|
If you have criticism, you need to address the content, not the hosts. Idra and Artosis are 2 (1.5) Zerg players, but you can't point that out and then blanket them as biased. Respond to the content.
You can't tell them to "get 2 Terran and Protoss players". That's fucking obtuse advice. "Yo just get 4 more high level players to record with you." Yes, I think everyone sees the value in getting it, but it's not practical.
Respond to the content and use evidence / logic to back up your claims. |
I liked the episode; it was much more neutral than I'd expected from Artosis and IdrA.
What I missed, though, was a general introduction to the topic. A brief summary of the development of balance in SC/BW would have been nice as well; this episode felt too me as if they were just looking for a reason to adress the Colossus' place in the game's development. Talking about that is alright and it was very interesting strategy/mechanic-wise, but I don't see how it warrants calling the whole thing a discussion on imbalance.
I'm also not sure how they'll fill future episodes with content or if this was the first and last show. The game in its current state may still need some work here and there and will certainly develop a lot over time, but it's not as if there's a whole lot of "imbalance" that could be discussed.
|
On February 05 2011 01:55 Cranberries wrote:Show nested quote +On February 05 2011 01:43 Severedevil wrote:On February 05 2011 00:53 sob3k wrote:On February 05 2011 00:47 Schamus wrote:
I think my biggest gripe with the video was really what Idra said, basically stating that Zerg's ground army is hurt by making corrupters... so is the Terran army by making vikings....
And other people are stating that FF is ruining the zerg army...Guess what. It does the same for the terran army too, since vikings arent that great after the colossus is dead. So i'm not exactly sure how it's entirely OP against Zerg, but perfectly balanced for terran. They said why right in the video. Vikings are much better against collossi than corruptors. I disagree. Corruptors have modestly more DPS vs. Colossi (if you're using Corrupt) than do Vikings, and Corruptors have double the durability. That's enough to make up for the lesser range. Vikings do: 12 dps Vikings have: 9 range Vikings cost: 150 minerals, 75 gas Vikings have: 125 hp Corruptors do: 10.8 dps Corruptors have: 6 range Corruptors cost: 150 minerals, 100 gas Corruptors have: 200 hp Even with Corruption (20% more damage) Corruptors only do 12.96 dps. That's only .96 more DPS with a CD, while costing more, having less range, taking roughly the same time to build. The only plus is their health and (slightly better) mobility. Vikings are better. Without question.
I think you're leaving a bunch of important stuff out.
Corruptors have 2 armor...
Corruption is 20% more damage recieved from ALL damage sources and not just corruptors... also the effect is even greater and gets better with the more corruptors you have.
Corruptors turn into a powerful seige unit
Me personally, as a protoss player, fear the corruptor far more than I fear vikings when it comes to protecting my collossus. Terrans actually have to micro their vikings whereas zerg can literally just send a bunch of corruptors and theres no way to keep them alive, all you can do is do a little bit more extra damage to some corruptors that wont even matter once the collossuss are dead (but can still be morphed if they survive). I know that it detracts from the ground army but so does vikings for terran (ya you can land them but they arent exactly DPS holocausts) and its not like they can get away with building fewer vikings due to the range... speed in killing collossus is of the essence. The fact is that hydras are so incredibly good against all other toss units besides collossus and storm that you are absolutely fine sacrificing some ground food for corruptors unless they have both templar and collossus.
I think forcefields will forever define this matchup, not collossus.
question about the show though, are we gonna go through all the units and come to a conclusion that they need to be slightly changed so we will actually be moving further from balance? Im reading these posts about moving stuff around in tech trees and stuff when the collossus may be completely fine as a unit as is. Its expensive, takes forever to build, 600 gas to tech to just 1 with range, and is its own tech path.
Lets talk about forcefield duration soon...
|
On February 05 2011 02:14 Jayrod wrote:Show nested quote +On February 05 2011 01:55 Cranberries wrote:On February 05 2011 01:43 Severedevil wrote:On February 05 2011 00:53 sob3k wrote:On February 05 2011 00:47 Schamus wrote:
I think my biggest gripe with the video was really what Idra said, basically stating that Zerg's ground army is hurt by making corrupters... so is the Terran army by making vikings....
