• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 02:57
CEST 08:57
KST 15:57
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall10HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16Code S RO4 & Finals Preview: herO, Rogue, Classic, GuMiho0TL Team Map Contest #5: Presented by Monster Energy6
Community News
Firefly given lifetime ban by ESIC following match-fixing investigation5$25,000 Streamerzone StarCraft Pro Series announced4Weekly Cups (June 30 - July 6): Classic Doubles6[BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China9Flash Announces Hiatus From ASL66
StarCraft 2
General
Weekly Cups (June 30 - July 6): Classic Doubles The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings Firefly given lifetime ban by ESIC following match-fixing investigation Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing
Tourneys
$25,000 Streamerzone StarCraft Pro Series announced FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series WardiTV Mondays
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response Simple Questions Simple Answers
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava Mutation # 480 Moths to the Flame Mutation # 479 Worn Out Welcome Mutation # 478 Instant Karma
Brood War
General
i aint gon lie to u bruh... ASL20 Preliminary Maps BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ [ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall SC uni coach streams logging into betting site
Tourneys
[BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China [BSL20] Grand Finals - Sunday 20:00 CET CSL Xiamen International Invitational The Casual Games of the Week Thread
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Earn Rewards for Every Prediction in the Game Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread Path of Exile What do you want from future RTS games?
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Summer Games Done Quick 2025! Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread [Manga] One Piece [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion NBA General Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
Culture Clash in Video Games…
TrAiDoS
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 630 users

IMBALANCED! - Introduction - Page 62

Forum Index > SC2 General
Post a Reply
Prev 1 60 61 62 63 64 81 Next
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.
shoop
Profile Joined November 2009
United Kingdom228 Posts
February 08 2011 16:22 GMT
#1221
At least in the last daily (#256), it seems to me that Day[9] was not so much expressing his opinion about game balance, as expressing a disinclination to take the issue so bloody godawfully seriously. In which case comparisons of "whose opinion is more valid" are pretty pointless.

I really dislike this reflex of stacking people's reputations against each other in order to decide who to support, when there is no need to make a choice in the first place.

Logo
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
United States7542 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-02-08 16:27:45
February 08 2011 16:26 GMT
#1222
Here's one problem I see why the colossi design, now I don't want to talk about imbalance really so I pick my words carefully here. It's not that the colossi makes an imbalance or causes P to be too strong (they may or may not be), but it's that they're poorly designed.

The issue as I see it is that for most standard combat units in the game the # of units you need to deal with a unit is almost entirely a function of how many of that unit there are. If I want to snipe 4 void rays I use a certain number of hydralisks and something to take damage and that's it. If I want to baneling bust a certain number of marines I only need X banelings and something/anything to take damage and that's it. So as army sizes increase I don't have to continue producing a certain unit to kill a specific unit that may not be increasing in size.

Colossi aren't like this though. The # of corruptors needed to kill a set # of colossi is a function of how many stalkers there are. Even if the P player stops making colossi the Zerg needs to keep increasing the # of corruptors they have to be able to take out the colossi. If they don't then the stalkers will out-do the corruptors and the colossi will survive and the fight is lost for Zerg. Basically the # of corruptors needed is a function of stalker counter + colossi count. 6 colossi and 20 or so Stalkers is about the same as 2 colossi and 40 or so stalkers. However the difference is that in one you end up with a strong ground force that you need to be able to handle and the other you uh win (can you tell I'm not a fan of mass colossi production compared to a strong gateway army supported by colossi).

Anyways I think that's an important part of the problem. The only real way to kill colossi (once they're out) is through corruptors which has this odd issue where you need an increasingly large # of corruptors to be able to engage a Protoss army even if they only stop at a few colossi, yet at the same time this means you fair worse and worse against the ground force as the size of the gateway units increases disproportionately to what the zerg army can. Corruption isn't powerful enough to make up the difference in lost ground strength.

Now this has to happen a bit, zerg units > gateway units in the long run, but it should be done in a more interesting way like Templars+Sentries cause with positional battles.

(I use zerg because I know zerg and the same issue is likely a part of PvP and PvT issues as well).
Logo
Endorsed
Profile Joined May 2010
Netherlands1221 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-02-08 16:37:16
February 08 2011 16:29 GMT
#1223
On February 08 2011 23:17 Ben... wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 08 2011 22:08 The KY wrote:
I dont know if he still does but I have personally heard day9 call mules imbalanced on several occasions during dailies so for those claiming he doesn't whine Bout it are clearly wrong he does but more subtley.


You mean those times when he would say something like 'but hey it's ok if you lose your whole army and base as Terran, just float to the island and call down a bunch of mules, enjoy your 5-figure economy!'

That wasn't whining, that was joking.
He may have been joking but there is an element of truth to it. Tasteless stated that he felt mules should be on a cooldown on his Facebook page when asked what still needs to be tweaked and I think I've heard it elsewhere too. I think a cooldown for mules makes perfect sense. It puts it more inline with larva injects and chronoboost where you have to be somewhat responsible with it. I think it would be an interesting discussion if Artosis and IdrA talked about mules in comparison the other macro abilities.


If you cooldown mules. YOU NEEEED to cooldown Chronoboost. There is no need for a mule cooldown. If you miss a mule, you don't have the production to make up for it anyway.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL.

How can you describe that as an "ignorant fix"

LOLOLOLOLOLOL

If protoss misses a chronoboost, it's not like he can just stack chronoboosts on top of each other for even faster probes... If Zerg misses an inject, it's not like he can stack his injects for even faster drones... NO, both races get penalized for missing these things, UNLIKE the Terran race.

IMHO, If anyone has a problem with a cooldown for MULEs, it's because they don't want to have to macro better. Terran macro is already much easier than Zerg macro, why shouldn't there be a cooldown on MULEs? They are a ridiculous gatherer.

Like you said sir, Terran players drop every available mule to keep up in early game... Why can't Terran players to continue dropping every available mule throughout the whole game? That's what Zerg players do with injects throughout the ENTIRE game, as do protoss players with chronoboosting.

MULEs are definitely very powerful and having been a Terran player previously I can comfortably say that having a cooldown on MULEs should really not be a big deal, and I'm willing to bet that top players such as Liquid`Jinro, IMMvp, MarineKing.Prime would have no problem with this as well, because top players don't really miss their MULE drops too often.

Summary: Having a cooldown for MULEs shouldn't be a big deal to GOOD/GREAT terran players.


LOLOLOLOL

YOU HAVE CLEARLY NO IDEA.

