|
On August 11 2014 23:39 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2014 22:51 r691175002 wrote:On August 11 2014 20:04 jojos11 wrote:good job david kim.keep listening to gold league whiners,maybe the game will officially died soon ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/DmHxcyL.jpg) User was warned for this post This is the expected and desired outcome of the balance patch. Balance, for many of us, means reasonable representation of all three races in tournament play, and as tournament winners. Win rates only express the rate of change of balance. If Terrans are winning more, that means that more of them are getting deeper into tournaments.That would be a problem if terrans were already at 1/3rd or greater representation, but they are not. Terrans have extremely poor representation in high level play, so this increase in win rates is only evidence that things are evening out. There is no way Code S should be 3 Terrans and 15+ Protoss. The 10% win rate differential you are crying about is nothing more than than the weaker Protoss players dropping out to make room for the top few Terran players who were forced out due to the previous state of the game. You can start to whine once both races constitute aprox 1/3rd of the competetive player base. For now, a skewed PvT winrate is good. I don't know if that's true. In the simulations topic some pages ago it seemed to be the case that win rates at the top level reflect the balance and that they are not just an indication of changing balance. And look at http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/IEM_Season_IX_-_Toronto/Korean_and_Taiwan_Qualifier3 out of 4 winners are terran, 2 out of 4 finals were TvT
Its still an online qualifier so idk if it's really relevent.
|
On August 11 2014 23:46 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2014 23:39 Grumbels wrote:On August 11 2014 22:51 r691175002 wrote:On August 11 2014 20:04 jojos11 wrote:good job david kim.keep listening to gold league whiners,maybe the game will officially died soon User was warned for this post This is the expected and desired outcome of the balance patch. Balance, for many of us, means reasonable representation of all three races in tournament play, and as tournament winners. Win rates only express the rate of change of balance. If Terrans are winning more, that means that more of them are getting deeper into tournaments.That would be a problem if terrans were already at 1/3rd or greater representation, but they are not. Terrans have extremely poor representation in high level play, so this increase in win rates is only evidence that things are evening out. There is no way Code S should be 3 Terrans and 15+ Protoss. The 10% win rate differential you are crying about is nothing more than than the weaker Protoss players dropping out to make room for the top few Terran players who were forced out due to the previous state of the game. You can start to whine once both races constitute aprox 1/3rd of the competetive player base. For now, a skewed PvT winrate is good. I don't know if that's true. In the simulations topic some pages ago it seemed to be the case that win rates at the top level reflect the balance and that they are not just an indication of changing balance. And look at http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/IEM_Season_IX_-_Toronto/Korean_and_Taiwan_Qualifier3 out of 4 winners are terran, 2 out of 4 finals were TvT Its still an online qualifier so idk if it's really relevent.
I really agree with the idea that "win rates at the top level reflect the balance". The recent GSL, SPL or even the current IEM qualifier seems to see the dominated of Terran. It is true that the current sample is too small (?doubt) to draw any conclusion for the balance of PvT, but if all the best protoss like Rain, Dear, PartinG (who is regarded as one of best PvT) lose to Terran at the same time and all by 2:0 really would tell something.
|
On August 12 2014 01:05 flowerhugo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2014 23:46 Faust852 wrote:On August 11 2014 23:39 Grumbels wrote:On August 11 2014 22:51 r691175002 wrote:On August 11 2014 20:04 jojos11 wrote:good job david kim.keep listening to gold league whiners,maybe the game will officially died soon User was warned for this post This is the expected and desired outcome of the balance patch. Balance, for many of us, means reasonable representation of all three races in tournament play, and as tournament winners. Win rates only express the rate of change of balance. If Terrans are winning more, that means that more of them are getting deeper into tournaments.That would be a problem if terrans were already at 1/3rd or greater representation, but they are not. Terrans have extremely poor representation in high level play, so this increase in win rates is only evidence that things are evening out. There is no way Code S should be 3 Terrans and 15+ Protoss. The 10% win rate differential you are crying about is nothing more than than the weaker Protoss players dropping out to make room for the top few Terran players who were forced out due to the previous state of the game. You can start to whine once both races constitute aprox 1/3rd of the competetive player base. For now, a skewed PvT winrate is good. I don't know if that's true. In the simulations topic some pages ago it seemed to be the case that win rates at the top level reflect the balance and that they are not just an indication of changing balance. And look at http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/IEM_Season_IX_-_Toronto/Korean_and_Taiwan_Qualifier3 out of 4 winners are terran, 2 out of 4 finals were TvT Its still an online qualifier so idk if it's really relevent. I really agree with the idea that "win rates at the top level reflect the balance". The recent GSL, SPL or even the current IEM qualifier seems to see the dominated of Terran. It is true that the current sample is too small (?doubt) to draw any conclusion for the balance of PvT, but if all the best protoss like Rain, Dear, PartinG (who is regarded as one of best PvT) lose to Terran at the same time and all by 2:0 really would tell something.