And other people are stating that FF is ruining the zerg army...Guess what. It does the same for the terran army too, since vikings arent that great after the colossus is dead. So i'm not exactly sure how it's entirely OP against Zerg, but perfectly balanced for terran. They said why right in the video. Vikings are much better against collossi than corruptors. I disagree. Corruptors have modestly more DPS vs. Colossi (if you're using Corrupt) than do Vikings, and Corruptors have double the durability. That's enough to make up for the lesser range. Vikings do: 12 dps Vikings have: 9 range Vikings cost: 150 minerals, 75 gas Vikings have: 125 hp Corruptors do: 10.8 dps Corruptors have: 6 range Corruptors cost: 150 minerals, 100 gas Corruptors have: 200 hp Even with Corruption (20% more damage) Corruptors only do 12.96 dps. That's only .96 more DPS with a CD, while costing more, having less range, taking roughly the same time to build. The only plus is their health and (slightly better) mobility. Vikings are better. Without question. I think you're leaving a bunch of important stuff out. Corruptors have 2 armor... Corruption is 20% more damage recieved from ALL damage sources and not just corruptors... also the effect is even greater and gets better with the more corruptors you have. Corruptors turn into a powerful seige unit Me personally, as a protoss player, fear the corruptor far more than I fear vikings when it comes to protecting my collossus. Terrans actually have to micro their vikings whereas zerg can literally just send a bunch of corruptors and theres no way to keep them alive, all you can do is do a little bit more extra damage to some corruptors that wont even matter once the collossuss are dead (but can still be morphed if they survive). I know that it detracts from the ground army but so does vikings for terran (ya you can land them but they arent exactly DPS holocausts) and its not like they can get away with building fewer vikings due to the range... speed in killing collossus is of the essence. The fact is that hydras are so incredibly good against all other toss units besides collossus and storm that you are absolutely fine sacrificing some ground food for corruptors unless they have both templar and collossus. I think forcefields will forever define this matchup, not collossus. question about the show though, are we gonna go through all the units and come to a conclusion that they need to be slightly changed so we will actually be moving further from balance? Im reading these posts about moving stuff around in tech trees and stuff when the collossus may be completely fine as a unit as is. Its expensive, takes forever to build, 600 gas to tech to just 1 with range, and is its own tech path. Lets talk about forcefield duration soon...
You don't understand, vikings can shot colossus with a range of 9, and corrupteur 6. That's the main point, having less armor and hp doesn't mean a thing when you can't be hit. That's why vikings are better.
|
I say Let's roaches shoot air and no zerg will yell imbalance anymore. Just my thought.
|
On February 05 2011 01:55 Cranberries wrote:Show nested quote +On February 05 2011 01:43 Severedevil wrote:On February 05 2011 00:53 sob3k wrote:On February 05 2011 00:47 Schamus wrote:
I think my biggest gripe with the video was really what Idra said, basically stating that Zerg's ground army is hurt by making corrupters... so is the Terran army by making vikings....
And other people are stating that FF is ruining the zerg army...Guess what. It does the same for the terran army too, since vikings arent that great after the colossus is dead. So i'm not exactly sure how it's entirely OP against Zerg, but perfectly balanced for terran. They said why right in the video. Vikings are much better against collossi than corruptors. I disagree. Corruptors have modestly more DPS vs. Colossi (if you're using Corrupt) than do Vikings, and Corruptors have double the durability. That's enough to make up for the lesser range. Vikings do: 12 dps Vikings have: 9 range Vikings cost: 150 minerals, 75 gas Vikings have: 125 hp Corruptors do: 10.8 dps Corruptors have: 6 range Corruptors cost: 150 minerals, 100 gas Corruptors have: 200 hp Even with Corruption (20% more damage) Corruptors only do 12.96 dps. That's only .96 more DPS with a CD, while costing more, having less range, taking roughly the same time to build. The only plus is their health and (slightly better) mobility. Vikings are better. Without question.