1. If protoss misses a chronoboost he can chronoboost something else twice. Actually, he can choose to chronoboost his probes twice-->The only punishment a protoss gets is that he will have those 3 probes a little bit later.
2. If terran misses a mule, HE WON'T HAVE THE PRODUCTION. To make up for it. So in a way missing a mule is JUST like missing an inject. If a terran is able to throw down 8 mules on a gold patch. He will have 10k minerals. But only 5 rax. So the only way to benefit from this is by making 10 rax before you drop those 8 mules. But if you do that you will just get killed.


Also, it's VERY common to see a player like OGSmc have 100 energy on all his nexus late game. Ofcourse a cooldown on mules isn't a big deal. Hell it would make the game better. But then there also should be a cooldown on chronoboost.
Mentymion
Profile Joined July 2010
Germany259 Posts
February 08 2011 16:34 GMT
#1224
I think the main issue with Protoss are not the Colossi, it's our damn Tech Route which makes the Colossus the only viable option for us now. Protoss desperately needs Observers in every Matchup cuz canons can't 100% protect us from cloaked Banshees or burrowed Roaches and also put us into the defensive position without mapcontrol,scouting abilities etc. That means that a robo is kinda a Must-have building where everything revolves around it. The next Unit in the tech tree is the Colossus and this unit perfectly fills the gap in every Gateway unit composition in PvZ as well in PvT. This is the only reason why the Colossus takes priority over other units such as the High Templar where EMP's can simply negate any effectivness of them and even destroy some of our Shields. That's one of the points which wasn't mentioned in the entire video which makes me kinda sad cuz Artosis should know that.
Rabiator
Profile Joined March 2010
Germany3948 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-02-08 16:45:13
February 08 2011 16:36 GMT
#1225
(My apologies)
+ Show Spoiler +

On February 09 2011 01:20 WhiteDog wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 09 2011 00:26 barbwire wrote:
Saying mule needs a cd is a bit of an ignorant fix imo.

I agree that dropping 8 mules on a newly-established gold base is kind of ridiculous, but there is no cd on chronoboost either. Obviously you can't use all your energy on one structure at the same time, but you can use full energy on your warpgates to get an army out faster. You can save your energy to chrono boost upgrades faster than any other race is capable of. Every other race has macro capabilities that seem "op" to other races from the outside looking in as well. I wish when I lost an army in a big battle I could run back to my base and have 36 marauders pop out at the same time ready to do more battle (given several hatches and using larva injects).

So while I do believe mass mule dropping a gold base is crazy, it's a little too much to simply say "mule needs a cd" when early game every terran is basically dropping every available mule to even keep up in economy. If you've ever seen a toss player that uses his chrono boost on his probes he will have 10 more than the terran in around 10 minutes....but the terran will have a mule down. Smarter people than you worked on making these macro mechanics somewhat balanced...although they possibly never will be in all scenarios and all respects.

Heyheyhey, if they put a cooldown in mule, it will not change anything for the early stage of the game since, as you said, terran already pump out their mules as fast as they can.
If they put a CD (say a bit less than mana regeneration) you will just not be able to put 8 mule at a time on a gold base, but everything else will stay unchanged.

1. Why not 8 MULEs on a gold base? If you build 8 OCs it would work. Not that that is really likely to happen, but building an extra OC just for the MULEs is something which is in the secret terran tactics chest.
2. THINK before you ask for a "nerf". If the MULE gets a cooldown it doesnt use energy anymore (skills either use energy OR are on a cooldown but not both) and this leaves all energy for scans. I do remember some Zerg posts whining about IMBA terran scouting abilities and with this change you could even skip your scouting SCV on a 1v1 map and just use a scan and get some extra minerals that way ... (to exaggerate it a little bit). I am sure terrans will love everyone who suggests this change.


Back to the topic:
I would love to see more pro Zerg players try the mass queen strategy from yesterdays funday monday. Catz did it really well but there was probably a lot of room for improvement. This tactic seemed to work so well for the beginning because it provides you with a strong defense AND the ability to cover even a huge map with creep. Having 80% of the map covered in creep (Shakuras Plateau and other huge maps) pretty fast is scary for non-Zerg.

The viability of mass queen tactics probably depends on the map and I would love it if people would start talking more about these to try and figure out which maps exactly are soooo awesome for Colossi and dangerous for people facing Colossi.

Shakuras Plateau seems to be a map with long distances, several wide attack paths between left and right sides and two chasms which are impassable to Colossi without the help of a Warp Prism and thus favoring a faster and/or airborne army.
If you cant say what you're meaning, you can never mean what you're saying.
Logo
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
United States7542 Posts
February 08 2011 16:37 GMT
#1226
On February 09 2011 01:36 Rabiator wrote:
(My apologies)
+ Show Spoiler +

On February 09 2011 01:20 WhiteDog wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 09 2011 00:26 barbwire wrote:
Saying mule needs a cd is a bit of an ignorant fix imo.

I agree that dropping 8 mules on a newly-established gold base is kind of ridiculous, but there is no cd on chronoboost either. Obviously you can't use all your energy on one structure at the same time, but you can use full energy on your warpgates to get an army out faster. You can save your energy to chrono boost upgrades faster than any other race is capable of. Every other race has macro capabilities that seem "op" to other races from the outside looking in as well. I wish when I lost an army in a big battle I could run back to my base and have 36 marauders pop out at the same time ready to do more battle (given several hatches and using larva injects).

So while I do believe mass mule dropping a gold base is crazy, it's a little too much to simply say "mule needs a cd" when early game every terran is basically dropping every available mule to even keep up in economy. If you've ever seen a toss player that uses his chrono boost on his probes he will have 10 more than the terran in around 10 minutes....but the terran will have a mule down. Smarter people than you worked on making these macro mechanics somewhat balanced...although they possibly never will be in all scenarios and all respects.

Heyheyhey, if they put a cooldown in mule, it will not change anything for the early stage of the game since, as you said, terran already pump out their mules as fast as they can.
If they put a CD (say a bit less than mana regeneration) you will just not be able to put 8 mule at a time on a gold base, but everything else will stay unchanged.

1. Why not 8 MULEs on a gold base? If you build 8 OCs it would work. Not that that is really likely to happen, but building an extra OC just for the MULEs is something which is in the secret terran tactics chest.
2. THINK before you ask for a "nerf". If the MULE gets a cooldown it doesnt use energy anymore (skills either use energy OR are on a cooldown but not both) and this leaves all energy for scans. I do remember some Zerg posts whining about IMBA terran scouting abilities and with this change you could even skip your scouting SCV on a 1v1 map and just use a scan and get some extra minerals that way ... (to exaggerate it a little bit). I am sure terrans will love everyone who suggests this change.


