|
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. |
On February 05 2011 02:21 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On February 05 2011 02:14 Jayrod wrote: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.
the range is 100% a non-issue, your corruptors can fly over a protoss ball and kill all the collossus they need to to bring them below critical mass while opening up supply for you to reinforce with units that he needs collossus for... you are actually freeing up food for yourself... the corruptors dying is part of the deal and part of why they are so good against. Theres nothing to understand behind the range... nothing. Ive played protoss to recognize some of the problems with collossus being the centerpiece from the PROTOSS perspective. I agree with morrow that something should be done to promote diversity because they shouldnt be the focal point of your army every game. However I think what you guys are missing out on... and in a big way... and it really shows your biases... is that protoss cannot produce as many combat units as the other races... period. Zerg and terran are able to have much larger armies under the food cap between marines and lings... do they always make a ton of lings and rines? Nope of course not... but if they did and protoss didnt have AoE there would be no way to defeat T or Z armies.
The balance question is.. how do you buff the protoss basic units... without breaking the early game. If gateway units weren't so awful in the midgame against well... everything. the AoE units wouldnt need to be that strong. As it stands... and on this map pool.. you nerf the collossus or the HT without modifying some other part of the race simultaneously, you break all the matchups.
Morrow says he cant think of anything the zerg has that might be imbalanced? How about a 300 food army? Oh no... that's right! The Zergs need that to survive in the game because they have weaker units... protoss' reliance on AoE is as important to them as your reliance on being able to remax quickly and do things like 300 food pushes... its AS important to them as terrans multiple ways to do economic damage and contain. Alot of these suggestions from all level of players on this thread are the exact reason that blizzard should be very careful if they want to turn to the gamers for balance suggestions. From morrow to the bronze leaguer watching morrows replays and trying to get into silver... the validity of your opinions is exactly the same... very little.
|
On February 05 2011 07:10 sleepingdog wrote:Show nested quote +On February 05 2011 02:26 MorroW wrote: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) I really like the idea of buffing protoss core stuff and nerfing their fancy stuff....what do you ppl think about giving stalkers +2 instead of +1 for each attack-upgrade? While nerfing the said fancy stuff of course (dunno how). On zealots this can't work because they would be OP against terran, I suppose.
Thats how stalker upgrades used to work, but that was changed.
|
I didn't really disagree with anything they said; they backed up their claims with solid (at least imo) arguments and made the effort to have an actual discussion rather than "This is what's true, and you better believe it."
I am a T player primarily, dip into Z occasionally, and I felt like their analysis was pretty spot-on. In TvP, Colossus are a major threat, but with competent Tank/Viking usage a Terran can still hold their own. In Z however, it just feels like, "Well, I hope I made enough shit."
On February 05 2011 07:24 Gentso wrote:
What if forcefields had a certain amount of health so you can break it down, or just lasted less?
Or maybe make Ultralisks a bit more accessible so they can break the FFs if you so choose to make the sacrifices necessary to do so? That'd be pretty interesting, to have Ultralisks serving kind of as a support/tank unit to supplement your typical ground force earlier on in the game. Right now it just feels like Ultralisks take way too long to get to.
Terran on the other hand has Tanks to negate FF usage, and if that's not what you want to do Thors are pretty readily available.
|
United States7483 Posts
The only problem with that is your buffing 4 gate doing that. I dunno how blizzard could balance it out so toss can have options and not have to go colossi every game to fight roach/hydra.
He said make warp gate a mid-game upgrade, which means 4 gating would come a lot later, being much more manageable, and would not really work as a timing push. You might see a lot more 2 gating though. I like morrow's idea of adding a lot more upgrades to the game to modify base units, and the game could use a lot more of it. For example, I think it would be awesome if vikings had a base range of 6 and an upgrade to go up to 9 range instead of having it be base, because it's too easy for a terran to go all bio all the time with medivacs, see a few colossus, make a few vikings, and suddenly protoss has to play extremely carefully so their colossus aren't sniped. An upgrade for immortals that makes the shields regen faster out of combat would be cool, and I can think of a lot more, like an upgrade on the fleet beacon that makes phoenix shoot faster or have a little more range (since generally, by the time the fleet beacon is out, toss isn't making phoenix anymore. Actually, I never EVER see anyone use phoenix past the mid-game >_>.)