The 6 and 9 range is the key here, how many times have you seen vikings harass collosi while taking minimal damange? usually due to attacking from angles where stalkers cant reach and thus preventing phoenix from attacking due to lack of stalker support.
and now ask yourself how many times you see corruptors do that. As a P player myself, If i get the stalker sentry collosus ball while having kept close enough in econ with the Z then i will feel like its my game to lose given the current maps.
You just have to attack the base that is least likely to result in a counterattack start poking and prodding with the collosus, if Z tries to commit with his army, forcefield so no proper concave, focus down corruptors with stalkers. In general this will work everytime vs roach hydra corruptor, with broodlords its the same principle with a few more steps, but if you timed ur attack well he is sacrificing something for those broods, so take advantage of that.
|
The Corruption ability should simply be changed to something that has an "real" effect, rather than a little gimmick.
Maybe something like "reduce armor by 1" mini AoE that stacks, like the Broodwar Devourer Spores (which i kinda liked).
As it is right now, its just an ability that isnt really used for an "real" effect; not totally useless but far from what it could be.
*Maybe the Corruptor will be able to morph into the Devourer again; who knows ...
|
On February 04 2011 11:02 Spekulatius wrote:
I would LOVE to actually see some solutions to the mentioned balance issues.
nerf colosus/high templar/force field
buff everything else in midgame
(what i mean by that is that you cant straight up buff zealot cause then early game is imbalanced, u have to think out some fancy upgrade for zealots past charge to make it not-useless past early game)
i dont talk about extreme nerfs or buffs here. small ones are enough to give more options
i just want it to be possible for a protoss to fight a zerg without abusing colosus or FF like a mad man. but whenever they dont have these 2 key things zealots/stalkers etc are complete trash compared to my hydra roach combo
in zvt u have tons of choices how you want to battle and make ur unit compositions, most things work great. but as soon as protoss enters mid/late game u have to sit there and only focus on colosus and FF cause thats way better than everything else
colossus is pretty much the most bullshit unit for the cost inthe game right now.
it deals tons of damage, sick range, really fast and mobile, long sight range and sees up cliffs.
tank: doesnt have long sight and its not mobile at all
ultralisk: melee, not as mobile
thor: not as much range, lot less mobile, no splash to ground
all of them cost similar food cost (except tank) but yet the colosus is still alot better than the rest
but then go and compare zealot/stalker to marauder/rine or hydra/roach.
then toss has no chanse at all. toss has no chance to fight low tier vs low tier, and ithink thats a problem (i dont talk about earlygame)
|
they absolutly need guests on the show to give them credibility, because they are the persons most flamed as whiners in the whole community.
|
|
|
Complete credibility on balance issue's is a difficult subject anyway.
If they wanted to get a good basis for real balance discussion they should be adding some statistics to the show. For example statistics from Master league in korea, if they really show that P > Z on certain maps then they could use that as a point to prove colossi are imbalanced.
It is indeed a little silly that they try to seek the problem with the colossus and not the corruptor. In my opinion the corruptor is just underpowered because it has slightly too few range. Statistics wise it almost looks better then the viking but that isn't a fair comparison. P can make almost pure stalker against zerg because there is no hardcounter for them (stalkers actually beat hydra's). In PvT P is forced to make lots of zealots because of marauders which means there are much less stalkers to defend against air.
The problem with PvZ is twofold imo:
- corruptors and hydra's are slightly too weak which makes it too hard to counter colossi.
- P is forced to go with sentry stalker colossi because nothing else works well (basically what morrow sais)... zealots and templar both completely stink against roaches because of their speed and hp regeneration.
Ideally roach regeneration is nerfed a little bit, so that templars actually get usefull (it won't affect other matchups anyway), and corruptors are buffed. This makes the matchup more fair AND there will be more options for both sides.. Nothing worse then having a matchup where there is only 1 option AND that is imbalanced as well...
Ideally the corruptor
|
On February 05 2011 02:31 Minimi][ wrote:
they absolutly need guests on the show to give them credibility, because they are the persons most flamed as whiners in the whole community.
This is a good point. To have any credibility a show needs to have a player of the race in question and one that doesnt talk about balance every week.
