EPTDesignated Balance Discussion Thread - Page 1082
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Deleted User 137586
7859 Posts
| ||
|
egrimm
Poland1199 Posts
On September 04 2014 06:31 DinoMight wrote: I don't think the Tempest is that big of a problem at the professional level. If you can show games where the Tempest is overpowered then sure, I'll believe you. But to just say the deathball is "unbeatable." is silly. PDDs work really well against Tempests. You might say well, you can just feedback them, but I would counter with "well, Ghosts can EMP" them and then it because a micro dance again similar to the one we currently have in late game TvP. Without the Swarm Host Zerg would have problems against Protoss. It's the only effective way of dealing with Void Ray / HT compositions, really. And Mech would be a LOT stronger vs Z and could require rebalancing. Charoisaur - exactly my feelings. I despise SH and don't like tempest. I find this units as the worst addition to hots. Both creates uninteresting dynamics and prolong games waaay too much. However I must agree with DinoMight what he says about balance. PvZ might swift in P favour in late game scenarios and mech TvZ probably would be broken as hell without SH. So right now SH are band aid and imho far worse than mscore. I hope with all my faith and power that there will be major redisign concerning these 2 units  #praytoinca ? | ||
|
r691175002
249 Posts
On September 04 2014 06:41 Ghanburighan wrote: Am I correct in stating that with the way games are played in the last month or so, P can transition into tempests only in games which the T has already lost? Only if you assume that being in the late game means T has already lost, which is actually a plausible opinion to have. | ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany15867 Posts
On September 04 2014 06:31 DinoMight wrote: I don't think the Tempest is that big of a problem at the professional level. If you can show games where the Tempest is overpowered then sure, I'll believe you. The most recent example that comes to mind is life vs Zest on deadwing from the last IEM (cant link it at the moment, writing from mobile phone). In this game basically happened the exact same situation i described: The tempests picked of the broodlords one by one until life desperately attacked into the deathball and lost everything. For Tvp i cant even remember a single game where a terran won once tempests were on the field. The problem is just that with tempests the Protoss just cant take bad fights anymore because all he has to do is position the deathball and press hold position while the tempests force the opponent to run into the deathball, what causes a very unfavorable engagement. | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
On September 04 2014 09:01 Charoisaur wrote: The most recent example that comes to mind is life vs Zest on deadwing from the last IEM (cant link it at the moment, writing from mobile phone). In this game basically happened the exact same situation i described: The tempests picked of the broodlords one by one until life desperately attacked into the deathball and lost everything. For Tvp i cant even remember a single game where a terran won once tempests were on the field. The problem is just that with tempests the Protoss just cant take bad fights anymore because all he has to do is position the deathball and press hold position while the tempests force the opponent to run into the deathball, what causes a very unfavorable engagement. Tempests are the hard counter to brood lords. That was the expected outcome. Tempests themselves have very low DPS and are not as big a problem as you make them seem. Any PvT where the Terran is able to get a meaningful number of Tempests is a game that the Protoss would have won anyway. | ||
|
bo1b
Australia12814 Posts
On September 04 2014 03:48 Hider wrote: I am thinking in terms of win/rates. In WCS Korea, protosses have better win/rates than the win/rates of protoss in Aliguac. If protoss really was the easiest race, we would expect to see the opposite (though note that sample size is small in WCS Korea) That really assumes that the correlation of skill to reward is linear though, as well as factors out external bubbles like meta game shifts, far fewer players in the foreign scene resulting in weird trends (like the sea scene being almost entirely zerg based). At some point practicality has to come out on top, you can pretty easily see how much easier mechanically protoss is by going through a list of replays, watching a stream, or by just playing random for a while. | ||
|
bo1b
Australia12814 Posts