Seeing them play first would be a good start. Most of them destroyed terran in the semi final of SPL.
Ok, Flash beat Parting, but it was to be expected given the map and how fucking strong is Flash in this situation (finale stage of a proleague in front of 2k spectators).
TY beat Classic but meh, 2 raxes vs Nexus first.
In GSL, there weren't really big upset, Cure and Innovation are stronger than Paralyze and Myungsik, and it was still very close. Maru was way better than his group too, and Reality went 2nd, yes, but with 2-3 in score against Trap so that's not like he had it easy.
Zest, Rain, Stats, Parting, Dear. They are still to play. the 4/4 terran currently isn't suprising at all in my opinion. It was already all the best terrans in the world that were stuck in code B/A, and there were 16 protoss in code S. Ofc you need to clean things a bit.
|
On August 11 2014 16:17 Svizcy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2014 10:24 Genome852 wrote:On August 10 2014 20:17 Svizcy wrote:
Easies way to have less BO poker is for them to implement a build radious arround, Nexus, CC and Hatchery. That way all other buildings need to be build in some radious arroud those main buildings.
Radious should be big enaugh to cover all main base. This way it wont affect the "normal" builds but you automatically get rid of all proxies, which is where the most BO poker ussualy happens. What if I want to walloff a strategic area that might be a bit far from my CC? Proxies and cheese are part of the game. You can wall of there but you have to build CC first to get a build radius. Walling off shouldnt be a problem, cause it would be really massive circle arround your main base structure. It would only affect proxies near your oponents base at start of the game.
Or you could just learn how to scout your own base.
|
On August 12 2014 01:05 flowerhugo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2014 23:46 Faust852 wrote:On August 11 2014 23:39 Grumbels wrote:On August 11 2014 22:51 r691175002 wrote:On August 11 2014 20:04 jojos11 wrote:good job david kim.keep listening to gold league whiners,maybe the game will officially died soon User was warned for this post This is the expected and desired outcome of the balance patch. Balance, for many of us, means reasonable representation of all three races in tournament play, and as tournament winners. Win rates only express the rate of change of balance. If Terrans are winning more, that means that more of them are getting deeper into tournaments.That would be a problem if terrans were already at 1/3rd or greater representation, but they are not. Terrans have extremely poor representation in high level play, so this increase in win rates is only evidence that things are evening out. There is no way Code S should be 3 Terrans and 15+ Protoss. The 10% win rate differential you are crying about is nothing more than than the weaker Protoss players dropping out to make room for the top few Terran players who were forced out due to the previous state of the game. You can start to whine once both races constitute aprox 1/3rd of the competetive player base. For now, a skewed PvT winrate is good. I don't know if that's true. In the simulations topic some pages ago it seemed to be the case that win rates at the top level reflect the balance and that they are not just an indication of changing balance. And look at http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/IEM_Season_IX_-_Toronto/Korean_and_Taiwan_Qualifier3 out of 4 winners are terran, 2 out of 4 finals were TvT Its still an online qualifier so idk if it's really relevent. I really agree with the idea that "win rates at the top level reflect the balance". The recent GSL, SPL or even the current IEM qualifier seems to see the dominated of Terran. It is true that the current sample is too small (?doubt) to draw any conclusion for the balance of PvT, but if all the best protoss like Rain, Dear, PartinG (who is regarded as one of best PvT) lose to Terran at the same time and all by 2:0 really would tell something.
Are u serious? Have u actually looked at who were the terrans that won against them? Correct me if Im wrong but Flash, TY, Maru and Cure are all Code S terrans so its pretty much expected that they would be able to beat these protosses.
Dont use GSL if all of the top Ps that uve listed havent even played yet. So far whats happened in GSL is that Cure showed great TvP, Innovation struggled to get over two average Ps, Maru as the best terran out there killed his group and Reality managed to upset Trap in their second series with the overall score still in favor of Trap. So what happened is that we luckily have 4/7 terrans advancing so far with 10 more protoss players still to play and Im pretty sure Zest, Rain, PartinG, Stork and Dear are better than myungsik, hush or paralyze (that MSC control lol).
And using SPL finals games is dumb as well. Flash vs PartinG had pretty obvious result since Flash played really solid and Parting played weirdly..., and u cant count TY vs Classic because that was a 2 rax snipe.
So all u are left with is that IEM qualifier and we all know that pretty much anything can happen in the online qualifiers so this one miracle isnt anything id be too concerned about and as ive already said all those terrans are the best Korea has to offer now so its good that they are actually able to beat their protoss counterparts.
|
Personally think mines are too strong. Would've preferred for Terran to get buffed in some other way. To effectively engage bio you need to close distance 9/10, when mines are this powerful thats almost impossible.
