|
On August 11 2011 18:02 BinxyBrown wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2011 17:39 Toadvine wrote:On August 11 2011 16:47 BinxyBrown wrote:
In korea the most skilled players play Terran, also in korea terran has the highest representation at top skill levels, their metagame will naturally progress faster than the other races because they have more people working on the same problems.
Conversely in korea protoss is the least played race, I really don't think that it has much to do with Protoss being weak as it does with more people coming up with good strategies as terran, which also has a more diverse tech path right now.
Lets hope that in hots Zerg and Toss can change their playstyle the way a terran can. Zerg is the least played race in Korean Masters and GM. Also, Terrans arguably innovate the least. Why would they if what they're doing works so well? Necessity has been the driving force behind Zerg and Protoss innovation, which is one of the reasons why PvZ changes so much. Not at the highest levels though, in GSL level play protoss is the least used race
What exactly is "GSL level play"? Code A and Code S? Korean GM? The players in pro teams?
Because if you mean the actual Code A/S, then the dwindling amount of Protoss is a new development. What would you say if I told you that the relative underperformance of Zerg players during the GSL Open Seasons was because of Zerg simply being the least played race? Maybe we should revert all of the Zerg buffs since then so the game can be balanced again?
On August 11 2011 17:39 LicH. wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2011 17:35 Cornix wrote:
The one thing I find hard to stomach in this thread is the repeated sentiment that apparently this data should be largely ignored in terms of balance entirely because 'That darn 1/1/1 build is messing it all up'.
In terms of balance a build that can be done with high levels of success pretty much DEFINES the meta and the current gamestate balance. This is an RTS.. you do generally go for builds that give you good chances to win the game and the point of tinkering with and trying out new builds is to find builds even better that let you win even more.
That's like saying 'Oh you should ignore the fact that some capture the flag scenarios in shooters don't work very well just because people are using that pesky rocket launcher and the flag room is small.'
Or saying 'Oh you should ignore this fighting game character being imbalanced because he's got this one great combo that everyone is using.'
Yes.. allowing for time for a new build to be adjusted to is nice, just to see if no one has found an answer yet.. but as far as balance concerns goes a build with a ~90% win rate at the highest levels of competition is definitely something to be concerned about and watched as an overall balance issue.. especially because more people will begin using it the longer it remains successful. So right now TvP is imbalanced BECAUSE of 1/1/1.. that doesn't mean we should 'ignore' the problem just because of 1/1/1.. it means we should watch it even more because of an unbalanced new build.
I'm not trying to say that 1/1/1 is impossible to hold or will never be countered but given the current situation trying to take the stance of 'oh there's no problem with PvT balance because 1/1/1' is the opposite of a good idea. Dude, this is your 6th post. Did you seriously make a TL account just to cry about the 1-1-1 build that has literally been around since beta, but has been drummed up to be "new and unstoppable" by complete fucking noobs like yourself who watch one season of gsl and draw generalizations from it? Holy shit, I don't know if I can open these kinds of threads anymore cause of people like you.
To be honest, I don't think there's ever been a build that was this successful in high level play pretty much regardless of what the opponent does. Perhaps 5 rax reaper would come close. A Terran could tell a Zerg "I'm going to 5 rax reaper", and the Zerg still wouldn't have a way of dealing with it effectively, short of a Roach all-in perhaps. Still, there were a good amount of games where Zergs managed to defend the harass well enough to take the game in the later stages. 5RR also required pretty good multitasking, micro, and high apm on the part of the Terran, it wasn't some faceroll all-in any random platinum player can do.
This shit, on the other hand, has never been defended in televised games without the Terran making an enormous blunder (forgetting Siege mode seems to be a popular one). It's literally like 25-3 at this point. This has never been the case with any other all-in afaik. The problem with all-ins, even abusive Terran all-ins vs Zerg on small maps, was always scouting them, rather than defending them. If the Terran tells the Zerg "I'm going to do all-in X", the Zerg will defend. It was always the need to prepare for everything at once that killed the Zerg.
This build, on the other hand, seems to do very well even if the Protoss knows it's coming 100% and designs his whole build around defending this specific attack. Today in Code A + Show Spoiler + Tassadar essentially hard countered it with very risky builds, and lost anyway, against a player who he absolutely destroyed in a standard game
So yeah, I really think this is shaping up to be a major problem. I'd be really surprised if some effective and stable solution pops up. It's possible, of course, and I'm not calling for any nerfs yet. It would be nice if Protoss got the retarded Warpgate nerf reverted. That was just dumb as hell and only caused problems without fixing a damn thing.
|
The sollution is really simple, yet everyone keeps discussing.
1) Marine health to 40, shield upgrade = +15 and requires ebay.
2) Banshee cloack upgrade requires ebay + reduce damage vs armored units (like stalkers).