On September 04 2014 10:36 DinoMight wrote: Tempests are the hard counter to brood lords. That was the expected outcome. Tempests themselves have very low DPS and are not as big a problem as you make them seem. Any PvT where the Terran is able to get a meaningful number of Tempests is a game that the Protoss would have won anyway. One of the problems people have with protoss is that its a race designed of hard counters. Also it should never be a thing where getting a certain number of carriers or ravens or tempests or broodlords means you should win. Having gameplay based on a composition race instead of strategy and mechanics sounds hideous. PvZ happens to be hideous btw. | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On September 04 2014 10:50 bo1b wrote: That really assumes that the correlation of skill to reward is linear though, as well as factors out external bubbles like meta game shifts, far fewer players in the foreign scene resulting in weird trends (like the sea scene being almost entirely zerg based). At some point practicality has to come out on top, you can pretty easily see how much easier mechanically protoss is by going through a list of replays, watching a stream, or by just playing random for a while. Perceived difficulty is subjective. For example, my personal experience with the game has protoss as the race I have the hardest time with. You finding them easy is not the fault of the race, but the fault of the user. | ||
|
bo1b
Australia12814 Posts
On September 04 2014 10:53 Thieving Magpie wrote: Perceived difficulty is subjective. For example, my personal experience with the game has protoss as the race I have the hardest time with. You finding them easy is not the fault of the race, but the fault of the user. You think protoss is mechanically more difficult to play then terran and zerg? Note, I did not say harder to win with, or worse, I said mechanically more challenging. | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On September 04 2014 15:02 bo1b wrote: You think protoss is mechanically more difficult to play then terran and zerg? Note, I did not say harder to win with, or worse, I said mechanically more challenging. Yes, I know what I said, I have a harder time (mechanically) playing protoss than either terran or zerg. Terran is easy to macro--you never have to look at your base, mules are easier to "time" than chronos. Even base building is easy since you can build anywhere. I don't need to memorize different structure placements per map per matchup, I don't have to worry about having different speed units. Zerg's even easier, especially in lower leagues, where 90% of decision making is "make drones." And sure, creep spread is hard but so is going back to random pylons every 15-20 seconds (warp ins are the same type of mechanic as creep spread btw) So yeah, I find it mechanically more demanding to play protoss. I do find them strategically less demanding, being that you get to dictate unit composition. You don't so much "react" as you do "enforce" what unit comps both players play--which is nice. | ||
|
IMPrime
United States715 Posts
If Blizzard feels like making the reaper into a useful attacking unit could imbalance the game, they could think about putting some kind of upgrade to help give them this midgame potential while not breaking earlygame. For example, hellions get Blue flame for +damage. What if reapers got a +damage upgrade from the tech lab? Or if they get their WOL building attack back from an upgrade? I feel like Blizzard could've done this to so many units. They wanted to buff the oracle but just flat out increased its speed so now it's kinda dumb (it was funny because they literally even said in that patch that pvt all-ins were a problem and then they buffed a pvt all-in). They could've put a cheap, fast +speed upgrade in a building (maybe even the cyber core, who knows?) so that midgame oracles could reach their full potential while not making oracle rushes a potential problem. They could even do things like require MSC to research photon overcharge and/or time warp from the cyber core or something. HTs require storm to be researched, why not MSC's ability(ies)? It's a bit late to do this kind of tinkering with new abilities, but Blizzard has one more shot with legacy of the void beta to really make units like the reaper not so 1-dimensional, and I feel like putting buffs in as upgrades would help. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On September 04 2014 15:40 Thieving Magpie wrote: Yes, I know what I said, I have a harder time (mechanically) playing protoss than either terran or zerg. Terran is easy to macro--you never have to look at your base, mules are easier to "time" than chronos. Yeah? In my universe, I'm forced to switch my camera back to my base each time I swap add-ons or simply start any building (tasks that frequently occur when you have to manage something else on the map). People who think Terran has the "easiest macro" because you can "queue without looking" are deluded; first they have a very narrow definition of macro (which doesn't simply come down to producing units), second they fail to realize how many production mistakes this functioning causes, even up to the best macro in the world, while other races have no risk to err and oversaturate their production. Zerg's even easier, especially in lower leagues, where 90% of decision making is "make drones." It's really funny you deem this aspect as "easy" when low level Zergs talk a lot about this difficulty. The "drones or units" decision is actually easier at pro level, where everything is more standardized (even if of course there can still be misreads/mindgames/etc.). At low level it can be harder to react since your opponent often barely knows what he's doing himself. And sure, creep spread is hard but so is going back to random pylons every 15-20 seconds (warp ins are the same type of mechanic as creep spread btw) You don't go back to "random Pylons every 15-20 seconds," warp-ins are more like around 30 seconds, they're not 100% constant (there are times in which Protoss invests most of his current resources in tech), and they don't require you at all to switch your camera up to 3-4 different screens like spreading creep sometimes does. Most of the time you don't even need to move your camera since you're already in your base anyway (e. g. midgame PvT). | ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