Not basing this of stats though, just playing the game and watching top terrans, so maybe my opinion isn't relevant
|
On August 12 2014 01:17 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2014 01:05 flowerhugo wrote:On August 11 2014 23:46 Faust852 wrote:On August 11 2014 23:39 Grumbels wrote:On August 11 2014 22:51 r691175002 wrote:On August 11 2014 20:04 jojos11 wrote:good job david kim.keep listening to gold league whiners,maybe the game will officially died soon User was warned for this post This is the expected and desired outcome of the balance patch. Balance, for many of us, means reasonable representation of all three races in tournament play, and as tournament winners. Win rates only express the rate of change of balance. If Terrans are winning more, that means that more of them are getting deeper into tournaments.That would be a problem if terrans were already at 1/3rd or greater representation, but they are not. Terrans have extremely poor representation in high level play, so this increase in win rates is only evidence that things are evening out. There is no way Code S should be 3 Terrans and 15+ Protoss. The 10% win rate differential you are crying about is nothing more than than the weaker Protoss players dropping out to make room for the top few Terran players who were forced out due to the previous state of the game. You can start to whine once both races constitute aprox 1/3rd of the competetive player base. For now, a skewed PvT winrate is good. I don't know if that's true. In the simulations topic some pages ago it seemed to be the case that win rates at the top level reflect the balance and that they are not just an indication of changing balance. And look at http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/IEM_Season_IX_-_Toronto/Korean_and_Taiwan_Qualifier3 out of 4 winners are terran, 2 out of 4 finals were TvT Its still an online qualifier so idk if it's really relevent. I really agree with the idea that "win rates at the top level reflect the balance". The recent GSL, SPL or even the current IEM qualifier seems to see the dominated of Terran. It is true that the current sample is too small (?doubt) to draw any conclusion for the balance of PvT, but if all the best protoss like Rain, Dear, PartinG (who is regarded as one of best PvT) lose to Terran at the same time and all by 2:0 really would tell something. Seeing them play first would be a good start. Most of them destroyed terran in the semi final of SPL. Ok, Flash beat Parting, but it was to be expected given the map and how fucking strong is Flash in this situation (finale stage of a proleague in front of 2k spectators). TY beat Classic but meh, 2 raxes vs Nexus first. In GSL, there weren't really big upset, Cure and Innovation are stronger than Paralyze and Myungsik, and it was still very close. Maru was way better than his group too, and Reality went 2nd, yes, but with 2-3 in score against Trap so that's not like he had it easy. Zest, Rain, Stats, Parting, Dear. They are still to play. the 4/4 terran currently isn't suprising at all in my opinion. It was already all the best terrans in the world that were stuck in code B/A, and there were 16 protoss in code S. Ofc you need to clean things a bit.
Maybe you have not got my point. One event alone would be okay and seems irrelevant to the balance issue. But if all the things happen at the same time or very short time should mean something, especially most of the best protoss (IEM Korean qualifier ) seems performed worse against Terran. I never look at one event or one player to draw any conclusion about balance so I have said above that I do not think that the game is totally unbalanced today. But if few protoss could be regarded at PvT killer, while we find many TvP killer for Terran rising is not a normal situation no matter how good you think a terran player is (We need to avoid bias in discussion of balance). Just like when the favorable protoss oracle patch ( which is no doubt unbalanced I think ) was on in past, most of the protoss became stronger than Terran players in a short time and people argued, even Stork did say that just because Terran players do not work hard at all and protoss players are in fire.
|
On August 12 2014 01:29 Green_25 wrote:
Personally think mines are too strong. Would've preferred for Terran to get buffed in some other way. To effectively engage bio you need to close distance 9/10, when mines are this powerful thats almost impossible.
Not basing this of stats though, just playing the game and watching top terrans, so maybe my opinion isn't relevant
I agree with your idea. Even it is balanced noways (Doubt ?), the most time colossus-stalk playing style against bio, mining games makes me disgusting. I hope to see more storms or tanks playing. Diversified playing styles will be much enjoyable to watch even my favorable players lose.
|
On August 11 2014 19:49 brickrd wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2014 19:44 Grumbels wrote:On August 11 2014 19:39 brickrd wrote:On August 11 2014 18:49 usethis2 wrote:
No, I understand him saying timing attacks are fine as long as the defender has a fighting chance when s/he diligently scout them out. What he dislikes is a blind proxy that is nearly impossible to scout and get you abnormal win rates when unscouted (or even when scouted).
I sort of agree and I believe blizzard does, too, although probably not as much as Big J dislikes proxies. That is why zealot build time was increased and void ray build time was increased in WOL. Apparently MakaPrime sent David Kim a replay where a terran couldn't defend a scouted void ray all-ins. That kind of proxies are not just a coin flip but a clear imbalance.
