| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
MrCon
France29748 Posts
On September 21 2011 00:02 hugman wrote: Those are still as useless as ever. Way too few games. I know, but when the int winrate were published, everyone was like "only korean has a meaning" Now that korean stats are out and they don't show what people want to see, they're meaningless. (which I agree) | ||
|
ddrddrddrddr
1344 Posts
| ||
|
Probe1
United States17920 Posts
| ||
|
Dommk
Australia4865 Posts
On September 21 2011 13:04 Belial88 wrote: I don't think blizz realized how shitty the corruptor and hydra would be either. I can't imagine they are too thrilled that Zerg is 'supposed' to go roach/hydra/corruptor and play it the exact same as terran going marine/marauder/viking. I think Blizz's point of the NP nerf was to make mass thor more viable and stop NP being so good on carriers, BCs, and motherships, but no one really countered mass thor with infestors and there's other reason those units are bad, although maybe this will make capital ships a good 'counter' to someone going infestor. You could always snipe infestors with colossi, and this nerf change doesn't change that. Targetting priority will always go towards the closer range lings and roaches, so the NP change won't change anything - you either target fired the infestor or you didn't. Pretty sure this change was meant to be 100% for PvZ, that is what all the Zergs are saying. Some guy in the STOG thread talked about a "leaked" conversation between David Kim and a few Pro Zergs saying the fungal nerf was meant to be for PvZ as well | ||
|
Randomaccount#128098
United States411 Posts
| ||
|
Brotocol
243 Posts
On September 21 2011 14:47 Probe1 wrote: Other than looking pretty, stat graphs are completely meaningless without a lot of supporting analysis. I mean it does look cool. But its the sprinkles on top of a argument, not the meat or potatoes. That's true for intricacies. But the fact that Terran has invariably been on top since the very beginning is not rocket science. It just breaks my heart how uneven the "trilogy" aspect of this game is, and how deep reaching the consequences have been. Cue: "bu bu bu it took 11 years to balance BW." But this has been addressed several times - the last BW balance patch came out in 2001. In that sense, I'm quite unhappy with how SC2 has turned out thus far. | ||
|
Acritter
Syria7637 Posts
On September 21 2011 13:16 ddrddrddrddr wrote: Instead of looking THAT far into the match up, I think just by changing the marauder would completely change the pvt. You can see the matchup without ghost, without tanks, without banshees, even with almost no marine; but I don't think I've ever seen pvt without marauders. The real "problem build" uses no Marauders whatsoever, opting to save gas for Tanks and Banshees and Barracks cycles for Marines. A Marauder nerf would change non-1-1-1 TvP quite significantly, but would actually only increase the rate of 1-1-1 usage. It is entirely possible that a Marauder nerf would end up increasing the T winrate, because it would force more Terrans to use the best build order in the matchup, whereas some Terrans don't use it at the moment because it's not very fun and doesn't allow them to demonstrate their lategame skill whatsoever. Let's leave the Marauder alone for right now, until 1-1-1 is fixed. | ||
|
Brotocol
243 Posts
The commentators talked about Protoss not innovating enough, and said it would probably be better in a month. Then... Game 2 of Sage vs Yoda: + Show Spoiler + Yoda does 1-1-1 and changes it a little bit. The commentators mention how innovative Yoda is, and how Sage took a big risk which didn't pay off. I found this pretty stupid. There seems to be a concentrated denial going on. | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On September 21 2011 13:04 Belial88 wrote: I don't think blizz realized how shitty the corruptor and hydra would be either. I can't imagine they are too thrilled that Zerg is 'supposed' to go roach/hydra/corruptor and play it the exact same as terran going marine/marauder/viking. I think Blizz's point of the NP nerf was to make mass thor more viable and stop NP being so good on carriers, BCs, and motherships, but no one really countered mass thor with infestors and there's other reason those units are bad, although maybe this will make capital ships a good 'counter' to someone going infestor. You could always snipe infestors with colossi, and this nerf change doesn't change that. Targetting priority will always go towards the closer range lings and roaches, so the NP change won't change anything - you either target fired the infestor or you didn't. They should have changed NP to be unable to affect massive units IMO and kept the range (and reduced the cost since it is useable against smaller units only then). Maybe the effect on massive units could be reduced time instead of total immunity. Maybe massive units should not be controlled but simply stunned for the duration. There are lots of creative ways to adjust the power of NP and due to the squishyness of the Infestor the range of 7 seems a bit low. HUGE units kinda cost a lot but tend to be too inefficient against hordes of low level stuff already which they - logically - should beat easily. Carriers, BCs, Thors, Motherships and Ultralisks all need to be made more effective for their cost and NP is just one thing which prevents people from going for them, but a relatively short range makes the spell pretty useless for a unit which is usually at the back of an army. | ||