The game actually feels pretty barren on upgrades for protoss at least, other than +stat upgrades, we have 2 on the twilight council, 3 on the robo bay, 2 on the cyber core, 2 on the templar archives, and 1 on the fleet beacon, 10 total. A lot of them are pretty useless, I can count the times on one hand I've wanted observer speed for example. I think terran could use some more on the fusion core too, I'd like to see a comeback on that absorb shield battlecruisers had in the beta for example.
The upcoming bigger maps might make carrier play more viable, so maybe that fleet beacon will get more use.
Now that I think of it, Terrans have 4 on barracks tech lab, 3 on factory, 5 on starport, 3 on engineering bay, 2 on ghost academy, and 2 on fusion core. That's 17 total, over 50% more options than Protoss. Zerg has 2 on spawning pool, 2 on roach warren, 1 on baneling nest, 1 on hydra den, 2 on infestation pit, 1 on ultralisk cavern. and 3 on the hatchery/lair/hive, for 12 total. I'm not counting upgrades from evolution pit/forge/armory and similar structures, because those have the same function for all races.
Both zerg and Protoss could use a few more, wouldn't you agree?
|
On February 05 2011 07:10 sleepingdog wrote:Show nested quote +On February 05 2011 02:26 MorroW wrote: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) I really like the idea of buffing protoss core stuff and nerfing their fancy stuff....what do you ppl think about giving stalkers +2 instead of +1 for each attack-upgrade? While nerfing the said fancy stuff of course (dunno how). On zealots this can't work because they would be OP against terran, I suppose.
IMHO templar can work just fine and accomplish the same goal that collosus do and set you for your key upgrades ect. The reason toss go for the collosus is it is on the same tech path that you use to get an observer. So if without going on that tech route originally the zergs creep advance is uncontested for the time being also if you go for a templar build instead of a robotics centric build then you are on the backfoot if the zerg has tunneling claw or baneling bombs.
Both terran and the zerg have multiple builds that tech to mobile detection.
As zerg you can be doing a air/hydra/infestor/roach (with upgrades) centric play and all of them will allow for the ability to get mobile detection. As terran you can go for infantry/mech/air and all of these allow for you to have mobile detection in the form of scans (and before someone mentions something yes I am well aware of the fact that scans aren't free but it is a option you have for detection nonetheless)
As toss your choices for detection is the observer meaning if I opened stargate and my scout gets into my opponents base (hallucination or phoneixes can scout) and I see that they have the tunneling claw upgrade on their roaches or 2 starports with techlabs and I don't have a robotics facility then the toss esentially lose map control until it finishes.
I think simply adding another detection mobile detection option for protoss would solve alot
|
I watched the show and loved it! I think the idea of two professional players giving the community their take on how to evaluate units in high level play is a really valuable thing.
My only wish, is that they could maybe show a couple replays per episode? Maybe one replay showing an opponent getting crushed by the imba unit of the day, and another replay showing how someone deals with it successfully, then discussing what went well and what could've been handled better by both sides of the battle.
I get that they're both great players, and that they offer valuable insights, but if someone had taken a (perhaps shorter) version of what they said and posted it on the team-liquid forums strategy section without replays to back it up, I think the topic would've been closed.
|
I think they should bring -orb- into the discussion and make a trio.