Having said that, I don't see too big of an imbalance in proxies and timings these days. Sometimes there happen bad lucks but those happen both to attackers and defenders, it seems. Those who neglect scouting are deserved to be punished for the most part. thats not what he said. he said or strongly implied that a scouted timing attack should always be defended if the players are equally skilled. which basically means that if you attack before youre maxed and win, big j thinks it's imba. Please agree on the definition of timing attack before going down this road. :o thats not goign to happen, hes just going to conveniently define "timing attack" as whichever particular builds he thinks are imba to play against, bringing it down to the basic complaint of "your attack takes less skill to execute than my defense" which is a matter of opinion no matter how you slice it
You're the one putting strawmen all over the place. And then you imply that Im just going to throw around biased definitions that people will bring up again. Funny guy.
Come back when you find that line that says you shouldnt be able to win when you outcontrol your opponent. Come back when you find that line that says you shouldnt be able to attack when scouted.
What im saying is, that to make an attack work the attacker should have to outcontrol the opponent (implying a good counterstrat from the defender that has to be flexibly reachable upon scouting.
Im saying that all timings should be scoutable.
Im not saying that you shouldnt attack. But when you do, you shouldnt have a > 50% chance to come out ahead, else there is no reason to not always perform this same attack every game and reach > 50% winrate with it.
If your 2rax works sometimes based upon skill, your opponent having a defenders advantage in combat and a reasonable way to always determine it is happening, then what part of my posts imply it is bad?
My point is, that when I spawn on deathwing and my opponent proxy 2raxes, there is no way that can guarantee that I can find out in time without having a big disadvantage against a standard build.
And Im not even saying that 2rax is the worst build jn that regard. But yes, on most maps there is plainly a chance that "that one variation of 2rax that you didnt scout for" (e.g. makarax vs a basescout; e.g. positiongamble on 3-4p maps; e.g. that other spot that you barely missed...) works.
|
On August 12 2014 02:20 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2014 19:49 brickrd wrote:On August 11 2014 19:44 Grumbels wrote:On August 11 2014 19:39 brickrd wrote:On August 11 2014 18:49 usethis2 wrote:
No, I understand him saying timing attacks are fine as long as the defender has a fighting chance when s/he diligently scout them out. What he dislikes is a blind proxy that is nearly impossible to scout and get you abnormal win rates when unscouted (or even when scouted).
I sort of agree and I believe blizzard does, too, although probably not as much as Big J dislikes proxies. That is why zealot build time was increased and void ray build time was increased in WOL. Apparently MakaPrime sent David Kim a replay where a terran couldn't defend a scouted void ray all-ins. That kind of proxies are not just a coin flip but a clear imbalance.
Having said that, I don't see too big of an imbalance in proxies and timings these days. Sometimes there happen bad lucks but those happen both to attackers and defenders, it seems. Those who neglect scouting are deserved to be punished for the most part. thats not what he said. he said or strongly implied that a scouted timing attack should always be defended if the players are equally skilled. which basically means that if you attack before youre maxed and win, big j thinks it's imba. Please agree on the definition of timing attack before going down this road. :o thats not goign to happen, hes just going to conveniently define "timing attack" as whichever particular builds he thinks are imba to play against, bringing it down to the basic complaint of "your attack takes less skill to execute than my defense" which is a matter of opinion no matter how you slice it If your 2rax works sometimes based upon skill, your opponent having a defenders advantage in combat and a reasonable way to always determine it is happening, then what part of my posts imply it is bad? My point is, that when I spawn on deathwing and my opponent proxy 2raxes, there is no way that can guarantee that I can find out in time without having a big disadvantage against a standard build. And Im not even saying that 2rax is the worst build jn that regard. But yes, on most maps there is plainly a chance that "that one variation of 2rax that you didnt scout for" (e.g. makarax vs a basescout; e.g. positiongamble on 3-4p maps; e.g. that other spot that you barely missed...) works.
Note that the same can be said for TvP early game.
Scouting double gas and a missing pylon only restricts the possibilities to the holy Protoss trifecta of all-ins, namely Proxy Oracle, Blink or DTs.
All three of those structures can be proxied anywhere, especially the Twilight Council and Dark Shrine.
There is no need for the latter two to be placed anywhere close to the Terran, ANY spot will do.
There is no garantuee that the Terran is ever able to scout the tech structure in time, if he can even find it.
Proxy Oracle hits 5:05 at the earliest, which is barely in time to get the magical number of 6 marines out.
Blind Engineering Bay + Turret is an option but throwing that down upon scouting double gas and a missing third pylon means you're wasting 225 minerals + build time against a Blink play and the Turret would be in the wrong location against a DT play.
All these threats form part of the TvP early game meta which is why every single Terran either goes CC first or 12gas Reaper. I haven't seen any other openings for months outside of the highly occasional Widow Mine / Hellion drop (the latter of which would die to Oracles).
This doesn't mean the builds are OP, it just means a certain response and consideration has to be taken into account when playing the TvP early game. I simply cannot go CC + Gas + Rax or gasless 1rax expand because I would simply die to a variety of Protoss aggression.