|
Belial88
United States5217 Posts
NP is the only really supply effective counter Zerg has against Colossi. Corruptors aren't really useful unless Protoss is going mass colossi like double robo and has no ground support army. Don't say broodlords, because it takes 4 minutes for Zerg to get BL from lair. | ||
|
Orcasgt24
Canada3238 Posts
On September 21 2011 16:27 Belial88 wrote: ^ Ultralisks can't be NP'd, and the reason people don't go carriers or BCs is because of corruptors or ultralisks or mass ling. You didn't really see mass carrier or BC in BW against Zerg. NP is the only really supply effective counter Zerg has against Colossi. Corruptors aren't really useful unless Protoss is going mass colossi like double robo and has no ground support army. Don't say broodlords, because it takes 4 minutes for Zerg to get BL from lair. Vikings are pretty usless except vs Collosus and Terran makes 20 or so of them just to kill the Collosus created out of 1 robo. Why eactly are Curropters so bad vs them? They can also use the totally neglected corruption spell on them. NP isn't the only counter to Collosus | ||
|
Reborn8u
United States1761 Posts
Think about all the things marines rape (to many to list) think of all the things lings rape (stalkers, immortals) wtf do zealots rape? I know everyone is going to bring up charge, but realize that you have to spend 300 gas and it takes a while to make a twilight and research charge (even with crono), plus protoss is pretty much forced into robo anyway to get obs for scouting and detection. What I'm saying is really about the early game anyway. Really though, chargelots are only great against a few things, thors, siege tanks which terrans don't make in TvP (except goody), with +1 they are cost effective vs lings. But seriously, why does protoss get such a shitty, slow, easy to counter, hard to upgrade starting unit like the zealot? It's almost impossible for terran or zerg to not hard counter zealots automatically with any build. Sure there are a 100 other things worth talking about. But this just kinda stands out to me. Especially, when I think how many games I've lost to Marines or lings. Part of it is because of how easy and fast ling speed, stim, and combat shield can come in. Everyone is talking about protoss's early game, I really feel like the zealot is the elephant in the room (or heaping pile of elephant turd in the room) Am I just way off the mark here? Now that I'm thinking about it, wtf do stalkers hard counter early game? Plenty of things counter them (lings, marauders) and roaches or marines are pretty much even with them. Why are BOTH of protoss's starting units so hard countered and don't hard counter anything? | ||
|
Heavenly
2172 Posts
On September 21 2011 16:46 Reborn8u wrote: A thing I thought should be brought up, since I haven't seen it mentioned. In the early game, wtf does a Zealot counter? EVERY unit from the barracks rapes them, marine, marauder, reaper, ghost. Zerg units rape them, ling *(4 lings for cost) roach, hydras, mutas infesotrs. Think about all the things marines rape (to many to list) think of all the things lings rape (stalkers, immortals) wtf do zealots rape? I know everyone is going to bring up charge, but realize that you have to spend 300 gas and it takes a while to make a twilight and research charge (even with crono), plus protoss is pretty much forced into robo anyway to get obs for scouting and detection. Really though, chargelots are only great against a few things, thors, siege tanks which terrans don't make in TvP (except goody), with +1 they are cost effective vs lings. But seriously, why does protoss get such a shitty, slow, easy to counter, hard to upgrade starting unit like the zealot? Seriously, it's almost impossible for terran or zerg to not hard counter zealots automatically with any build. Sure there are a 100 other things worth talking about. But this just kinda stands out to me. Especially, when I think how many games I've lost to Marines or lings. Part of it is because of how easy and fast ling speed, stim, and combat shield can come in. Everyone is talking about protoss's early game, I really feel like the zealot is the elephant in the room (or heaping pile of elephant turd in the room) Am I just way off the mark here? They're pretty decent but you'll notice nowdays in GSL if there's some kind of zealot/archon stuff going on then terran will just mass medivacs and the protoss can't engage. High templar and sentries lag behind chargelots so once you are kited a certain distance (only getting off one hit per charge which is quickly healed up by medivacs) you have to retreat back to the templar and sentries, losing zealots along the way. If you try to forcefield there can sometimes be a delay when it queues up for the sentry to get into range, then you end up forcefielding late and blocking your own zealots. And even if the bio force bathes in storms as long as the units don't die, medivacs will heal them back up in no time. Plus ghost snipe = outranges HT and is also great versus zealots. Seems zealot/archon has become irrelevant in high level games. Zealots are pretty stupid. But people used to hate them a lot more and thought they were complete trash before MC's famous "sentry marauder cage zealot kill kill" or whatever. Personally I'd like to have to baller ass speed zealots from Brood War that sprint across the map in four seconds. I'd really prefer zealot charge to take less time to research and be cheaper. I mean it's twice as expensive as stim and available much later, and stim's a pretty cool spell. | ||