I think the marine nerf is really great, since it also affects early game tvz. No more 2 rax scv + rine allin. No more geiko builds. For fast expanding terrans there is the bunker, so this makes the marine health not important.
|
well, at least now I have a source to blame why I always lose against a terran 
|
On August 11 2011 18:19 Snowbear wrote:
The sollution is really simple, yet everyone keeps discussing.
1) Marine health to 40, shield upgrade = +15 and requires ebay.
2) Banshee cloack upgrade requires ebay + reduce damage vs armored units (like stalkers).
I think the marine nerf is really great, since it also affects early game tvz. No more 2 rax scv + rine allin. No more geiko builds. For fast expanding terrans there is the bunker, so this makes the marine health not important.
I don't think the banshee nerf would be necissary, but the marine nerf is a good idea. IMO marines are simply too cost efficient, especially in the early game (2 rax, 1-1-1 etc.).
|
On August 11 2011 18:47 Therg wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2011 18:19 Snowbear wrote:
The sollution is really simple, yet everyone keeps discussing.
1) Marine health to 40, shield upgrade = +15 and requires ebay.
2) Banshee cloack upgrade requires ebay + reduce damage vs armored units (like stalkers).
I think the marine nerf is really great, since it also affects early game tvz. No more 2 rax scv + rine allin. No more geiko builds. For fast expanding terrans there is the bunker, so this makes the marine health not important. I don't think the banshee nerf would be necissary, but the marine nerf is a good idea. IMO marines are simply too cost efficient, especially in the early game (2 rax, 1-1-1 etc.).
Yeah, it would make them less effective early game, and med and lategame they would be the same as before. I don't understand why blizzard never thought about it...
|
I think any banshee nerf is difficult, simply because they are a pretty gimmicky unit as it is. Nerfing them would probably make them underused. Nerfing marine/tank is obviously also a very risky idea.
Maybe cut warpgate research time and immortal build time? Might help getting those few extra units.
|
On August 11 2011 19:55 Bagi wrote:
Maybe cut warpgate research time and immortal build time? Might help getting those few extra units.
Cutting warpgate research time is a bad idea for obvious reasons.
Immortal build time? I don't think Immortals are key in any of the PvT problems.
|
On August 11 2011 20:24 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2011 19:55 Bagi wrote:
Maybe cut warpgate research time and immortal build time? Might help getting those few extra units. Cutting warpgate research time is a bad idea for obvious reasons. Immortal build time? I don't think Immortals are key in any of the PvT problems.
The warpgate doesn't even have to go as far as pre-nerf values, just somewhere in between.
The PvT problem is pretty much 1-1-1, and faster immortals could really help fend off that push. If you're after some lategame buffs, tough luck.
|
On August 11 2011 20:24 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2011 19:55 Bagi wrote:
Maybe cut warpgate research time and immortal build time? Might help getting those few extra units. Cutting warpgate research time is a bad idea for obvious reasons. Immortal build time? I don't think Immortals are key in any of the PvT problems.
Why is cutting Warpgate research time bad? Just reduce it by 20 seconds, back to the pre-patch value, and nerf sentry build time back if it's necessary. The change just messed things up in PvT and PvZ, negatively affecting both defensive and offensive timings, and didn't do anything to help PvP, which it was supposed to do.
|
+ Show Spoiler [Code A] +I feel sooo sorry for Tassadar, he is pretty clearly Code S material, but continuously lost against 1-1-1 from Terrans who couldn't beat him in a macro game if their lives depended on it.
Oops, wrong thread.
|
arnt 1-1-1 all in wins just build order wins from my own experience (only diamond) the toss can hold if they went for a safer build but will lose if they FE a bit like how if a T fes the toss can all in and generally win
|
No, Tuk. Wrong completely.
If you FE as Protoss, you actually have MORE chance of holding it, as your expo will have paid for itself by the time the push hits. If you stay on 1 base you just die completely. That is why the build is so strong. It seems like there is NO counter at all.
|
On August 11 2011 23:24 SeaSwift wrote:
No, Tuk. Wrong completely.
If you FE as Protoss, you actually have MORE chance of holding it, as your expo will have paid for itself by the time the push hits. If you stay on 1 base you just die completely. That is why the build is so strong. It seems like there is NO counter at all.
I have experienced with a friend with all possible things, it's actually quite suprising results.
Carrier/Mothership/Phoenix/Voidray was some of the worst against 1/1/1 with stalker/zealot/sentries. You just didn't have enough army to deal with the marines afterwards. Even if you manage to kill the raven/banshees and perhaps 1-2 tanks.
Colossus/Immortal with gateway units was kind of mediocre, it killed some more but not nearly enough. Problem here is you have so few if you go colossus or with immortal you need super good flank on immortal and tanks and stalkers for banshees etc.