For the same reason, a Zerg that goes Hatch first, especially on a two player map, is simply taking a risk.
It isn't much different from going Hatch first against a Protoss and getting cannon rushed.
You can either go Hatch first and accept the fact you will have trouble holding off early all-ins/rushes, or you can go pool first and play a little more defensive. Yes, you would not be playing as economic as you would Hatch first and if your opponent goes CC first your pool first might not have done something, but that doesn't mean Zerg should be entitled to go for a free Hatch first instead.
There are dozens of TvPs in which a Terran COULD have played agressively rather than going for a Reaper or a CC first and totally destroy the Protoss player, but Terran simply cannot know that in time.
A 2rax being a possibility is IMO a necessity in TvZ to avoid Zergs playing greedy.
Just as I have to respect the threat of Oracles, Blink and DTs in TvP, preventing me from playing very greedy, Zerg has to do the same against Terran.
|
On August 12 2014 01:29 Green_25 wrote:
Personally think mines are too strong. Would've preferred for Terran to get buffed in some other way. To effectively engage bio you need to close distance 9/10, when mines are this powerful thats almost impossible.
Not basing this of stats though, just playing the game and watching top terrans, so maybe my opinion isn't relevant
What in the world is Protoss going to do with their range 9 collosus and range 9 psistorms against those terrifying range 5 widow mines? That widow mine killed a zealot and splashed 2 more units while they charged into the enemy. Such terrible game ending damage, might as well gg!
Whats that? Micro? Splitting Units? What do these strange words mean?
|
On August 12 2014 02:38 Loccstana wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2014 01:29 Green_25 wrote:
Personally think mines are too strong. Would've preferred for Terran to get buffed in some other way. To effectively engage bio you need to close distance 9/10, when mines are this powerful thats almost impossible.
Not basing this of stats though, just playing the game and watching top terrans, so maybe my opinion isn't relevant What in the world is Protoss going to do with their range 9 collosus and range 9 psistorms against those terrifying range 5 widow mines? That widow mine killed a zealot and splashed 2 more units while they charged into the enemy. Such terrible game ending damage, might as well gg! Whats that? Micro? Splitting Units? What do these strange words mean?
Well Protoss will obviously go Collosus/stalker every game, we know that. The point is do we want every PvT to look exactly the same? Its also an advantage for Terran in that they know their opponent has one option and can meta it.
Basically TvP is going to be a role-reversal of a month ago.
|
Before we continue this part of the discussion further--can we actually have a written out definition of timing attack vs all-in vs poke so that we don't have a confusion of what it is we're talking about?
And no, I'm not asking for a list of what build orders count as what. I'm talking about what parameters are needed to fit into each category.
I've always thought.
sacrificing econ for immediate, but temporary, advantage => all-in
slightly hindering tech/econ for a slight temporary advantage => timing attack
sending out units during a time when the opponent statistically doesn't have enough to defend => poke
The %chance each of those tactics have of winning should be irrelevant to the design of their use.
|
On August 12 2014 02:57 Thieving Magpie wrote:
Before we continue this part of the discussion further--can we actually have a written out definition of timing attack vs all-in vs poke so that we don't have a confusion of what it is we're talking about?
And no, I'm not asking for a list of what build orders count as what. I'm talking about what parameters are needed to fit into each category.
I've always thought.
sacrificing econ for immediate, but temporary, advantage => all-in
slightly hindering tech/econ for a slight temporary advantage => timing attack
sending out units during a time when the opponent statistically doesn't have enough to defend => poke
The %chance each of those tactics have of winning should be irrelevant to the design of their use.
It could also be sacrificing tech, eg: Zerg roach allin delays all of their tech in normal ZvT, DTs for Protoss, etc as part of the all-in section
|
On August 12 2014 02:37 Thezzy wrote:
Scouting double gas and a missing pylon only restricts the possibilities to the holy Protoss trifecta of all-ins, namely Proxy Oracle, Blink or DTs.
All three of those structures can be proxied anywhere, especially the Twilight Council and Dark Shrine.
There is no need for the latter two to be placed anywhere close to the Terran, ANY spot will do.
I agree that this is an issue, and frankly I consider it to be the dumbest interaction currently present in SC2.
It isn't really a balance problem though, just a game design one. Everyone knows that PvT was not a healthy matchup, and unfortunately the changes have not really addressed that.
IMO it is too build order dependent, and has too much blind rock-paper-scissors potential. I think it is easily the most volatile matchup for that reason.