#2 isn't true, Transfuse has a cooldown AND costs energy.
Logo
.Enigma.
Profile Joined January 2011
Sweden1461 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-02-08 16:41:30
February 08 2011 16:40 GMT
#1227
On February 09 2011 01:34 Mentymion wrote:
I think the main issue with Protoss are not the Colossi, it's our damn Tech Route which makes the Colossus the only viable option for us now. Protoss desperately needs Observers in every Matchup cuz canons can't 100% protect us from cloaked Banshees or burrowed Roaches and also put us into the defensive position without mapcontrol,scouting abilities etc. That means that a robo is kinda a Must-have building where everything revolves around it. The next Unit in the tech tree is the Colossus and this unit perfectly fills the gap in every Gateway unit composition in PvZ as well in PvT. This is the only reason why the Colossus takes priority over other units such as the High Templar where EMP's can simply negate any effectivness of them and even destroy some of our Shields. That's one of the points which wasn't mentioned in the entire video which makes me kinda sad cuz Artosis should know that.


The part about the tech route is so true, going for a robotics for detection, drops or immortals is much more viable and safe then going for a equally fast twilight council (mostly because of the detection). Atleast that is what it feels like at the moment. Going templars as fast doesn't feel as safe, you might have charge but the time it takes for templars to be effective is longer then it takes for colossai to come out. Templars would become a more viable tech switch later on in the game.

I'm not saying that anything here is really wrong, just stating how the situation looks to be at the moment.
"Jupiters c*ck!" - Quintus Lentulus Batiatus
Endorsed
Profile Joined May 2010
Netherlands1221 Posts
February 08 2011 16:40 GMT
#1228
On February 09 2011 01:34 Mentymion wrote:
I think the main issue with Protoss are not the Colossi, it's our damn Tech Route which makes the Colossus the only viable option for us now. Protoss desperately needs Observers in every Matchup cuz canons can't 100% protect us from cloaked Banshees or burrowed Roaches and also put us into the defensive position without mapcontrol,scouting abilities etc. That means that a robo is kinda a Must-have building where everything revolves around it. The next Unit in the tech tree is the Colossus and this unit perfectly fills the gap in every Gateway unit composition in PvZ as well in PvT. This is the only reason why the Colossus takes priority over other units such as the High Templar where EMP's can simply negate any effectivness of them and even destroy some of our Shields. That's one of the points which wasn't mentioned in the entire video which makes me kinda sad cuz Artosis should know that.


Turrets can't protect Terran players 100 percent from cloacked banshee's. That's why going cloacked banshee's is a viable thing to do. You don't need to go robo. Only when you go like 1 gate core FE and you see him making a factory/only having marines. Explain to my how LiquidTyler likes to go 3 gate expand into double forge. I mean he would just DIE to cloacked banshee's burrowed roaches riteeeeeeeee? No. he just throws down a cannon and gets a robo so he can push out.

You seriously need to learn how to spread out your ht's if they are getting EMP'ed. It's not like 3 storms is enough to kill any bio ball anyway.
Numy
Profile Blog Joined June 2010
South Africa35471 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-02-08 16:46:24
February 08 2011 16:43 GMT
#1229
On February 09 2011 01:26 Logo wrote:
Here's one problem I see why the colossi design, now I don't want to talk about imbalance really so I pick my words carefully here. It's not that the colossi makes an imbalance or causes P to be too strong (they may or may not be), but it's that they're poorly designed.

The issue as I see it is that for most standard combat units in the game the # of units you need to deal with a unit is almost entirely a function of how many of that unit there are. If I want to snipe 4 void rays I use a certain number of hydralisks and something to take damage and that's it. If I want to baneling bust a certain number of marines I only need X banelings and something/anything to take damage and that's it. So as army sizes increase I don't have to continue producing a certain unit to kill a specific unit that may not be increasing in size.

Colossi aren't like this though. The # of corruptors needed to kill a set # of colossi is a function of how many stalkers there are. Even if the P player stops making colossi the Zerg needs to keep increasing the # of corruptors they have to be able to take out the colossi. If they don't then the stalkers will out-do the corruptors and the colossi will survive and the fight is lost for Zerg. Basically the # of corruptors needed is a function of stalker counter + colossi count. 6 colossi and 20 or so Stalkers is about the same as 2 colossi and 40 or so stalkers. However the difference is that in one you end up with a strong ground force that you need to be able to handle and the other you uh win (can you tell I'm not a fan of mass colossi production compared to a strong gateway army supported by colossi).

Anyways I think that's an important part of the problem. The only real way to kill colossi (once they're out) is through corruptors which has this odd issue where you need an increasingly large # of corruptors to be able to engage a Protoss army even if they only stop at a few colossi, yet at the same time this means you fair worse and worse against the ground force as the size of the gateway units increases disproportionately to what the zerg army can. Corruption isn't powerful enough to make up the difference in lost ground strength.

Now this has to happen a bit, zerg units > gateway units in the long run, but it should be done in a more interesting way like Templars+Sentries cause with positional battles.

(I use zerg because I know zerg and the same issue is likely a part of PvP and PvT issues as well).


I also view this as a design problem not a balance one. The problem is P have had their core designed altered in a bad way. The current design is early tech is instable and fragile then later tech is stable(except HTs they are a fragment from BW). Where as the old P design was the early tech was stable but didn't have potential to do massive damage then later tech is instable but potential to do damage.

As it stands the Colossi/sentry combination has completely warped the Protoss design. Gateway units have to be far weaker than they should because the later tech is stable unlike the Reaver/HT of BW. This means that P has a very strange dynamic of having to rely on this later tech units completely and thus cannot really split their army or use their gateway force properly. It just pigeon holes the whole race into being a "Death Ball race" instead of the beautiful mobile BW race they once were.

That being said this is the new P. I guess we cannot hope for the old P core design to come back since it's already to late. Just have to resign ourselves to the fact that this is the new P and we must live with it.

If we were to go back to the old core design, my guess is that colossi would have to be made more volatile and sentries would be later tech. Creating the stable with low potential -> volatile high potential seen in BW.
WhiteDog
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
France8650 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-02-08 17:04:14
February 08 2011 16:55 GMT
#1230
Useless post, talking about mule with terran players is dumb, and it's not the good place anyway.
"every time WhiteDog overuses the word "seriously" in a comment I can make an observation on his fragile emotional state." MoltkeWarding
Logo
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
United States7542 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-02-08 17:03:07
February 08 2011 17:00 GMT
#1231
On February 09 2011 01:43 Numy wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 09 2011 01:26 Logo wrote:
Here's one problem I see why the colossi design, now I don't want to talk about imbalance really so I pick my words carefully here. It's not that the colossi makes an imbalance or causes P to be too strong (they may or may not be), but it's that they're poorly designed.

