|
Its only more fun if your a w/m griefer.
Having 10/12 minute contains without having anything to worry about at all except that easy to punish 2 base collosi timing where the terran must really be greedy to still lose to that wiht the bazillion vikings they make now early game.
Protoss is forced to be behind and stay on 2 bases at masters + level untill terran eventually has a force where he can just amove and steamroll protoss if he doesnt have tech AND micro...
Right now it feels protoss is always behind in everything. units are forced not to be made due to widow mine and worst of all. there is no reall counter thats accesible to w/m except collosi in a reall game where allot of things are happening.
This stationary shit needs to stop from blizzard first they add swarmhosts, boring stationary unit wich actually requires more micro to defeat and when behind always wins.
With now the implementation of the widow mine wich is stationary and also requires no micro wich kills any eco build a protoss can do.
Its like blizzard is forcing us to 2 base allin wich are all figured out so always lose you the game.
At a decent level so im not talking about NA or diamond.
|
What i find most uncomfortable is that terran doesnt even need to scout a 2 base collosi timing anymore, they just have to see a larger then ussuall army moving out and they can already make those 2 bunkers. And ofcourse counter drops when your spotted.
nope. its figured out.
|
Northern Ireland26426 Posts
Belated thumbs up to ThievingMagpie on his posts re the widow mine and tempo style btw. Outlined the strengths and corresponding problems the parade push forces on Zergs and why it's so hard to engage.
Definitely more informative than my 'marine-tank on crack' summation anyway.
Does anybody think that perhaps HoTS just plays a lot faster than WoL and thus eventually mistakes are almost inevitable? Marine-tank pushes in WoL gave Zergs brief periods of breathing room to setup and plan for engagements, some 4M games the pushing is pretty much absolutely relentless
|
On October 16 2014 09:37 Eraz0rZ wrote:
But in this matchup, you cant make chargelots anymore at all.
Except maybe for that one warpprism wich can do damage once and then gets shutdown by vikings.
The fact is, zealots are useless in PvT now adays. Mines kill them WAY too cost effective.
Any PvT pro game refutes those preposterous statements. Charge Zealots are still produced en masse after blink/colo, and if there were statistics about how many combat units are made in PvT games Zealots would still come first (or maybe second after Stalkers); so no Mines didn't remove them from the landscape at all. Using the overrated concept of cost-efficiency is of little interest when Terrans don't even build Mines as a standard in the first place when Protoss opens Colossi... Most of the time they're only used for 5 rax Mines pressure to increase the damage potential of drops.
On October 16 2014 14:59 playa wrote:
Can we please stop focusing on Terran so much? Please. You can still make chargelots. Terran still usually tries to mass doom drop, while they rely on prayers being answered. Terran probably should beat Zerg, but w/e. Blatant imbalance is always ignored due to everyones fascination with Terran being OP or UP. P vs Z is complete trash. The numbers could be 30% in P vs Z and everyone would completely ignore the MU to focus on something at 50%. It's stupid. I don't know why everyone has blinders on or why Zerg is exempt from OP conversations in regards to Toss but clearly they are.
I must admit it's quite funny, PvZ has always been below 50% according to Aligulac in the entirety of HotS (which is a surprising result to me), albeit not by much. I guess the 2-3% difference represents that terrific OPness of mutas, right?
|
On October 16 2014 21:09 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2014 09:37 Eraz0rZ wrote:
But in this matchup, you cant make chargelots anymore at all.
Except maybe for that one warpprism wich can do damage once and then gets shutdown by vikings.