This was really inevitable when you consider what the clowns over at blizzard have been doing though. All of their "late game" changes such as oracle speed and dark shrine cost only provided more all-in potential. If blizzard continues to nerf protoss (or buff the other races) in the mid to late game, all Protoss will have left is gimmicky garbage.
|
On August 12 2014 02:37 Thezzy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2014 02:20 Big J wrote:On August 11 2014 19:49 brickrd wrote:On August 11 2014 19:44 Grumbels wrote:On August 11 2014 19:39 brickrd wrote:On August 11 2014 18:49 usethis2 wrote:
No, I understand him saying timing attacks are fine as long as the defender has a fighting chance when s/he diligently scout them out. What he dislikes is a blind proxy that is nearly impossible to scout and get you abnormal win rates when unscouted (or even when scouted).
I sort of agree and I believe blizzard does, too, although probably not as much as Big J dislikes proxies. That is why zealot build time was increased and void ray build time was increased in WOL. Apparently MakaPrime sent David Kim a replay where a terran couldn't defend a scouted void ray all-ins. That kind of proxies are not just a coin flip but a clear imbalance.
Having said that, I don't see too big of an imbalance in proxies and timings these days. Sometimes there happen bad lucks but those happen both to attackers and defenders, it seems. Those who neglect scouting are deserved to be punished for the most part. thats not what he said. he said or strongly implied that a scouted timing attack should always be defended if the players are equally skilled. which basically means that if you attack before youre maxed and win, big j thinks it's imba. Please agree on the definition of timing attack before going down this road. :o thats not goign to happen, hes just going to conveniently define "timing attack" as whichever particular builds he thinks are imba to play against, bringing it down to the basic complaint of "your attack takes less skill to execute than my defense" which is a matter of opinion no matter how you slice it If your 2rax works sometimes based upon skill, your opponent having a defenders advantage in combat and a reasonable way to always determine it is happening, then what part of my posts imply it is bad? My point is, that when I spawn on deathwing and my opponent proxy 2raxes, there is no way that can guarantee that I can find out in time without having a big disadvantage against a standard build. And Im not even saying that 2rax is the worst build jn that regard. But yes, on most maps there is plainly a chance that "that one variation of 2rax that you didnt scout for" (e.g. makarax vs a basescout; e.g. positiongamble on 3-4p maps; e.g. that other spot that you barely missed...) works. Note that the same can be said for TvP early game. Scouting double gas and a missing pylon only restricts the possibilities to the holy Protoss trifecta of all-ins, namely Proxy Oracle, Blink or DTs. All three of those structures can be proxied anywhere, especially the Twilight Council and Dark Shrine. There is no need for the latter two to be placed anywhere close to the Terran, ANY spot will do. There is no garantuee that the Terran is ever able to scout the tech structure in time, if he can even find it. Proxy Oracle hits 5:05 at the earliest, which is barely in time to get the magical number of 6 marines out. Blind Engineering Bay + Turret is an option but throwing that down upon scouting double gas and a missing third pylon means you're wasting 225 minerals + build time against a Blink play and the Turret would be in the wrong location against a DT play. All these threats form part of the TvP early game meta which is why every single Terran either goes CC first or 12gas Reaper. I haven't seen any other openings for months outside of the highly occasional Widow Mine / Hellion drop (the latter of which would die to Oracles). This doesn't mean the builds are OP, it just means a certain response and consideration has to be taken into account when playing the TvP early game. I simply cannot go CC + Gas + Rax or gasless 1rax expand because I would simply die to a variety of Protoss aggression. For the same reason, a Zerg that goes Hatch first, especially on a two player map, is simply taking a risk. It isn't much different from going Hatch first against a Protoss and getting cannon rushed. You can either go Hatch first and accept the fact you will have trouble holding off early all-ins/rushes, or you can go pool first and play a little more defensive. Yes, you would not be playing as economic as you would Hatch first and if your opponent goes CC first your pool first might not have done something, but that doesn't mean Zerg should be entitled to go for a free Hatch first instead. There are dozens of TvPs in which a Terran COULD have played agressively rather than going for a Reaper or a CC first and totally destroy the Protoss player, but Terran simply cannot know that in time. A 2rax being a possibility is IMO a necessity in TvZ to avoid Zergs playing greedy. Just as I have to respect the threat of Oracles, Blink and DTs in TvP, preventing me from playing very greedy, Zerg has to do the same against Terran.
I don't think that this interaction in TvP is good either, it's rather much worse. I'm not implying that such builds are broken, but I think everybody would agree that it is skill-less bullshit if any race had a button that said "the game ends. 40% chance to win, 60% chance to lose". It would be an underpowered option, but at the same time, you could send me as Zerg against Maru and I'd have a 40% chance to win the game, regardless of how much better Maru was playing.
Doing some proxy in the early game (or a superearly pool) is obviuosly not the same, but it's not that far from barely missing a scout on a two rax and thinking you are safe, or whatever build that plainly relies on not being reliably scoutable Scarlett is currently training as Protoss.