The issue as I see it is that for most standard combat units in the game the # of units you need to deal with a unit is almost entirely a function of how many of that unit there are. If I want to snipe 4 void rays I use a certain number of hydralisks and something to take damage and that's it. If I want to baneling bust a certain number of marines I only need X banelings and something/anything to take damage and that's it. So as army sizes increase I don't have to continue producing a certain unit to kill a specific unit that may not be increasing in size.

Colossi aren't like this though. The # of corruptors needed to kill a set # of colossi is a function of how many stalkers there are. Even if the P player stops making colossi the Zerg needs to keep increasing the # of corruptors they have to be able to take out the colossi. If they don't then the stalkers will out-do the corruptors and the colossi will survive and the fight is lost for Zerg. Basically the # of corruptors needed is a function of stalker counter + colossi count. 6 colossi and 20 or so Stalkers is about the same as 2 colossi and 40 or so stalkers. However the difference is that in one you end up with a strong ground force that you need to be able to handle and the other you uh win (can you tell I'm not a fan of mass colossi production compared to a strong gateway army supported by colossi).

Anyways I think that's an important part of the problem. The only real way to kill colossi (once they're out) is through corruptors which has this odd issue where you need an increasingly large # of corruptors to be able to engage a Protoss army even if they only stop at a few colossi, yet at the same time this means you fair worse and worse against the ground force as the size of the gateway units increases disproportionately to what the zerg army can. Corruption isn't powerful enough to make up the difference in lost ground strength.

Now this has to happen a bit, zerg units > gateway units in the long run, but it should be done in a more interesting way like Templars+Sentries cause with positional battles.

(I use zerg because I know zerg and the same issue is likely a part of PvP and PvT issues as well).


I also view this as a design problem not a balance one. The problem is P have had their core designed altered in a bad way. The current design is early tech is instable and fragile then later tech is stable(except HTs they are a fragment from BW). Where as the old P design was the early tech was stable but didn't have potential to do massive damage then later tech is instable but potential to do damage.

As it stands the Colossi/sentry combination has completely warped the Protoss design. Gateway units have to be far weaker than they should because the later tech is stable unlike the Reaver/HT of BW. This means that P has a very strange dynamic of having to rely on this later tech units completely and thus cannot really split their army or use their gateway force properly. It just pigeon holes the whole race into being a "Death Ball race" instead of the beautiful mobile BW race they once were.

That being said this is the new P. I guess we cannot hope for the old P core design to come back since it's already to late. Just have to resign ourselves to the fact that this is the new P and we must live with it.


It's never too late; we have 2 more expansions to go. Having a deathball race just isn't that interesting. It's not like Protoss is that far from being more flexible and interesting. Warp prisms, Blink and warp gates already show a ton of potential to open stuff up for our Protoss buddies. It's just that in most cases ball + colossi ends up being way better.

Out of curiosity, do you (or anyone) think Colossi having less HP would affect the situation at all? Colossi actually have very high hp/pop compared to other units of a similar nature. Colossi: 58hp/pop, Siege tank: 40hp/pop, HT: 40hp/pop, Banshee: 46hp/pop. Personally I'd rather have cheaper colossi with less hp than what we have now. It'd open up more options for Protoss while making colossi easier to deal with when prepared.

Kind of related, but I'd love to see drop play being important for colossi to maximize their damage. The problem with that is that of course the counter to colossi are things that shoot air. That's really why I dislike the colossi: their repositioning abilities + the fact that drop positioning/micro with colossi is pointless because air is the colossi response anyways.
Logo
Rabiator
Profile Joined March 2010
Germany3948 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-02-08 17:10:14
February 08 2011 17:02 GMT
#1232

+ Show Spoiler +

On February 09 2011 01:37 Logo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 09 2011 01:36 Rabiator wrote:
(My apologies)
+ Show Spoiler +

On February 09 2011 01:20 WhiteDog wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 09 2011 00:26 barbwire wrote:
Saying mule needs a cd is a bit of an ignorant fix imo.

I agree that dropping 8 mules on a newly-established gold base is kind of ridiculous, but there is no cd on chronoboost either. Obviously you can't use all your energy on one structure at the same time, but you can use full energy on your warpgates to get an army out faster. You can save your energy to chrono boost upgrades faster than any other race is capable of. Every other race has macro capabilities that seem "op" to other races from the outside looking in as well. I wish when I lost an army in a big battle I could run back to my base and have 36 marauders pop out at the same time ready to do more battle (given several hatches and using larva injects).

So while I do believe mass mule dropping a gold base is crazy, it's a little too much to simply say "mule needs a cd" when early game every terran is basically dropping every available mule to even keep up in economy. If you've ever seen a toss player that uses his chrono boost on his probes he will have 10 more than the terran in around 10 minutes....but the terran will have a mule down. Smarter people than you worked on making these macro mechanics somewhat balanced...although they possibly never will be in all scenarios and all respects.

Heyheyhey, if they put a cooldown in mule, it will not change anything for the early stage of the game since, as you said, terran already pump out their mules as fast as they can.
If they put a CD (say a bit less than mana regeneration) you will just not be able to put 8 mule at a time on a gold base, but everything else will stay unchanged.

1. Why not 8 MULEs on a gold base? If you build 8 OCs it would work. Not that that is really likely to happen, but building an extra OC just for the MULEs is something which is in the secret terran tactics chest.
2. THINK before you ask for a "nerf". If the MULE gets a cooldown it doesnt use energy anymore (skills either use energy OR are on a cooldown but not both) and this leaves all energy for scans. I do remember some Zerg posts whining about IMBA terran scouting abilities and with this change you could even skip your scouting SCV on a 1v1 map and just use a scan and get some extra minerals that way ... (to exaggerate it a little bit). I am sure terrans will love everyone who suggests this change.


#2 isn't true, Transfuse has a cooldown AND costs energy.