Destructicon
4713 Posts
As other people have said I'd prefer if they make charge available earlier and I'd also make it that zealots become immune to slowing effects for 3 seconds after they have charged, it would help even more against kiting. And again, it feels like people are right and its Warp Gate tech that is pulling the main protoss army down because of how powerful it is. I'd rather have Charge moved to the Cybernetics Core with a 50/50 or at least 100/100 cost, and Warp Gate moved to the Twilight Council with 100/100 or 200/200 cost and a 170 seconds research time. Then they might be able to buff zealots and stalkers a bit more. | ||
|
Belial88
United States5217 Posts
On September 21 2011 16:46 Orcasgt24 wrote: Vikings are pretty usless except vs Collosus and Terran makes 20 or so of them just to kill the Collosus created out of 1 robo. Why eactly are Curropters so bad vs them? They can also use the totally neglected corruption spell on them. NP isn't the only counter to Collosus Both Terran's anti-Colossi unit, and Terran's ground army rapes protoss. Roaches are worse than marauders, Corruptors are worse than vikings, and this would all be great if the whole 'cheap zerg swarm' thing was going on, but Roach/Hydra/Corruptor is actually a more gas expensive composition than Stalker/Colossi. Even this would be okay if you could expect Roach/Hydra/Corruptor to do damage, but it's very easy for Protoss to not take any losses with forcefield and supply efficiency against an army that is very supply costly, particularly roaches. i think roach/hydra/corruptor was probably balanced around the pre-nerf roaches where they cost 1 supply. Corruption is also useless. There are numbers out there, but basically Corruption is worthless unless you have 14-16 Corruptors, in which case you kill Colossi in only one less 'volley'. The next time Corruption is useful, is at 28+ corruptors, which is lol... This would be okay if roaches and hydras had the same range as Colossi, or forcefields didn't exist, but there's reason why a 9 range roach would be completely game breaking. We could get rid of sentries so we could somehow have roaches and hydras hit colossi in battles, but that's a huge redesign of the game, as much as I'd like to see sentries removed. NP is the best and most stable counter to colossi. Zerg don't really have a versatile unit like the marine or stalker, and roaches and hydras are much more niche than even a colossi is. Baneling rain is a good counter to colossi, but there are huge vulnerabilities in going baneling rain against a protoss who micros well, and baneling rain doesn't force Protoss to do anything different. Protoss is going VR/Colossi or Stalker/Colossi. Protoss sees Baneling rain. Protoss shrugs his shoulders and continues making VR or Stalkers. This isn't like, say, seeing corruptors/vikings where Protoss may slow his colossi production down. The ultralisk is actually an amazing counter to colossi, but just takes too damn long to get to, even with the recent patch. The problem is not late game colossi, the problem is that timing between 2 base and 4 bases for Zerg where they can't get hive and somehow have to deal with Protoss' army. The balance in the game lies in lair tech. A thing I thought should be brought up, since I haven't seen it mentioned. In the early game, wtf does a Zealot counter? EVERY unit from the barracks rapes them, marine, marauder, reaper, ghost. Zerg units rape them, ling *(4 lings for cost) roach, hydras, mutas infesotrs. It's not necessarily about what they counter, it's that they are basically free late game due to being only minerals. A zealot beats zerglings (you can say this or that on cost all you want, but 25 zealots rapes 100 lings, and 1 zealot rapes 3 zerglings, you really need about 1.25x in lings, so it's not really cost efficient as an ansewr). They also beat roaches 1v1 when unmicro'd, and can rape roaches if they charge and get a surround with good positioning. They are amazing against infestors, as zerg shouldnt be wasting FG on charging zealots and it's impossible to get that many FG off (of course you cant rely on only zealots) and they just tear down drones and expos so fast as a harass unit. They also rape MM pretty hard when you engage correctly. As a melee unit, of course that's the rub, but you need to position well with melee units or else everything falls apart. | ||
|
johngalt90
United States357 Posts
