowered. Making SCV's building the bunker easier to snipe is a good idea also.
Suggestion: Decrease the anti-air range of either the thor or the viking.
Not sure about the range but I think your suggestion to decrease the viking speed may be a good idea - it follows the whole idea of terran mech being immobile, as of now vikings are too strong and mobile.
Suggestion: Give marauders' concussive shells a cooldown timer (like the stalker blink).
I don't know the reasoning behind this change. If they are too powerful it would be a nice way of giving them a slight nerf.
Medivacs
Suggestion: Lower the heal rate. 13.5hp/sec is really high.
...
A medivac supported army is essentially an army with an organic carapace upgrade.
Not sure I agree with it being equivalent to an army with organic carapace. Maybe if you choose to attack one unit at a time. Other than that I have no opinion on this as I've not used Medivacs enough to have an opinion.
|
On August 04 2010 01:56 Lucius2 wrote:Show nested quote +A good move against tanks is to throw infested terran into groups of them and watch the booms. since tanks dont overshoot anymore not that effective as u might think....
Imagine what could happen if they remove it, a single borrowed infestor spawns a couple of infested terran behind the army, hello 3 sec window with no tank fire.
On August 04 2010 01:44 eivind wrote:
I think the easiest and best solution would be to limit the number of orbital commands to 1. It would not affect Terran early game at all.
Then Terran players actually has to choose between scanning and using mules early game AND late game.
That would force terran to go raven every single game, which is different than an ob or overseer.
|
On August 04 2010 02:07 Lucius2 wrote:is it? really? emp? marauder? same problem with tanks as zerg and if someone only mentions the word immortal i gonna punsh a hole in one of my walls.
HTs, archons, phoenixes deal with tanks pretty well. Zealots to some extent. HTs and zealots can deal with a mass of marauders and marines with tanks.
|
On August 04 2010 02:14 mahnini wrote:
i just felt like i should point out one more time that these complaints are the very same complaints people made in PvZ imbalance threads before.
1. Zerg had too many openings which Protoss had to prepare for
2. Lurker contain was stupidly effective and hard to break
now, let's think about this for a second. back when PvZ imbalance was a hot topic we had a pretty mature progaming scene. we had guys practicing 12 hours a day in progaming teams exchanging a plethora of builds and ideas, we had guys like nal_ra and anytime, full-fledge starleague winners who STILL had a hard time breaking from conventional PvZ.
at the time even in progaming ZvP stats would favor Z. take a look at map stats for maps from 05-06 maps like rush hour 2 or peaks of baekdu had 60%+ winrates in favor of zerg ZvP. i remember at the time the standard opening in PvZ to be either 2gate zealot or 1base reaver or sair dt. we had TONS of threads in BW strat about the possible imbalance in PvZ and by the end of the discussion damn near every protoss player thought it was impossible to win and that there was something fundamentally flawed with their race. we had suggestions to buff scouts, buff maelstrom, buff DAs, pretty much every damn thing you could think of.
all that retarded shit went down the drain the moment some up and coming protoss kid from MBC dethroned the motherfucking bonjwa with one build. it's fine to be discussing this but to think 2 weeks after release we understand a matchup more than progamers understood their livelihood in 2005-2006 is pretty damn stupid.
You give a little too much credit to Bisu when the maps were a far bigger contributing factor. There was little consideration give to pvz fast expand back then, now a map is pretty much no longer considered playable if you can't forge nexus on it. No genius player will solve that, maps have to be explicitly designed to allow protoss to fast expand or the match up doesn't work at high levels.
Rush Hour etc came before Bisu if I'm remembering right, around the era of players like JJu proclaiming zvp easy mode. So I think it had just as much to do with maps as it did with Bisu, high level protoss players collectively would have realized some maps are better designed for them than others.
It's a good example though of how powerful maps are in balance. I don't think the Bisu Build would have become the movement it was on maps like Rush Hour, even if we still played them today
|
So I watched the games of Silver vs IdrA. They were. . .interesting. I'm going to try not to summarize them too much, but a couple points I found interesting were:
Game 1
Silver does a bio Mech push, which I found pretty cool. He just took a few marines for defense, and mixed them in with the normal slower mech composition. It allowed him to be agressive. I kinda like that. I think a problem with tanks is that they incorporate so well with just about everything. Dunno if it's possible to nerf that without breaking the game.
IdrA makes mutalisks. Now, with good micro against the already seen thors, this would have been an acceptable choice.
Silver moves out with a Thor Hellion Tank mode Tank push. He does not have siege, nor does he have Strike cannons, but he does have the Hellion upgrade.
What I find intruiging is that according to this thread we know that thirteen mutas, properly spread/microed can beat four thors. Silver has four thors, IdrA has fifteen mutalisks. Now there are marines in this battle as well, but we don't really need to fully kill all the thors, just hurt them enough so that the remaing zerglings can kill the Thor. Only one thor dies to the clumped mutalisks, and IdrA pulls an IdrA.
Game 2
IdrA complains, including saying that Drewbie beat Huk, a TvP matchup of all things. And then goes on to say that he wants an apology for playing Terran, and that the win was undeserved. It seemed to be implied that he was implying that all Terrans took wins they didn't deserve, but I might be imagining things. It's good to see the Day9 tournament didn't change the IdrA we love.
The map is Lost Temple and Silver is Terran, so he does a tank drop. IdrA responds appropriately; roaches, roach speed, and drop tech. He gets supply dropped by OLs sniped by marines quite a bit, but he perseveres. . .for a while.
IdrA loses his natural after running his roaches into a wall of buildings backed up by tanks and marines. He then pulls an IdrA.
Conclusions:
So what I learned is that indeed, clumped mutalisks do die to thors. And yes, running roaches into buildings backed by tanks is a bad idea. And yes Tank drops can be effective. And yes, Tanks are powerful. They're the backbone of the Terran army. Any build that doesn't have mobility as a focus and doesn't use tanks is a bad build in almost any situation, especially versus zerg. But what's super important to note is that in both games the Terran didn't go mech. Hell in game one he didn't get siege! It didn't show that mech was OP, IMO, it just seemed to show that a bio mech army focusing on mech can be quite powerful. (Most bio mech armies tend to focus on infantry.) I don't think Terran is overpowered in the slightest. I think they walk a very close line to being completely inviable. That sounds really dumb, but let me explain. Mech survives only by being able to defend long enough to get a good economy. It traditionally harasses with hellions, but other avenues are available, and these help keep the macro plane even, so to speak. The main thing I'm getting is that zerg is underpowered. I think it's not so much that, but that zerg has no units to really break into a tank line similar to, say, dark swarm or something similar. I don't really know if we have any ideas about how to beat mech yet. Perhaps ultras and queens. Perhaps banelings. Perhaps mass drones. We just don't know yet, and until someone shows us, I don't think we're going to know.
Addendum: This got me thinking to Brood War, and the strength of a 200/200 Terran army then. The thing about Starcraft 2 is that getting to 200/200 is amazingly easy. I think the best fix would be to actually increase the supply to say 400. Units in Starcraft 2 have much higher supply values, and so it makes sense to be able to make more units. It also bears noting that the maps are amazingly Terran favored right now.
Try not to troll me too hard, ok?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