You mean Spawn Creep Tumor I guess. It seems indeed that I was wrong there, but I was thinking about the big combat abilities like the Thors cannon and the corruption of the Corruptors ... Requiring energy and a cooldown is a big restraint for an ability, but since you only lay a creep tumor once (most of the time) and this reproduces itself after that it doesnt matter much. For the MULE it is a different thing entirely.
If you cant say what you're meaning, you can never mean what you're saying.
Cranberries
Profile Joined July 2010
Wales567 Posts
February 08 2011 17:03 GMT
#1233
On February 09 2011 02:00 Logo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 09 2011 01:43 Numy wrote:
On February 09 2011 01:26 Logo wrote:
Here's one problem I see why the colossi design, now I don't want to talk about imbalance really so I pick my words carefully here. It's not that the colossi makes an imbalance or causes P to be too strong (they may or may not be), but it's that they're poorly designed.

The issue as I see it is that for most standard combat units in the game the # of units you need to deal with a unit is almost entirely a function of how many of that unit there are. If I want to snipe 4 void rays I use a certain number of hydralisks and something to take damage and that's it. If I want to baneling bust a certain number of marines I only need X banelings and something/anything to take damage and that's it. So as army sizes increase I don't have to continue producing a certain unit to kill a specific unit that may not be increasing in size.

Colossi aren't like this though. The # of corruptors needed to kill a set # of colossi is a function of how many stalkers there are. Even if the P player stops making colossi the Zerg needs to keep increasing the # of corruptors they have to be able to take out the colossi. If they don't then the stalkers will out-do the corruptors and the colossi will survive and the fight is lost for Zerg. Basically the # of corruptors needed is a function of stalker counter + colossi count. 6 colossi and 20 or so Stalkers is about the same as 2 colossi and 40 or so stalkers. However the difference is that in one you end up with a strong ground force that you need to be able to handle and the other you uh win (can you tell I'm not a fan of mass colossi production compared to a strong gateway army supported by colossi).

Anyways I think that's an important part of the problem. The only real way to kill colossi (once they're out) is through corruptors which has this odd issue where you need an increasingly large # of corruptors to be able to engage a Protoss army even if they only stop at a few colossi, yet at the same time this means you fair worse and worse against the ground force as the size of the gateway units increases disproportionately to what the zerg army can. Corruption isn't powerful enough to make up the difference in lost ground strength.

Now this has to happen a bit, zerg units > gateway units in the long run, but it should be done in a more interesting way like Templars+Sentries cause with positional battles.

(I use zerg because I know zerg and the same issue is likely a part of PvP and PvT issues as well).


I also view this as a design problem not a balance one. The problem is P have had their core designed altered in a bad way. The current design is early tech is instable and fragile then later tech is stable(except HTs they are a fragment from BW). Where as the old P design was the early tech was stable but didn't have potential to do massive damage then later tech is instable but potential to do damage.

As it stands the Colossi/sentry combination has completely warped the Protoss design. Gateway units have to be far weaker than they should because the later tech is stable unlike the Reaver/HT of BW. This means that P has a very strange dynamic of having to rely on this later tech units completely and thus cannot really split their army or use their gateway force properly. It just pigeon holes the whole race into being a "Death Ball race" instead of the beautiful mobile BW race they once were.

That being said this is the new P. I guess we cannot hope for the old P core design to come back since it's already to late. Just have to resign ourselves to the fact that this is the new P and we must live with it.


It's never too late; we have 2 more expansions to go. Having a deathball race just isn't that interesting. It's not like Protoss is that far from being more flexible and interesting. Warp prisms, Blink and warp gates already show a ton of potential to open stuff up for our Protoss buddies. It's just that in most cases ball + colossi ends up being way better.

Out of curiosity, do you (or anyone) think Colossi having less HP would affect the situation at all? Colossi actually have very high hp/pop compared to other units of a similar nature. Colossi: 58hp/pop, Siege tank: 40hp/pop, HT: 40hp/pop, Banshee: 46hp/pop. Personally I'd rather have cheaper colossi with less hp than what we have now. It'd open up more options for Protoss while making colossi easier to deal with when prepared.

Kind of related, but I'd love to see drop play being important for colossi to maximize their damage. The problem with that is that of course the counter to colossi are things that shoot air. That's really why I dislike the colossi their repositioning abilities + the fact that drop positioning/micro with colossi is pointless because air is the colossi response anyways.

The cost of the Colossus, the time to build and time to research it's potent upgrade are the reasons why it's strong. If you made the Colossus weaker, without changing any of the values, I doubt people would make it: instead rushing towards HT would probably be better against T, and playing air against Zerg would be better.
WhiteDog
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
France8650 Posts
February 08 2011 17:03 GMT
#1234
On February 09 2011 02:02 Rabiator wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 09 2011 01:37 Logo wrote:
On February 09 2011 01:36 Rabiator wrote:
(My apologies)
+ Show Spoiler +

On February 09 2011 01:20 WhiteDog wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 09 2011 00:26 barbwire wrote:
Saying mule needs a cd is a bit of an ignorant fix imo.

I agree that dropping 8 mules on a newly-established gold base is kind of ridiculous, but there is no cd on chronoboost either. Obviously you can't use all your energy on one structure at the same time, but you can use full energy on your warpgates to get an army out faster. You can save your energy to chrono boost upgrades faster than any other race is capable of. Every other race has macro capabilities that seem "op" to other races from the outside looking in as well. I wish when I lost an army in a big battle I could run back to my base and have 36 marauders pop out at the same time ready to do more battle (given several hatches and using larva injects).

So while I do believe mass mule dropping a gold base is crazy, it's a little too much to simply say "mule needs a cd" when early game every terran is basically dropping every available mule to even keep up in economy. If you've ever seen a toss player that uses his chrono boost on his probes he will have 10 more than the terran in around 10 minutes....but the terran will have a mule down. Smarter people than you worked on making these macro mechanics somewhat balanced...although they possibly never will be in all scenarios and all respects.

Heyheyhey, if they put a cooldown in mule, it will not change anything for the early stage of the game since, as you said, terran already pump out their mules as fast as they can.
If they put a CD (say a bit less than mana regeneration) you will just not be able to put 8 mule at a time on a gold base, but everything else will stay unchanged.

1. Why not 8 MULEs on a gold base? If you build 8 OCs it would work. Not that that is really likely to happen, but building an extra OC just for the MULEs is something which is in the secret terran tactics chest.
2. THINK before you ask for a "nerf". If the MULE gets a cooldown it doesnt use energy anymore (skills either use energy OR are on a cooldown but not both) and this leaves all energy for scans. I do remember some Zerg posts whining about IMBA terran scouting abilities and with this change you could even skip your scouting SCV on a 1v1 map and just use a scan and get some extra minerals that way ... (to exaggerate it a little bit). I am sure terrans will love everyone who suggests this change.