On September 04 2014 15:40 Thieving Magpie wrote: Yes, I know what I said, I have a harder time (mechanically) playing protoss than either terran or zerg. Terran is easy to macro--you never have to look at your base, mules are easier to "time" than chronos. Even base building is easy since you can build anywhere. I don't need to memorize different structure placements per map per matchup, I don't have to worry about having different speed units. Zerg's even easier, especially in lower leagues, where 90% of decision making is "make drones." And sure, creep spread is hard but so is going back to random pylons every 15-20 seconds (warp ins are the same type of mechanic as creep spread btw) So yeah, I find it mechanically more demanding to play protoss. I do find them strategically less demanding, being that you get to dictate unit composition. You don't so much "react" as you do "enforce" what unit comps both players play--which is nice. If you choose a defensive Protoss style you can sit in your base doing shit but keeping your eyes on the minimap. Yes you would need a fast reaction to a drop and / or a poke or both but as a Terran you cant choose the option to do nothing and play a defensive game vs Protoss - it simply doesnt work. With the most common Protoss build into double forge/colossus I can literally just sit there until I have 3-3. I played Terran at pro level and I am playing Protoss now - the comparison especially in the turned over matchup PvT and TvP compared I would dare to say that calling a turtle PvT mechanically demanding is more than just over the top. PvZ is mechanically demanding, since you cannot sit there and do nothing. Zerg will boom in economy and really nearly no matter how good you fight, a Zerg on unlimited and unharassed economy will bash you into the ground. PvT nonetheless is neither strategically nor mechanically demanding if you don't choose a style which relies on it. Ofcourse that is mainly centered around the early until midgame. You can play more mechanically demanding in the mid and lategame, but even the harass of Protoss is way less demanding. If I have a pylon nearby, I will hold down Z and warpin zealots without even pressing more than 1 key on the keyboard. If you want to harass as Terran before looking and the mechanics there would be the choice what you want to drop and with how many medivacs which would obviously hurt a lot more missing in your army compared to 3-4 zealots which are more than enough to deal harm to economy even with a bunker nearby. Protoss gets more mechanically demanding the better the Terran is, but unfortunately the real monsters of Terran reside in Korea. PvT is the match up foreigners took most maps against Koreans if I am not mistaken and I believe thats to the more strategical and less mechanical demanding style of Protoss. i.e TaeJa vs elfi | ||
|
strawstream
Germany2 Posts
For me: Protoss is my worst Race by far and in Terms in Macro for me the hardest. Its just subjective what you think its easy and you feel comfortable with. And if you think Protoss is more easy than Terran, so just play Protoss. Sry for bad english  | ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
| ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On September 04 2014 19:00 NarutO wrote: If you choose a defensive Protoss style you can sit in your base doing shit but keeping your eyes on the minimap. Yes you would need a fast reaction to a drop and / or a poke or both but as a Terran you cant choose the option to do nothing and play a defensive game vs Protoss - it simply doesnt work. With the most common Protoss build into double forge/colossus I can literally just sit there until I have 3-3. I played Terran at pro level and I am playing Protoss now - the comparison especially in the turned over matchup PvT and TvP compared I would dare to say that calling a turtle PvT mechanically demanding is more than just over the top. PvZ is mechanically demanding, since you cannot sit there and do nothing. Zerg will boom in economy and really nearly no matter how good you fight, a Zerg on unlimited and unharassed economy will bash you into the ground. PvT nonetheless is neither strategically nor mechanically demanding if you don't choose a style which relies on it. Ofcourse that is mainly centered around the early until midgame. You can play more mechanically demanding in the mid and lategame, but even the harass of Protoss is way less demanding. If I have a pylon nearby, I will hold down Z and warpin zealots without even pressing more than 1 key on the keyboard. If you want to harass as Terran before looking and the mechanics there would be the choice what you