|
On February 05 2011 08:27 Jayrod wrote:Show nested quote +On February 05 2011 02:21 WhiteDog wrote:On February 05 2011 02:14 Jayrod wrote: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. the range is 100% a non-issue, your corruptors can fly over a protoss ball and kill all the collossus they need to to bring them below critical mass while opening up supply for you to reinforce with units that he needs collossus for... you are actually freeing up food for yourself... the corruptors dying is part of the deal and part of why they are so good against. Theres nothing to understand behind the range... nothing. Ive played protoss to recognize some of the problems with collossus being the centerpiece from the PROTOSS perspective. I agree with morrow that something should be done to promote diversity because they shouldnt be the focal point of your army every game. However I think what you guys are missing out on... and in a big way... and it really shows your biases... is that protoss cannot produce as many combat units as the other races... period. Zerg and terran are able to have much larger armies under the food cap between marines and lings... do they always make a ton of lings and rines? Nope of course not... but if they did and protoss didnt have AoE there would be no way to defeat T or Z armies. The balance question is.. how do you buff the protoss basic units... without breaking the early game. If gateway units weren't so awful in the midgame against well... everything. the AoE units wouldnt need to be that strong. As it stands... and on this map pool.. you nerf the collossus or the HT without modifying some other part of the race simultaneously, you break all the matchups. Morrow says he cant think of anything the zerg has that might be imbalanced? How about a 300 food army? Oh no... that's right! The Zergs need that to survive in the game because they have weaker units... protoss' reliance on AoE is as important to them as your reliance on being able to remax quickly and do things like 300 food pushes... its AS important to them as terrans multiple ways to do economic damage and contain. Alot of these suggestions from all level of players on this thread are the exact reason that blizzard should be very careful if they want to turn to the gamers for balance suggestions. From morrow to the bronze leaguer watching morrows replays and trying to get into silver... the validity of your opinions is exactly the same... very little.
The opinions of MorroW Greg and Artosis have very little validity? Who are you? There is no "300 food army." It is a 120 food army sacrificed for very little damage to the Protoss ball of death. If you have stockpiled enough money at that point to remax to 120 supply of roaches you have saved 4500minerals/1500 gas. That is NOT overpowered by any means. That is bad macro and that is also letting your opponent reach his desired unstoppable unit composition.
|
I think the real problem is that Zerg doesn't generally have a siege unit. It's almost like they only have one siege unit, the Brood Lord, which is a very late Tier 3 unit so it's not as easily available as the Siege Tank or the Colossus.
I think the solution is gonna come with the expansion, when hopefully zerg gets a good Tier 2 siege unit, like a Lurker or something similar.
|
i would enjoy avilo joining the duo
|
On February 05 2011 10:25 Frankinatank wrote:
I think the real problem is that Zerg doesn't generally have a siege unit. It's almost like they only have one siege unit, the Brood Lord, which is a very late Tier 3 unit so it's not as easily available as the Siege Tank or the Colossus.
I think the solution is gonna come with the expansion, when hopefully zerg gets a good Tier 2 siege unit, like a Lurker or something similar.
You could argue that infestors are the equivalent of the colossus or the siege tank. Infestors do good AOE damage and they make you feel "safe", just like how the siege tank and colossus makes you feel safe.
A key difference is that fungal growth doesn't stack, so infestors heavily relies on the core units for finishing the job, whereas critical mass siege tanks and colossus could melt every kind of ground army.
Edit
I said something retarded by accident
|
the range is 100% a non-issue, your corruptors can fly over a protoss ball and kill all the collossus they need to to bring them below critical mass while opening up supply for you to reinforce with units that he needs collossus for... you are actually freeing up food for yourself... the corruptors dying is part of the deal and part of why they are so good against.
This is pretty much the main issue at hand. In order for a zerg to deal with a toss death ball with collosus mixed in, they have to overproduce corrupters solely for the purpose of taking out the collosus, leaving your ground army significantly weaker. As you stated yourself, you will free your supply up to remake units but you have to already have a huge economic lead in order to remake the units necessary. I feel like I'm just restating what Idra and Artosis mentioned in their vid.....
|
14 Posts
PLZ banne me, iam sick of the censorship and oppersion of free opinion.
If a normal Memeber woud post suche a thread it woud be closed, if Artosis do so not.
This Thread has not any eligibility to exist and lead to nothing as a dispute, even the video is made from to biased Players and there motivation are questionable. At least the hole concept of the show is unbalanced and cant be take serious at all. If someone post suche a thread it shoud be permissible to question his motive without being banned.
|
On February 05 2011 10:58 IIDynamicII wrote:
PLZ banne me, iam sick of the censorship and oppersion of free opinion.
If a normal Memeber woud post suche a thread it woud be closed, if Artosis do so not.
This Thread has not any eligibility to exist and lead to nothing as a dispute, even the video is made from to biased Players and there motivation are questionable. At least the hole concept of the show is unbalanced and cant be take serious at all. If someone post suche a thread it shoud be permissible to question his motive without being banned.