#2 isn't true, Transfuse has a cooldown AND costs energy.

You mean Spawn Creep Tumor I guess. It seems indeed that I was wrong there, but I was thinking about the big combat abilities like the Thors cannon and the corruption of the Corruptors ... Requiring energy and a cooldown is a big restraint for an ability, but since you only lay a creep tumor once (most of the time) and this reproduces itself after that it doesnt matter much. For the MULE it is a different thing entirely.

And larva inject ?
"every time WhiteDog overuses the word "seriously" in a comment I can make an observation on his fragile emotional state." MoltkeWarding
Logo
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
United States7542 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-02-08 17:06:21
February 08 2011 17:05 GMT
#1235
On February 09 2011 02:02 Rabiator wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 09 2011 01:37 Logo wrote:
On February 09 2011 01:36 Rabiator wrote:
(My apologies)
+ Show Spoiler +

On February 09 2011 01:20 WhiteDog wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 09 2011 00:26 barbwire wrote:
Saying mule needs a cd is a bit of an ignorant fix imo.

I agree that dropping 8 mules on a newly-established gold base is kind of ridiculous, but there is no cd on chronoboost either. Obviously you can't use all your energy on one structure at the same time, but you can use full energy on your warpgates to get an army out faster. You can save your energy to chrono boost upgrades faster than any other race is capable of. Every other race has macro capabilities that seem "op" to other races from the outside looking in as well. I wish when I lost an army in a big battle I could run back to my base and have 36 marauders pop out at the same time ready to do more battle (given several hatches and using larva injects).

So while I do believe mass mule dropping a gold base is crazy, it's a little too much to simply say "mule needs a cd" when early game every terran is basically dropping every available mule to even keep up in economy. If you've ever seen a toss player that uses his chrono boost on his probes he will have 10 more than the terran in around 10 minutes....but the terran will have a mule down. Smarter people than you worked on making these macro mechanics somewhat balanced...although they possibly never will be in all scenarios and all respects.

Heyheyhey, if they put a cooldown in mule, it will not change anything for the early stage of the game since, as you said, terran already pump out their mules as fast as they can.
If they put a CD (say a bit less than mana regeneration) you will just not be able to put 8 mule at a time on a gold base, but everything else will stay unchanged.

1. Why not 8 MULEs on a gold base? If you build 8 OCs it would work. Not that that is really likely to happen, but building an extra OC just for the MULEs is something which is in the secret terran tactics chest.
2. THINK before you ask for a "nerf". If the MULE gets a cooldown it doesnt use energy anymore (skills either use energy OR are on a cooldown but not both) and this leaves all energy for scans. I do remember some Zerg posts whining about IMBA terran scouting abilities and with this change you could even skip your scouting SCV on a 1v1 map and just use a scan and get some extra minerals that way ... (to exaggerate it a little bit). I am sure terrans will love everyone who suggests this change.


#2 isn't true, Transfuse has a cooldown AND costs energy.

You mean Spawn Creep Tumor I guess. It seems indeed that I was wrong there, but I was thinking about the big combat abilities like the Thors cannon and the corruption of the Corruptors ... Requiring energy and a cooldown is a big restraint for an ability, but since you only lay a creep tumor once (most of the time) and this reproduces itself after that it doesnt matter much. For the MULE it is a different thing entirely.


No I mean transfuse. Transfuse has a 1sec cooldown. A queen can spawn creep tumors as fast as the animation as well as vomit as fast as the animation (provided she's surrounded by hatcheries). Transfuse was given a 1 sec cooldown so a full energy queen can't heal for 500 dmg instantly. It has a big effect on Ultras for example as rather than being able to heal 500hp/s per queen each queen only heals for 125hp/s.
Logo
Rabiator
Profile Joined March 2010
Germany3948 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-02-08 17:09:00
February 08 2011 17:06 GMT
#1236

+ Show Spoiler +

On February 09 2011 02:03 WhiteDog wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 09 2011 02:02 Rabiator wrote:
On February 09 2011 01:37 Logo wrote:
On February 09 2011 01:36 Rabiator wrote:
(My apologies)
+ Show Spoiler +

On February 09 2011 01:20 WhiteDog wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 09 2011 00:26 barbwire wrote:
Saying mule needs a cd is a bit of an ignorant fix imo.

I agree that dropping 8 mules on a newly-established gold base is kind of ridiculous, but there is no cd on chronoboost either. Obviously you can't use all your energy on one structure at the same time, but you can use full energy on your warpgates to get an army out faster. You can save your energy to chrono boost upgrades faster than any other race is capable of. Every other race has macro capabilities that seem "op" to other races from the outside looking in as well. I wish when I lost an army in a big battle I could run back to my base and have 36 marauders pop out at the same time ready to do more battle (given several hatches and using larva injects).

So while I do believe mass mule dropping a gold base is crazy, it's a little too much to simply say "mule needs a cd" when early game every terran is basically dropping every available mule to even keep up in economy. If you've ever seen a toss player that uses his chrono boost on his probes he will have 10 more than the terran in around 10 minutes....but the terran will have a mule down. Smarter people than you worked on making these macro mechanics somewhat balanced...although they possibly never will be in all scenarios and all respects.

Heyheyhey, if they put a cooldown in mule, it will not change anything for the early stage of the game since, as you said, terran already pump out their mules as fast as they can.
If they put a CD (say a bit less than mana regeneration) you will just not be able to put 8 mule at a time on a gold base, but everything else will stay unchanged.

1. Why not 8 MULEs on a gold base? If you build 8 OCs it would work. Not that that is really likely to happen, but building an extra OC just for the MULEs is something which is in the secret terran tactics chest.
2. THINK before you ask for a "nerf". If the MULE gets a cooldown it doesnt use energy anymore (skills either use energy OR are on a cooldown but not both) and this leaves all energy for scans. I do remember some Zerg posts whining about IMBA terran scouting abilities and with this change you could even skip your scouting SCV on a 1v1 map and just use a scan and get some extra minerals that way ... (to exaggerate it a little bit). I am sure terrans will love everyone who suggests this change.


#2 isn't true, Transfuse has a cooldown AND costs energy.

You mean Spawn Creep Tumor I guess. It seems indeed that I was wrong there, but I was thinking about the big combat abilities like the Thors cannon and the corruption of the Corruptors ... Requiring energy and a cooldown is a big restraint for an ability, but since you only lay a creep tumor once (most of the time) and this reproduces itself after that it doesnt matter much. For the MULE it is a different thing entirely.

And larva inject ?