Yes I think its the fact that they portray themselves as unbiased that gets a lot of people annoyed and this would address that balance in opinions on the show. Maybe even have a bit of banter like when Incontrol interviewed Artosis recently, a show like that would be very watchable.
I am a bit worried about the direction the imba talks go at the moment though. I personally prefer to see a game where each of the three races have something the other 2 races fear and with real bite which is the spirit of BW rather than watching 3 races try and gum each other to death after 40 minutes.
Also if you are going to change what they call an essential unit that is used every game in one matchup (pvz) it is going to affect the other matchup too. I dont think that issue was addressed enough because its not like protoss are ripping up the GSL with the "death ball" combination at the moment either because its the early game that matters more there.
|
i will preface this with saying that i am a protoss player, but i want to expand upon what the previous poster said - i don't even understand why roach regen is necessary for the unit anymore. terran will be able to scan if a zerg player burrows all of his roaches, plus making roaches against terran usually has a specific purpose (to counter mech units, either fast 1 base hellion or all-out mech style with thors), and the roach is so fucking strong against protoss as it is so why is it still here? all the roach regen does is restrict protoss build orders and while that is OK at the moment, due to the robo tech being so amazing against zerg, i feel that if a colossus nerf were to take place the roach prevents any long term alternative strategy from being effective.
|
I think the main problem with colossus is that its surprisingly mobile. Honestly, simply reducing its speed slightly would be a pretty huge nerf IMO.
On February 05 2011 02:59 kyarisan wrote:
i will preface this with saying that i am a protoss player, but i want to expand upon what the previous poster said - i don't even understand why roach regen is necessary for the unit anymore. terran will be able to scan if a zerg player burrows all of his roaches, plus making roaches against terran usually has a specific purpose (to counter mech units, either fast 1 base hellion or all-out mech style with thors), and the roach is so fucking strong against protoss as it is so why is it still here? all the roach regen does is restrict protoss build orders and while that is OK at the moment, due to the robo tech being so amazing against zerg, i feel that if a colossus nerf were to take place the roach prevents any long term alternative strategy from being effective.
What? If roaches were the major problem then Protoss Air is the obvious solution, not robo. Colossus isn't even all that good against roaches. Seriously, I can't understand how this makes sense.
Zerg's are forced to get roaches if you get colossi. Zerglings are trivial and Hydras obviously can't even function unless they have roaches in front.
I don't understand the point against roach regen. It is used in plenty of games, and offers all the more micro opportunities with roaches.
|
Firstly the discussed scenario. I agree with MorroW MorroW post (how can I not :p) simply put the Colossi are very strong, but this is mostly because gateway units are to weak (late game Zealots/stalker vs Marine/Marauder or Roach/Hydra). So the gateway units need a buff and the colossus needs a nerf. But this may break the early game, how would a four gate be with stronger zealots or stalkers. What I am trying to say with this is that it will become much more complicated very fast when u want to think about an solution.
Secondly the casters. Artosis and IdrA are just great. I dont want to say that they are completely unbiased. But from all the people I have heard talk about "balance", to me these two always give really good, if not the best, arguments.
edit: wrong choice of words
|
Wow, IdrA and Artosis.. u guys r soo awesome! I'm still listening to your video and can't stop! You are bringing up so many great points. Honestly at this point I don't understand why Blizzard hasn't taken notice or changed a lot of these things you are mentioning. I've watched all the GSL games so far and have really noticed how some of these builds mentioned are just too powerful vs Zerg unless the Zerg does some very specific build and exactly timed to stop it.