For your TvZ argument that it is required, I don't believe it is. Reaper expands as well as CC first into hellions + 3rd CC both hold up with the Zergs economy. Zergs have to go for a pool at a decent time anyways for queens. 3hatch builds aren't even really better economically (than 2hatch+faster pool), not to mention that they are risky against reapers (but better defensively against hellions and banshees).
The situation in PvZ is the similar. Protoss has a variety of openings that can keep up with the Zerg economically (or even get you ahead when the Zerg plays a safe standard build e.g. 14pool against Nexus into Gate).
@vague description of how I use terms:
Allin: Attack that seriously gets you behind if it fails, i.e. you should usually lose, given an opponent that plays well. E.g. a 7gate attack of 40probes against a 3base 50drone Zerg.
Timing Attack: Anything that includes some infrastructural/compositional set up process, i.e. you plan to attack beforehand, and then hits your opponent with most of your army. Most of the time this will put you behind if you can't do damage, but it does not directly imply that you have to rely on bigger mistakes of the opponent to still win. E.g. a stim/medivac attack of 2base against a Protoss trying to secure a 3rd.
Poke: Army movement that includes the possibility to attack and should at least threaten the opponent, but which does not usually need to do any form of damage. E.g. a 3base Terran moving out with sufficient medivac support against a Zerg that does not have mutas yet.
|
Funny enough, most of the games won by P recently against T was when they went either straight to HTs (Trap vs Reality on Overgrowth) Or do some tricky 1 colo into HTs. So WMs were useless most of the time in the standard TvP games that T won. The only things that is to take into consideration then is Time Warp time reduction and the lack of skill of protoss that can't deal with a single WMs in their mineral lines.
|
On August 12 2014 03:35 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2014 02:37 Thezzy wrote:On August 12 2014 02:20 Big J wrote:On August 11 2014 19:49 brickrd wrote:On August 11 2014 19:44 Grumbels wrote:On August 11 2014 19:39 brickrd wrote:On August 11 2014 18:49 usethis2 wrote:
No, I understand him saying timing attacks are fine as long as the defender has a fighting chance when s/he diligently scout them out. What he dislikes is a blind proxy that is nearly impossible to scout and get you abnormal win rates when unscouted (or even when scouted).
I sort of agree and I believe blizzard does, too, although probably not as much as Big J dislikes proxies. That is why zealot build time was increased and void ray build time was increased in WOL. Apparently MakaPrime sent David Kim a replay where a terran couldn't defend a scouted void ray all-ins. That kind of proxies are not just a coin flip but a clear imbalance.
Having said that, I don't see too big of an imbalance in proxies and timings these days. Sometimes there happen bad lucks but those happen both to attackers and defenders, it seems. Those who neglect scouting are deserved to be punished for the most part. thats not what he said. he said or strongly implied that a scouted timing attack should always be defended if the players are equally skilled. which basically means that if you attack before youre maxed and win, big j thinks it's imba. Please agree on the definition of timing attack before going down this road. :o thats not goign to happen, hes just going to conveniently define "timing attack" as whichever particular builds he thinks are imba to play against, bringing it down to the basic complaint of "your attack takes less skill to execute than my defense" which is a matter of opinion no matter how you slice it If your 2rax works sometimes based upon skill, your opponent having a defenders advantage in combat and a reasonable way to always determine it is happening, then what part of my posts imply it is bad? My point is, that when I spawn on deathwing and my opponent proxy 2raxes, there is no way that can guarantee that I can find out in time without having a big disadvantage against a standard build. And Im not even saying that 2rax is the worst build jn that regard. But yes, on most maps there is plainly a chance that "that one variation of 2rax that you didnt scout for" (e.g. makarax vs a basescout; e.g. positiongamble on 3-4p maps; e.g. that other spot that you barely missed...) works. Note that the same can be said for TvP early game. Scouting double gas and a missing pylon only restricts the possibilities to the holy Protoss trifecta of all-ins, namely Proxy Oracle, Blink or DTs. All three of those structures can be proxied anywhere, especially the Twilight Council and Dark Shrine. There is no need for the latter two to be placed anywhere close to the Terran, ANY spot will do. There is no garantuee that the Terran is ever able to scout the tech structure in time, if he can even find it. Proxy Oracle hits 5:05 at the earliest, which is barely in time to get the magical number of 6 marines out. Blind Engineering Bay + Turret is an option but throwing that down upon scouting double gas and a missing third pylon means you're wasting 225 minerals + build time against a Blink play and the Turret would be in the wrong location against a DT play. All these threats form part of the TvP early game meta which is why every single Terran either goes CC first or 12gas Reaper. I haven't seen any other openings for months outside of the highly occasional Widow Mine / Hellion drop (the latter of which would die to Oracles). This doesn't mean the builds are OP, it just means a certain response and consideration has to be taken into account when playing the TvP early game. I simply cannot go CC + Gas + Rax or gasless 1rax expand because I would simply die to a variety of Protoss aggression. For the same reason, a Zerg that goes Hatch first, especially on a two player map, is simply taking a risk. It isn't much different