The cooldown for larva inject is on the hatchery and not on the queen, right? One queen can inject several hatcheries as long as she has the energy, right?
If you cant say what you're meaning, you can never mean what you're saying.
Dice.
Profile Joined May 2009
United States78 Posts
February 08 2011 17:07 GMT
#1237
On February 09 2011 01:29 Endorsed wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 08 2011 23:17 Ben... wrote:
On February 08 2011 22:08 The KY wrote:
I dont know if he still does but I have personally heard day9 call mules imbalanced on several occasions during dailies so for those claiming he doesn't whine Bout it are clearly wrong he does but more subtley.


You mean those times when he would say something like 'but hey it's ok if you lose your whole army and base as Terran, just float to the island and call down a bunch of mules, enjoy your 5-figure economy!'

That wasn't whining, that was joking.
He may have been joking but there is an element of truth to it. Tasteless stated that he felt mules should be on a cooldown on his Facebook page when asked what still needs to be tweaked and I think I've heard it elsewhere too. I think a cooldown for mules makes perfect sense. It puts it more inline with larva injects and chronoboost where you have to be somewhat responsible with it. I think it would be an interesting discussion if Artosis and IdrA talked about mules in comparison the other macro abilities.


If you cooldown mules. YOU NEEEED to cooldown Chronoboost. There is no need for a mule cooldown. If you miss a mule, you don't have the production to make up for it anyway.

Show nested quote +
LOLOLOLOLOLOL.

How can you describe that as an "ignorant fix"

LOLOLOLOLOLOL

If protoss misses a chronoboost, it's not like he can just stack chronoboosts on top of each other for even faster probes... If Zerg misses an inject, it's not like he can stack his injects for even faster drones... NO, both races get penalized for missing these things, UNLIKE the Terran race.

IMHO, If anyone has a problem with a cooldown for MULEs, it's because they don't want to have to macro better. Terran macro is already much easier than Zerg macro, why shouldn't there be a cooldown on MULEs? They are a ridiculous gatherer.

Like you said sir, Terran players drop every available mule to keep up in early game... Why can't Terran players to continue dropping every available mule throughout the whole game? That's what Zerg players do with injects throughout the ENTIRE game, as do protoss players with chronoboosting.

MULEs are definitely very powerful and having been a Terran player previously I can comfortably say that having a cooldown on MULEs should really not be a big deal, and I'm willing to bet that top players such as Liquid`Jinro, IMMvp, MarineKing.Prime would have no problem with this as well, because top players don't really miss their MULE drops too often.

Summary: Having a cooldown for MULEs shouldn't be a big deal to GOOD/GREAT terran players.


LOLOLOLOL

YOU HAVE CLEARLY NO IDEA.

1. If protoss misses a chronoboost he can chronoboost something else twice. Actually, he can choose to chronoboost his probes twice-->The only punishment a protoss gets is that he will have those 3 probes a little bit later.
2. If terran misses a mule, HE WON'T HAVE THE PRODUCTION. To make up for it. So in a way missing a mule is JUST like missing an inject. If a terran is able to throw down 8 mules on a gold patch. He will have 10k minerals. But only 5 rax. So the only way to benefit from this is by making 10 rax before you drop those 8 mules. But if you do that you will just get killed.


Also, it's VERY common to see a player like OGSmc have 100 energy on all his nexus late game. Ofcourse a cooldown on mules isn't a big deal. Hell it would make the game better. But then there also should be a cooldown on chronoboost.


So you start by saying I clearly have no idea... But then later agree with me that putting a cooldown on mules wouldn't be a big deal. Obviously if protoss misses CB he can CB something twice, but it doesn't make up for that lost time of production. Protoss is punished. The punishment for missing a mule isn't as harsh, because you can call down any amount of mules simultaneously.

You start talking about very circumstantial and hypothetical situations... "He will have 10k minerals. But only 5 rax."

WHAT? Pity on the Terran who is able to throw down EIGHT MULES on a high yield and only has 5 rax. You're a garbage player.. I would make a safe assumption that if you have a high yield as terran then it must be your 3rd base... Any Terran on 3 base that only has 5rax obviously can't keep up anyway. Enough with the hypothetical BS, I'm done entertaining it...

My main point is that Terran should not be "saving" mules, there is no valid reason to.. Also, any good Terran should not be missing mules when they have the energy to calldown and are not saving energy for SCANs.

Ahh, that's the stuff. [b]Team Dice[/b] [b][green]Main Team[/green][/b] 2 [tlpd#players#4#T#sc2-korean]Bbyong[/tlpd] 5 [tlpd#players#6#T#sc2-korean]Fantasy[/tlpd] 3 [tlpd#players#629#P#sc2-korean]Oz[/tlpd] 7 [tlpd#players#2322#P#sc2-korean]Parting[/tlp
Dice.
Profile Joined May 2009
United States78 Posts
February 08 2011 17:09 GMT
#1238
On February 09 2011 01:55 WhiteDog wrote:
Useless post, talking about mule with terran players is dumb, and it's not the good place anyway.


I couldn't agree more. Yet I do know some good and honorable Terran players who say they wouldn't mind if MULEs had a cooldown, because they are confident in their ability to not miss calldowns.

It really shouldn't be a big deal...
Ahh, that's the stuff. [b]Team Dice[/b] [b][green]Main Team[/green][/b] 2 [tlpd#players#4#T#sc2-korean]Bbyong[/tlpd] 5 [tlpd#players#6#T#sc2-korean]Fantasy[/tlpd] 3 [tlpd#players#629#P#sc2-korean]Oz[/tlpd] 7 [tlpd#players#2322#P#sc2-korean]Parting[/tlp
Rst1728
Profile Joined February 2011
United States15 Posts
February 08 2011 17:13 GMT
#1239
There has been a lot of back and forth about "Day 9 or Artosis/Idra" whose opinion has more weight. There are some fairly decent arguments on both sides. The first thing I want to point out though, is that Day never talks about imbalance. At all. If somebody says otherwise they are wrong. He's made comments (mules, mainly, but I've seen it with other units) to the effect of "such and such happened because X is imbalanced!! UGH!" He's joking. 100% of the time. When he's doing that he's making fun of people who QQ about imbalance every time any race does something that another can't. His true opinion, stated much more often than jokes about imbalance are "I don't believe in imbalance, I believe in practice."

Ok, that's off my chest. This isn't to say imbalances don't exist, they almost certainly do, Blizzard isn't perfect, and neither is Day 9. I am, however, much much more inclined to listen to his opinions on the issue than Idra/Artosis. Mainly because he doesn't have anything invested in the outcome of the games. He can afford to be unbiased. Idra can't, and to a lesser extent neither can Artosis.