The fact is, zealots are useless in PvT now adays. Mines kill them WAY too cost effective. Any PvT pro game refutes those preposterous statements. Charge Zealots are still produced en masse after blink/colo, and if there were statistics about how many combat units are made in PvT games Zealots would still come first (or maybe second after Stalkers); so no Mines didn't remove them from the landscape at all. Using the overrated concept of cost-efficiency is of little interest when Terrans don't even build Mines as a standard in the first place when Protoss opens Colossi... Most of the time they're only used for 5 rax Mines pressure to increase the damage potential of drops. Show nested quote +On October 16 2014 14:59 playa wrote:
Can we please stop focusing on Terran so much? Please. You can still make chargelots. Terran still usually tries to mass doom drop, while they rely on prayers being answered. Terran probably should beat Zerg, but w/e. Blatant imbalance is always ignored due to everyones fascination with Terran being OP or UP. P vs Z is complete trash. The numbers could be 30% in P vs Z and everyone would completely ignore the MU to focus on something at 50%. It's stupid. I don't know why everyone has blinders on or why Zerg is exempt from OP conversations in regards to Toss but clearly they are. I must admit it's quite funny, PvZ has always been below 50% according to Aligulac in the entirety of HotS (which is a surprising result to me), albeit not by much. I guess the 2-3% difference represents that terrific OPness of mutas, right?
In the last 1406 P vs Z's tracked on there, the mu is at 45%. When you look at game length win rates, magically we only win anywhere near 50% when doing all-ins. Obviously something is imbalanced. Last time I checked people weren't able to mass mutas in the early game (when all-ins happen), and Blizzard even admitted before HotS that mutas were a problem and the tempest was originally designed to help solve it.
If you think mutas are balanced, at all, then be prepared for shock and amazement when a new unit for Toss specializes in dealing with them. If any Terran matchup was below 50%, let alone at 45%, you would be probably be sending death threats and on the suicide hotline.
|
I think I would be totally fine with Mutalisks if they gave us back the two damage that they nicked from the sentry. With how the two other match-ups are looking, I think it seems like an all-right buff. I don't think they are as prepostrous as many would claim. I think a lot of issues come from not scouting regularily.
|
On October 16 2014 22:35 playa wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2014 21:09 TheDwf wrote:On October 16 2014 09:37 Eraz0rZ wrote:
But in this matchup, you cant make chargelots anymore at all.
Except maybe for that one warpprism wich can do damage once and then gets shutdown by vikings.
The fact is, zealots are useless in PvT now adays. Mines kill them WAY too cost effective. Any PvT pro game refutes those preposterous statements. Charge Zealots are still produced en masse after blink/colo, and if there were statistics about how many combat units are made in PvT games Zealots would still come first (or maybe second after Stalkers); so no Mines didn't remove them from the landscape at all. Using the overrated concept of cost-efficiency is of little interest when Terrans don't even build Mines as a standard in the first place when Protoss opens Colossi... Most of the time they're only used for 5 rax Mines pressure to increase the damage potential of drops. On October 16 2014 14:59 playa wrote:
Can we please stop focusing on Terran so much? Please. You can still make chargelots. Terran still usually tries to mass doom drop, while they rely on prayers being answered. Terran probably should beat Zerg, but w/e. Blatant imbalance is always ignored due to everyones fascination with Terran being OP or UP. P vs Z is complete trash. The numbers could be 30% in P vs Z and everyone would completely ignore the MU to focus on something at 50%. It's stupid. I don't know why everyone has blinders on or why Zerg is exempt from OP conversations in regards to Toss but clearly they are. I must admit it's quite funny, PvZ has always been below 50% according to Aligulac in the entirety of HotS (which is a surprising result to me), albeit not by much. I guess the 2-3% difference represents that terrific OPness of mutas, right? In the last 1406 P vs Z's tracked on there, the mu is at 45%. When you look at game length win rates, magically we only win anywhere near 50% when doing all-ins. Obviously something is imbalanced. Last time I checked people weren't able to mass mutas in the early game (when all-ins happen), and Blizzard even admitted before HotS that mutas were a problem and the tempest was originally designed to help solve it. If you think mutas are balanced, at all, then be prepared for shock and amazement when a new unit for Toss specializes in dealing with them. If any Terran matchup was below 50%, let alone at 45%, you would be probably be sending death threats and on the suicide hotline.