Archon/HT/DT was actually proven to be the best, and actually won. I think I had something like 2 archons and around 10+ chargelots, it easily took down the 1/1/1, only problem was if the 1/1/1 build had cloak involved, you wouldnt really have detection. Perhaps if you sack some zealots but not for the big engagement. Btw, twilight with blink/charge and just gateway armies also got absolutely slaughtered.
|
About 2 months ago all 3 races were almost at 50%... Without any balance patches I wonder how that one race dropped so much.
|
United Kingdom10823 Posts
On August 11 2011 23:31 eYeball wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2011 23:24 SeaSwift wrote:
No, Tuk. Wrong completely.
If you FE as Protoss, you actually have MORE chance of holding it, as your expo will have paid for itself by the time the push hits. If you stay on 1 base you just die completely. That is why the build is so strong. It seems like there is NO counter at all. I have experienced with a friend with all possible things, it's actually quite suprising results. Carrier/Mothership/Phoenix/Voidray was some of the worst against 1/1/1 with stalker/zealot/sentries. You just didn't have enough army to deal with the marines afterwards. Even if you manage to kill the raven/banshees and perhaps 1-2 tanks. Colossus/Immortal with gateway units was kind of mediocre, it killed some more but not nearly enough. Problem here is you have so few if you go colossus or with immortal you need super good flank on immortal and tanks and stalkers for banshees etc. Archon/HT/DT was actually proven to be the best, and actually won. I think I had something like 2 archons and around 10+ chargelots, it easily took down the 1/1/1, only problem was if the 1/1/1 build had cloak involved, you wouldnt really have detection. Perhaps if you sack some zealots but not for the big engagement. Btw, twilight with blink/charge and just gateway armies also got absolutely slaughtered.
How does that work well though? It feels a bit contradicting.
With all the minerals you have to pump in to get your expansion up/saturated in time, you won't have that many chargelots, and the gas needed to have an effective army would need the expansion right? Not trolling, genuinely curious about how you guys got it working
|
On August 11 2011 23:33 seansye wrote:
About 2 months ago all 3 races were almost at 50%... Without any balance patches I wonder how that one race dropped so much.
Terran players finally realized protoss found a way to beat the easy mode MMM+viking and started to used Ravens and Ghosts (well...realized is a big word since blizzard pushed them to use it by lowering the cost).
Then, Zerg found the Roach/ling all in that can punish easily any protoss fast expand that is NOT perfectly timed and done which isnt so hard to scout for zerg especially since they have creep, speedlings, watch tower control AND sacrificed OV. Then, in the last patch, infestors were buffed and people were just starting to used them. Then, some pro players showed how strong they were and how bad they could pretty much own anything protoss has without a ton of micro. Therefore, every single zerg player decided to follow the group and use those as a mid-game composition with lings.
|
On August 11 2011 10:26 rpgalon wrote:
just buff the protoss stargate play, 2 things, make graviton beam 25 energy so you can harass and fight with them. and increase the damage/decrease the attack speed of void rays and phoenix, so upgrades and armor have less effect on them ( like the viking and the corruptor ).
only good protoss players uses stargate so it is not going to affect much the lower level where protoss is doing fine.
hopefully make hydras tier 1 and increase spore range before doing that =)
|
On August 11 2011 13:39 quiet noise wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2011 13:35 KingFranX wrote:
That graph just tells you that the games and win % fluctuates a lot. The only exception seems to be tvz where terran always seem to have the advantage... It also tells you that protoss is at an all-time low worse than any fluctiuation in sc2 history. 2 Protoss players made it to the round 16 in GSL.
correct me if im wrong but i think there was a GSL r08 with 0 zergs before ? at least season 1 only had 1 zerg in r08 fruitdealer.
|
On August 11 2011 23:33 seansye wrote:
About 2 months ago all 3 races were almost at 50%... Without any balance patches I wonder how that one race dropped so much.
It happens. Players figure out new stuff and all that. Same chart for BW:
http://i.imgur.com/uxz19.png
And I can assure you no patches has had any influence there.
|
On August 11 2011 18:02 BinxyBrown wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2011 17:39 Toadvine wrote:On August 11 2011 16:47 BinxyBrown wrote:
In korea the most skilled players play Terran, also in korea terran has the highest representation at top skill levels, their metagame will naturally progress faster than the other races because they have more people working on the same problems.
Conversely in korea protoss is the least played race, I really don't think that it has much to do with Protoss being weak as it does with more people coming up with good strategies as terran, which also has a more diverse tech path right now.
Lets hope that in hots Zerg and Toss can change their playstyle the way a terran can. Zerg is the least played race in Korean Masters and GM. Also, Terrans arguably innovate the least. Why would they if what they're doing works so well? Necessity has been the driving force behind Zerg and Protoss innovation, which is one of the reasons why PvZ changes so much. Not at the highest levels though, in GSL level play protoss is the least used race
Prove that the most skilled players play terran. You can't. If there is an imbalance or flawed game design that makes the race easier at that level, then it is easier to look like you're more skilled than an opponent from another race. The general consensus in Korea (75%) is that protoss is the weak race.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