Its not fair but its life. Life ain't fair. If you don't like I suggest reading the TL 10 commandments. Here is #6 for you.
+ Show Spoiler +6. THOU SHALL RESPECT FORUM VETERANS
All other things being equal, we will give preferential treatment to site members who have been with us longer (as reflected in their post count + length of time with us as a registered member). It's a simple recognition of the quality of these people. Longevity and contribution are prized commodities around here. In a similar vein, "known" pro/semi-pro players will also be treated with deference (yes, quite a few hang out here). Don't complain - these guys have earned it.
Remember: we ban little kids all the time because they sign on thinking they can say and do whatever they want to whomever they want right from the get-go - just like they're used to doing at other sites. That attitude won't work here. That's a promise. As far as new users are concerned (i.e. anyone with less than 1000 or so quality posts to their name), this site is Holy Ground. The veterans are the users who've consistently shown respect to the site and to others and that's why they're still here. Show them some respect.
In practice, this policy means a user who has thousands of posts may be able to get away with a few minor transgressions in etiquette with just a warning. If you're at 50 posts and you try the same kind of stunt, then we may just ban you. Harsh? Yes. Unfair? Most definitely. But that's the way life is. Learn to live with it.
This also means you should think twice before calling that guy with 5000+ posts a jackass. If the guy's been with us that long, chances are YOU'RE the one being an idiot. Some battles are just not worth fighting - just move on.
|
14 Posts
6. THOU SHALL RESPECT FORUM VETERANS
"The veterans are the users who've consistently shown respect to the site and to others and that's why they're still here."
I dont seeing this point as fulfilled. Its more instrumentalize of this page for his own profit under assumption of disputes that leads to nothing.
|
On February 05 2011 11:16 IIDynamicII wrote:
6. THOU SHALL RESPECT FORUM VETERANS
"The veterans are the users who've consistently shown respect to the site and to others and that's why they're still here."
I dont seeing this point as fulfilled. Its more instrumentalize of this page for his own profit under assumption of disputes that leads to nothing.
If you don't like the threadt, just don't read it.
I think it's great that progamers share their thoughts of the game with others. one reason why TL.net is as successful as it is, is the fact, that the top players are part of the community.
|
Infestors might be the way to go in ZvP. I haven't seen to many games though. Fungal growth does stop the colossus micro away... but if u go Infestors you will lose out on corruptors.
I think the key is the forcefield... Zerg has no way to deal with a force field/ collossus attack.
I have two suggestions: First, would be to make it where if the collossus attack can splash and hit the force field. If it hits it two or three times, the force field "blows" up. A drawback is that it might change TvP match up too.
Second, if a forcefield is cast on Creep, the force field time is cut in half? That might help a zerg out a little
|
but then go and compare zealot/stalker to marauder/rine or hydra/roach
Wouldn't a more accurate comparison be to compare those sets of units to zergling/roach? In which case it seems like its pretty even.
|
On February 05 2011 11:16 IIDynamicII wrote:
6. THOU SHALL RESPECT FORUM VETERANS
"The veterans are the users who've consistently shown respect to the site and to others and that's why they're still here."
I dont seeing this point as fulfilled. Its more instrumentalize of this page for his own profit under assumption of disputes that leads to nothing.
And that is your opinion. Obviously if Chill wanted to kick or ban Artosis by now for this thread he would of done so already. It may not make sense to you but it makes sense to the admins. Life isn't fair.
|
On February 05 2011 11:35 catabowl wrote:
Infestors might be the way to go in ZvP. I haven't seen to many games though. Fungal growth does stop the colossus micro away... but if u go Infestors you will lose out on corruptors.
I think the key is the forcefield... Zerg has no way to deal with a force field/ collossus attack.
I have two suggestions: First, would be to make it where if the collossus attack can splash and hit the force field. If it hits it two or three times, the force field "blows" up. A drawback is that it might change TvP match up too.
Second, if a forcefield is cast on Creep, the force field time is cut in half? That might help a zerg out a little
This would nerf protoss 6 gate timing against muta play to oblivion. Remember in gsl 2 or 3, Toss had like 25% win rate against zerg due to the muta/ling build that no toss really know to how counter until 6 gate timing came out. Also people have to realize sentry are expensive. Those things are 100 gas each.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