I don't have any opinion on the state of Mutalisks in PvZ since I don't play the match-up; I am simply amused by your "Phoenixes don't even help" claims. Then again, what to expect from someone who didn't understand for months that parking 2 units in front of a Factory was the answer to proxy Mines...
As for your last pathetic statement, I would then be a goner since a long time given that Terran has been trash in at least one match-up half of the time since I play competitively.
|
mutas are only dangerous when you don't react against them, but gues what, same goes for everything else.
|
On October 16 2014 22:51 TokO wrote:
I think I would be totally fine with Mutalisks if they gave us back the two damage that they nicked from the sentry. With how the two other match-ups are looking, I think it seems like an all-right buff. I don't think they are as prepostrous as many would claim. I think a lot of issues come from not scouting regularily.
Choo Choo!!!
|
On October 16 2014 23:07 Meavis wrote:
mutas are only dangerous when you don't react against them, but gues what, same goes for everything else.
Yeah, so when they go mass roach, attack your third and then follow up with 20-30 mutas, be prepared to just react to them off 3 bases and 1 stargate. It must be nice being able to have favorable trades with marines or having thors or having mines or having static D that can actually scare/kill them. Just react... I'm sure you would be fantastic.
|
On October 16 2014 22:55 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2014 22:35 playa wrote:On October 16 2014 21:09 TheDwf wrote:On October 16 2014 09:37 Eraz0rZ wrote:
But in this matchup, you cant make chargelots anymore at all.
Except maybe for that one warpprism wich can do damage once and then gets shutdown by vikings.
The fact is, zealots are useless in PvT now adays. Mines kill them WAY too cost effective. Any PvT pro game refutes those preposterous statements. Charge Zealots are still produced en masse after blink/colo, and if there were statistics about how many combat units are made in PvT games Zealots would still come first (or maybe second after Stalkers); so no Mines didn't remove them from the landscape at all. Using the overrated concept of cost-efficiency is of little interest when Terrans don't even build Mines as a standard in the first place when Protoss opens Colossi... Most of the time they're only used for 5 rax Mines pressure to increase the damage potential of drops. On October 16 2014 14:59 playa wrote:
Can we please stop focusing on Terran so much? Please. You can still make chargelots. Terran still usually tries to mass doom drop, while they rely on prayers being answered. Terran probably should beat Zerg, but w/e. Blatant imbalance is always ignored due to everyones fascination with Terran being OP or UP. P vs Z is complete trash. The numbers could be 30% in P vs Z and everyone would completely ignore the MU to focus on something at 50%. It's stupid. I don't know why everyone has blinders on or why Zerg is exempt from OP conversations in regards to Toss but clearly they are. I must admit it's quite funny, PvZ has always been below 50% according to Aligulac in the entirety of HotS (which is a surprising result to me), albeit not by much. I guess the 2-3% difference represents that terrific OPness of mutas, right? In the last 1406 P vs Z's tracked on there, the mu is at 45%. When you look at game length win rates, magically we only win anywhere near 50% when doing all-ins. Obviously something is imbalanced. Last time I checked people weren't able to mass mutas in the early game (when all-ins happen), and Blizzard even admitted before HotS that mutas were a problem and the tempest was originally designed to help solve it. If you think mutas are balanced, at all, then be prepared for shock and amazement when a new unit for Toss specializes in dealing with them. If any Terran matchup was below 50%, let alone at 45%, you would be probably be sending death threats and on the suicide hotline. I don't have any opinion on the state of Mutalisks in PvZ since I don't play the match-up; I am simply amused by your "Phoenixes don't even help" claims. Then again, what to expect from someone who didn't understand for months that parking 2 units in front of a Factory was the answer to proxy Mines... As for your last pathetic statement, I would then be a goner since a long time given that Terran has been trash in at least one match-up half of the time since I play competitively.