want to drop and with how many medivacs which would obviously hurt a lot more missing in your army compared to 3-4 zealots which are more than enough to deal harm to economy even with a bunker nearby. Protoss gets more mechanically demanding the better the Terran is, but unfortunately the real monsters of Terran reside in Korea. PvT is the match up foreigners took most maps against Koreans if I am not mistaken and I believe thats to the more strategical and less mechanical demanding style of Protoss. i.e TaeJa vs elfi You're confusing strategic difficulty with mechanical difficulty. All races have to go back to their bases to build buildings (except Zerg when building overlords) so telling me you have to swap Adons(optional btw) when you ready have to return to your base every 25-30 seconds just for supply depots alone is very silly sounding to me. And heck, telling me Protoss mechanics are easy because Protoss just needs to sit there is also silly to me since that is a strategic decision, not a mechanical one. Protoss can be as active on the map as any of the other two races (just look at Phoenix play vs Zerg) which makes that complaint a strategic complaint, not a mechanical one. What you're complaining about is that you feel that since Terran can't just sit there and max out that Terran is obviously weaker (except meching terrains do that vs Zerg and Terran or roughly 60% of Terran matchups) If you want to complain that Protoss when you play Protoss that you just sit there and do nothing, that is a user problem not a mechanic problem. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9342 Posts
You're confusing strategic difficulty with mechanical difficulty. All races have to go back to their bases to build buildings (except Zerg when building overlords) so telling me you have to swap Adons(optional btw) when you ready have to return to your base every 25-30 seconds just for supply depots alone is very silly sounding to me. No, this is not him confusing anything. I would say your definition is the one that stands out. Naruto follows the common way of thinking about mechanics. except meching terrains do that vs Zerg and Terran or roughly 60% of Terran matchups) What? This is BS. Almost noone goes mech anymore vs zerg and in TvT, mech can be very unit-control intensive. | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On September 04 2014 23:05 Hider wrote: No, this is not him confusing anything. I would say your definition is the one that stands out. Naruto follows the common way of thinking about mechanics. What? This is BS. Almost noone goes mech anymore vs zerg and in TvT, mech can be very unit-control intensive. All 3 races go back to their base to build buildings. Terran has to do it a few times more to swap add-ons, Protoss has to do it the most just for unit production. Terran can isolate their entire base, Zerg needs to spread creep, Protoss needs correct placement of pylons in order to be active around the map forcing then to hold and defend terrain based where they want the pylon. Terran drops 8 marines to destroy a mineral line automatically, Protoss has to make 5-6 Phoenix's and literally have to click each individual worker they need to kill at 10x the cost of marine drop. It is subjective which is harder, the only way Protoss is easier mechanically is if you choose to just sit in your base and max out. Terran does that while meching too. Telling me you have to micro siege tanks does not change your strategy of sitting around until max. Now, as I said, that is anecdotal. Just because I find Protoss hard does not mean Protoss is objectively hard. And just because you and naruto find it easy does not make them objectively easy. It depends on how you choose to play them--which I different from matchup to matchup which is different from meta game shift to meta game shift. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland11920 Posts
As terran, if you don't produce for 10 seconds, you just missed 10 seconds, your army is weaker than it could be. As protoss, if you don't warp in when you could, then you could just "happen" to have the right number of gateway units because of having missed these warps. That's where the main difference is, not in the ability to sit in your base (and magpie is right to say that this is strategic). | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9342 Posts
All 3 races go back to their base to build buildings. Terran has to do it a few times more to swap add-ons, Protoss has to do it the most just for unit production. Terran can isolate their entire base, Zerg needs to spread creep, Protoss needs correct placement of pylons in order to be active around the map forcing then to hold and defend terrain based where they want the pylon. Terran drops 8 marines to destroy a mineral line automatically, Protoss has to make 5-6 Phoenix's and literally have to click each individual worker they need to kill at 10x the cost of marine drop. I know what your talking about, but when a race generally is forced/rewarded for being more active on the map, then most people will consider that as a mechanically part (not strategically). Strategically hard would be more about whether your rewarded for good decision-making in the game. | ||
| ||