from going Hatch first against a Protoss and getting cannon rushed. You can either go Hatch first and accept the fact you will have trouble holding off early all-ins/rushes, or you can go pool first and play a little more defensive. Yes, you would not be playing as economic as you would Hatch first and if your opponent goes CC first your pool first might not have done something, but that doesn't mean Zerg should be entitled to go for a free Hatch first instead. There are dozens of TvPs in which a Terran COULD have played agressively rather than going for a Reaper or a CC first and totally destroy the Protoss player, but Terran simply cannot know that in time. A 2rax being a possibility is IMO a necessity in TvZ to avoid Zergs playing greedy. Just as I have to respect the threat of Oracles, Blink and DTs in TvP, preventing me from playing very greedy, Zerg has to do the same against Terran. I don't think that this interaction in TvP is good either, it's rather much worse. I'm not implying that such builds are broken, but I think everybody would agree that it is skill-less bullshit if any race had a button that said "the game ends. 40% chance to win, 60% chance to lose". It would be an underpowered option, but at the same time, you could send me as Zerg against Maru and I'd have a 40% chance to win the game, regardless of how much better Maru was playing. Doing some proxy in the early game (or a superearly pool) is obviuosly not the same, but it's not that far from barely missing a scout on a two rax and thinking you are safe, or whatever build that plainly relies on not being reliably scoutable Scarlett is currently training as Protoss. For your TvZ argument that it is required, I don't believe it is. Reaper expands as well as CC first into hellions + 3rd CC both hold up with the Zergs economy. Zergs have to go for a pool at a decent time anyways for queens. 3hatch builds aren't even really better economically (than 2hatch+faster pool), not to mention that they are risky against reapers (but better defensively against hellions and banshees). The situation in PvZ is the similar. Protoss has a variety of openings that can keep up with the Zerg economically (or even get you ahead when the Zerg plays a safe standard build e.g. 14pool against Nexus into Gate).
Agreed for the most part, although I feel early aggression should not disappear entirely.
Otherwise the first 5 to 10 minutes of every SC2 game would be two players just macro-ing up and scouting.
It would be boring as hell to watch knowing that nothing is going to happen, especially for casters and viewers.
Some of the best moments in a series come from early aggressive games.
I think the best series are those that have both macro games and games with early aggression.
It shows the true skill of the players, both in micro and macro and how they think on their feet.
The only current issue is that in some match-ups/scenarios (especially in early game TvP) there is so much aggression potential that one side is forced into a tiny box of builds that are flexible enough to not die instantly when X, Y or Z shows up.
While Reaper expands and Hellions/Banshees can do early game damage, this is still usually past the 7:00 minute mark before the aggression can start to happen. I don't mind it at all to see either side have at least some viable capability to put on some pressure or a decent poke before then although not to the extend of some all-ins we currently have.
Note that the 2rax has never been issue before and it was stronger in WoL, especially the earlier days before the Queen patch. Even today, the Barracks has 5 seconds more build time, the maps are far larger, you need to build a Supply depot before you can start the Barracks and the Bunker no longer gives 100% of the minerals back.
Possibly the meta of current SC2 in general where players are going for longer macro games rather than aggressive playstyles may be helping the 2rax catching a lot of Zergs off guard. That doesn't mean 2rax should be changed so quickly.
I'd rather let it play out and see Zergs try various adaptations and maybe start including pool first builds again which I can't honestly consider to be a bad thing. For all we know a month or two from now a 2rax is considered a gimmick due to good scouting and pool first builds. Then Hatch first builds can start coming in again and the cycle might start over.
I do agree that rock-paper-scissors is bad (which is why I dislike current early game TvP) because it can be so frustrating and random to lose to it, even if you scouted it in the end. I do think a 2rax is easier to find and hold than to guess which of the three all-ins is coming from Protoss though, especially since all three all-ins require completely different responses.
All that said, I think it's currently too early to really make any kind of call on the 2rax in TvZ, especially given the fact that it has been around since the dawn of SC2.
|
On August 12 2014 02:38 Loccstana wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2014 01:29 Green_25 wrote:
Personally think mines are too strong. Would've preferred for Terran to get buffed in some other way. To effectively engage bio you need to close distance 9/10, when mines are this powerful thats almost impossible.
Not basing this of stats though, just playing the game and watching top terrans, so maybe my opinion isn't relevant What in the world is Protoss going to do with their range 9 collosus and range 9 psistorms against those terrifying range 5 widow mines? That widow mine killed a zealot and splashed 2 more units while they charged into the enemy. Such terrible game ending damage, might as well gg! Whats that? Micro? Splitting Units? What do these strange words mean?
Would putting charge on manual cast help with this? (I don't play protoss)
|
Give Zergs and Protoss a chance to adapt this time. It was clear they were too strong before, and maybe the same kind of play just won't work anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