On September 21 2011 16:27 Belial88 wrote: ^ Ultralisks can't be NP'd, and the reason people don't go carriers or BCs is because of corruptors or ultralisks or mass ling. You didn't really see mass carrier or BC in BW against Zerg. NP is the only really supply effective counter Zerg has against Colossi. Corruptors aren't really useful unless Protoss is going mass colossi like double robo and has no ground support army. Don't say broodlords, because it takes 4 minutes for Zerg to get BL from lair. I think blizzard would be well-served to eliminate the carrier in favor of another unit. Honestly if they elimanted carriers and motherships and returned the arbiter i really think that could provide some dynamic intensity in late-game scenarios (think about how late-game tvp could provide some fun and exciting mobility battles). I think that the arbiter would need to be properly scaled maybe it could be great. give it basic recall which would have a smaller radius than mass recall (this could give some good harass options that money have complained have been lacking in protoss arsenal.) Stasis would certainly need a radius reduction from BW due to unit clumping but maybe then again its not so unfair given the power of other aoe spells (fungal, storm, emp.) cloaking field- im not sure it would even do much. But on the other tune it could be great it could force ravens the same way it forced science vessels in BW which often isnt an ideal unit to be purchasing. Kind of just throwing it out there. We have reached a developed or at the least more developed point in the game and it seems protoss is in some real trouble balance wise. It seems an incredibly difficult issue to solve. | ||
|
Belial88
United States5217 Posts
| ||
|
Raiznhell
Canada786 Posts
On September 21 2011 17:15 Belial88 wrote: ^ I think they weren't going to include the carrier originally, but fans asked for it to be put in. They stated not every unit is supposed to have a purpose in this game, and the reason you don't see the carrier is because terrans don't make siege tanks in PvZ anymore, like in BW. If only we could  .Seems Tanks are only useful when going 1/1/1 allin or in specific early game timing attacks like Byun did although I think Byun would have lost to Oz if Oz didn't decide to base race and actually just deal with the assault itself. I hope in the upcoming patch they remove the Marauder completely so as to make Terrans everywhere think deep on how to actually make Mech into a working strategy through all areas of the TvP matchup. It would be really interesting to see what builds and such turn up although this is only hoping and i highly doubt blizzard would make such a call when thousands of dollars around the world would be at stake. | ||
|
Destructicon
4713 Posts
I think you are exaggerating the state of ZvP a bit. Neural might be the most simple counter to Colossus but it isn't the only one. Contrary to what you might think, broodlords and corrupters are very viable counters. Here is a straight up comparison between Corrupters and Vikings. Corrupter 200 HP - 2 supply - Armored - 2 base armor Viking 125 H - 2 supply - Armored - 0 base armor Range Corrupter - 6 Viking - 9 Attack and rate of fire Corrupter - 14 +6 to Massive - 1.9 speed - 1 attack Viking - 10 +4 vs Armored - 2 speed - 2 attacks So the corrupter does have less range, however it has much more HP and armor to help it survive getting close. Yes the viking can snipe a colossus easier since the damage comes in bursts thanks to its 2 attacks that do a total of 28 damage. However in terms of raw DPS the corrupter isn't far behind thanks to its corruption ability which brings its DPS to 12, to the vikings 14. It takes exactly 13 vikings to 1 shot a colossus, it takes only 2 more corruptors then that to 1 shot a colossus, I really don't see the problem here. Also, corruptors can use the corruption ability on ground targets after the colossus have died, lengthening their use, and they can afterwards morph into BL, though it is wise to still keep a couple to counter VR, but corrupters + infestors are a deadly combo against VR. Also remember that the corrupters scale better with weapon upgrades then vikings, a group of corrupters with +2 weapon damage only needs to be 13 strong to 1 shot a colossus. I also believe that roach, hydra, corrupter was proven to be inefficient because of colossus and forcefields. A roach, infestor into corrupter and BL is way better because, you can fungal and keep the enemy army in place while roaches, corrupters and BL work on the rest of the army. I really don't see zerg suffering a lot versus protoss, I'd dare to say it is the other way around, because fungal can lead into BL and Baneling drops raining death down upon the protoss without the protoss being able to do anything, you can't micro when your army is stuck in place. | ||
|
Orcasgt24
Canada3238 Posts
On September 21 2011 17:15 Belial88 wrote: ^ I think they weren't going to include the carrier originally, but fans asked for it to be put in. They stated not every unit is supposed to have a purpose in this game, and the reason you don't see the carrier is because terrans don't make siege tanks in PvZ anymore, like in BW. Immortals are the reason Terrans don't make tanks. A seiged tank does 3.3 dps to an immortals shields. SCV's do better vs Immortals then tanks. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
Afreeca Starleague
Snow vs Sharp
Jaedong vs Mini
Wardi Open
OSC
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Afreeca Starleague
Light vs Speed
Larva vs Soma
PiGosaur Monday
LiuLi Cup
RSL Revival
Maru vs Reynor
Cure vs TriGGeR
The PondCast
RSL Revival
Zoun vs Classic
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