To everybody who says that Idra and Artosis should not be discredited for saying that Zerg (their race) is underpowered, let me ask a simple question. If Zerg were overpowered, would they say anything? Or worse yet, would they defend Zerg, and fight to keep whatever overpowered tech was in question? I think it's fairly obvious that they would fight to keep their race un-nerfed, even if the nerf was needed for game balance. I'm not faulting them for that, it's human nature, but at the same time it's a very good reason to take everything they say with a grain of salt. Listen to their opinion, think about it, but don't take it as gospel either.

Staying on topic about Colossi, In the diamond league I've found that you really NEED them in order to be competitive against Zergs. This is less true vs terran, and other protoss (now that VRs are buffed) but you really really really need them vs Zerg. Hydras straight up dominate gateway units and immortals for cost. Roaches do the same. Templar are to fragile, and immobile. Also they are 100% useless vs spine crawlers. If you nerf the colossus there need to be other serious adjustments made to the matchup, and a lot of them will probably be things Zergs won't like very much. Long post, I know, but I had a lot of points I wanted to get in.
We'll see
TimeSpiral
Profile Joined January 2011
United States1010 Posts
February 08 2011 17:14 GMT
#1240
On February 08 2011 23:59 AimForTheBushes wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 08 2011 23:45 TimeSpiral wrote:
Vikings, Corrupters, Phoenix, VRs? Doesn't matter, and here's why
==================================================


Artosis and IdrA hit the nail on the head when they said you are forced to 'overmake' the counter. They elaborate by describing what they mean by using that terminology and I completely agree. You actually need to be able to one shot every Colossus until they are all dead to have a chance at trading supply. This is rendered virtually impossible when the Protoss opponent peppers in Phoenix/VRs as buffers.

I disagree with how they glossed over TvP, but I can understand why they did; they do not have as much experience playing TvP. The matchup is not fine, imo.

Adding Spellcasters to the Gateway Colossus Ball (GCB) makes it even worse. I get that some people disagree that the Phoenix is a spellcaster, but it basically is. It casts "hold person" and transforms the target into an immobile air unit. So, you take the GCB and account for the Sentry, the Phoenix, and if it is late game, maybe a contingent of HTs and it is basically invulnerable.

I don't know how to fix Protoss, but something is broken in the TvP and the ZvP matchups.


So do you consider One Ghost too many to make to "counter" the protoss death ball? I can't imagine anyone allowing their opponents to get mass gateway, multiple robos, enough sentries for FFs, stargates for phoenixes, and archives for a "contigency" of templar, and expect to win. What does that game situation look like? Your opponent must have been sitting unbothered on his side of the map with 4 bases for 20 minutes. If that's the case (which it would almost have to be, considering you've covered every single tech tree short of fleet beacon/dark shrine), you as a terran should have about 40 marine/marauders, 6 thors, 10 tanks, a fleet of BCs and vikings, and a contingency of ghosts to deal with it off of your respective 5 bases..


One Ghost does not "counter" the Protoss Death Ball. Anyone getting hit with AoE while their entire army is in a giant CTL+1 group-ball is going to suffer terrible, terrible damage. A good EMP will neutralize some of the Sentries and soften up the stalkers, but the Zealots and the Colossus will be relatively un-phased by it. The effects of a decent EMP could be compared to the instant death rays of 4+ Colossus but EMP is non-lethal and therefore can never really be as effective :/

Death rays are 100% lethal.

Well, the situation you're referencing is actually more common than you are suggesting and is not necessitated by "Your opponent must have been sitting unbothered on his side of the map with 4 bases for 20 minutes." I've been in games, and have seen plenty of high level games, where it is back and forth, constant battles, that eventually go to the extreme late game where both opponents have the entire tech-tree open and 2.5-3.5 base economies kickin' which is enough to produce any composition relatively comfortably. The Terran almost always loses in the scenario, in my experience as a player and a spectator.

It is silly to suggest such a thing doesn't happen, although it is more rare than the big 200/200 clash.
[G] Positioning, Formations, and Tactics: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=187892
Prev 1 60 61 62 63 64 81 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 3h 3m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
WinterStarcraft596
StarCraft: Brood War
Leta 478
TY 369
PianO 235
actioN 117
Noble 74
sSak 69
Yoon 16
Sacsri 8
yabsab 7
Dota 2
XaKoH 468
ODPixel227
League of Legends
JimRising 678
Counter-Strike
Stewie2K826
Other Games
summit1g9316
shahzam1044
monkeys_forever254
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick36256
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 17 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH356
• Hupsaiya 66
• Kozan
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• sooper7s
• Migwel
• IndyKCrew
StarCraft: Brood War
• tankgirl 1
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• lizZardDota293
League of Legends
• Lourlo1661
• Stunt436
• HappyZerGling81
Upcoming Events
The PondCast
3h 3m
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
9h 3m
WardiTV European League
9h 3m
Jumy vs NightPhoenix
Percival vs Nicoract
ArT vs HiGhDrA
MaxPax vs Harstem
Scarlett vs Shameless
SKillous vs uThermal
Replay Cast
17h 3m
RSL Revival
1d 3h
ByuN vs SHIN
Clem vs Reynor
OSC
1d 6h
Replay Cast
1d 17h
RSL Revival
2 days
Classic vs Cure
FEL
2 days
OSC
2 days
[ Show More ]
RSL Revival
3 days
FEL
3 days
FEL
3 days
CSO Cup
3 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
3 days
Bonyth vs QiaoGege
Dewalt vs Fengzi
Hawk vs Zhanhun
Sziky vs Mihu
Mihu vs QiaoGege
Zhanhun vs Sziky
Fengzi vs Hawk
Sparkling Tuna Cup
4 days
RSL Revival
4 days
FEL
4 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
4 days
Bonyth vs Dewalt
QiaoGege vs Dewalt
Hawk vs Bonyth
Sziky vs Fengzi
Mihu vs Zhanhun
QiaoGege vs Zhanhun
Fengzi vs Mihu
Replay Cast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Proleague 2025-07-07
HSC XXVII
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
Acropolis #3
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
Championship of Russia 2025
RSL Revival: Season 1
Murky Cup #2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025

Upcoming

2025 ACS Season 2: Qualifier
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSL Xiamen Invitational
2025 ACS Season 2
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
SEL Season 2 Championship
FEL Cracov 2025
Esports World Cup 2025
Underdog Cup #2
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.