Also some of the map imbalances are not so huge, but do make a big deal in the end. Maps like Kulas Ravine, why hasn't Blizzard noticed that Zerg loses such a high percentage of the time? Blizzard still has a lot of work to do and seems their fixes are so slow at this point :-/
|
The main reason for the problems adressed by morrow is i think how attack- and armorupgrades scale with the units. Roaches are kinda even effective with stalkers in the early game, but as the game progresses the gateway units fall behind. While they do, colossi and immortal really begin to kick ass with upgrades (mainly the attackupgrades). So it might be a problem which could be solved without screwing the balance in the early game.
|
On February 05 2011 02:26 MorroW wrote:Show nested quote +On February 04 2011 11:02 Spekulatius wrote:
I would LOVE to actually see some solutions to the mentioned balance issues.
nerf colosus/high templar/force field buff everything else in midgame (what i mean by that is that you cant straight up buff zealot cause then early game is imbalanced, u have to think out some fancy upgrade for zealots past charge to make it not-useless past early game) i dont talk about extreme nerfs or buffs here. small ones are enough to give more options i just want it to be possible for a protoss to fight a zerg without abusing colosus or FF like a mad man. but whenever they dont have these 2 key things zealots/stalkers etc are complete trash compared to my hydra roach combo in zvt u have tons of choices how you want to battle and make ur unit compositions, most things work great. but as soon as protoss enters mid/late game u have to sit there and only focus on colosus and FF cause thats way better than everything else colossus is pretty much the most bullshit unit for the cost inthe game right now. it deals tons of damage, sick range, really fast and mobile, long sight range and sees up cliffs. tank: doesnt have long sight and its not mobile at all ultralisk: melee, not as mobile thor: not as much range, lot less mobile, no splash to ground all of them cost similar food cost (except tank) but yet the colosus is still alot better than the rest but then go and compare zealot/stalker to marauder/rine or hydra/roach. then toss has no chanse at all. toss has no chance to fight low tier vs low tier, and ithink thats a problem (i dont talk about earlygame)
And what will happen with 4 gate ? Or Immortals/Stargate units vs Terran mech ? It seems that there is no solution to this problem...
|
Woo!!! Pros talkin about imbalance!! I once heard that it isnt one or two units that are broken, but the entire game. This kinda stopped me from discussing imba. But if anyone can talk about imba then its Idra and Artosis!!
I remember seeing videos of the Colossi doing focus damage like the void ray, rather than the sweeping motion they do now. Given that they would probably have a higher DPS if this were so, How would this affect the game?? For better or worse?? Just a thought
|
This is the best show, ever! At last, some relevant balance discussion.
It is very interesting to follow but very hard to give some good pieces of advices.
For now it looks like protoss must go coloss, sentries and/or void rays. Gateway units seem very weak mid to late game. But than again maybe some PRO or different maps will show all of us that this is not case.
Vulture in SC:BW was considered the worst unit in the game and at the end I think it is the best. And scoutcraft was very popular in the the beginning of StarCraft and at the end scout is the crappiest unit.
In short more time is needed for real conclusions but it is very fun to discuss!
|
On February 05 2011 03:14 DoubleReed wrote:I think the main problem with colossus is that its surprisingly mobile. Honestly, simply reducing its speed slightly would be a pretty huge nerf IMO. Show nested quote +On February 05 2011 02:59 kyarisan wrote:
i will preface this with saying that i am a protoss player, but i want to expand upon what the previous poster said - i don't even understand why roach regen is necessary for the unit anymore. terran will be able to scan if a zerg player burrows all of his roaches, plus making roaches against terran usually has a specific purpose (to counter mech units, either fast 1 base hellion or all-out mech style with thors), and the roach is so fucking strong against protoss as it is so why is it still here? all the roach regen does is restrict protoss build orders and while that is OK at the moment, due to the robo tech being so amazing against zerg, i feel that if a colossus nerf were to take place the roach prevents any long term alternative strategy from being effective. What? If roaches were the major problem then Protoss Air is the obvious solution, not robo. Colossus isn't even all that good against roaches. Seriously, I can't understand how this makes sense. Zerg's are forced to get roaches if you get colossi. Zerglings are trivial and Hydras obviously can't even function unless they have roaches in front. I don't understand the point against roach regen. It is used in plenty of games, and offers all the more micro opportunities with roaches.
i agree with kyarisan roaches are very scary units -extremely cost efficient against toss
i dont find a reason why a zerg wouldn't get roaches in every single zvp
and the burrow ability kinda forces the toss to go robo for the observer
which will also be the shortest tech path towards immortals and collosai
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