The answer is to not let it happen in the first place. Period.
|
On October 16 2014 23:09 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2014 22:51 TokO wrote:
I think I would be totally fine with Mutalisks if they gave us back the two damage that they nicked from the sentry. With how the two other match-ups are looking, I think it seems like an all-right buff. I don't think they are as prepostrous as many would claim. I think a lot of issues come from not scouting regularily. Choo Choo!!!
I think that robo builds deviate enough from the standard, now that Protoss don't go Immortal-Sentry to hold 3rd Bases, that Zerg will have a good opportunity to scout and counter. Large concaves still deal with Immortal Sentry fine against imperfect forcefields, but you're probably right that it will probably usher an era of Parting again. However, it empowers Protoss is situations in the early-midgame where they currently feel quite powerless, especially against Terran's. There was this rant with Huk on Remax about Protoss lacking builds (given the recent map changes nerfing blink) to keep a terran 'honest'. I think making gateway all-ins more potent kinda help with that situation.
I mean, we could discuss combined templar tech again, terran just won like five tournaments, so people might be more willing to discuss it.
|
The main problem with PvZ is that there is not interesting design interaction other than Phoenix vs hydra/Queen.
None of the other opening have interesting micro or design play that makes it sexy to watch. Phoenix play is the only time where we see constant Aggression, zoning, harass, etc... The rest feel like all-ins or timing attacks.
In BW, the stilted unit movement and limited controls made PvZ this dance about who could circumvent each other's Marlee units the most effectively. But both zealots and zerglings melt in any midsized fight in SC2 so all we have is blink stalkers + tech units vs roaches + tech units and it's kind of brutish.
The only time the game reaches a point where it's not globs of units smacking each other is when you get to late game Swarm Host/Broodlord play where Protoss becomes a very agile force doing multi-prong attacks.
If there was a way to bring that dynamic to the PvZ midgame it would fantastic, but I don't know how that is possible with unit redesign.
|
Out of curiosity, suppose that Blizzard does a "state of SC2 balance" panel at Blizzcon with a Q&A, what questions should Blizzard be asked and what do you think their(Blizzard's) message will be?
|
On October 16 2014 23:44 Grumbels wrote:
Out of curiosity, suppose that Blizzard does a "state of SC2 balance" panel at Blizzcon with a Q&A, what questions should Blizzard be asked and what do you think their message will be?
Depends on the specificit of the question. Remember that they will always say "look at ladder, balanced"
|
On October 16 2014 23:41 Thieving Magpie wrote:
The main problem with PvZ is that there is not interesting design interaction other than Phoenix vs hydra/Queen.
None of the other opening have interesting micro or design play that makes it sexy to watch. Phoenix play is the only time where we see constant Aggression, zoning, harass, etc... The rest feel like all-ins or timing attacks.
In BW, the stilted unit movement and limited controls made PvZ this dance about who could circumvent each other's Marlee units the most effectively. But both zealots and zerglings melt in any midsized fight in SC2 so all we have is blink stalkers + tech units vs roaches + tech units and it's kind of brutish.
The only time the game reaches a point where it's not globs of units smacking each other is when you get to late game Swarm Host/Broodlord play where Protoss becomes a very agile force doing multi-prong attacks.
If there was a way to bring that dynamic to the PvZ midgame it would fantastic, but I don't know how that is possible with unit redesign.
Simply the excitement of seeing scourges versus shuttles is greater than anything in P vs Z, if not SC 2... I didn't play P vs Z in BW, but corsairs were better than phoenix vs mutas. You had maelstrom which allowed your ground units to fight them. Storm did serious damage, and there was no get out of jail card with insta regeneration. Cannons seemed far better (maybe it's due to no one making a million mutas in BW).
In SC 2, it's just pathetic what Toss has versus mutas. Your backbone unit can't even trade vs a harassment unit. It's just comical. If Zerg adds in any corruptors, you're expected to get a fleet beacon (300 minerals, 200 gas), then get a 150/150 upgrade and then make a lot of 150/100 phoenix off 3 bases, while the Zerg takes the map, making it a moot point if the mutas get killed.
Since Blizzard can't be stupid/blind, and they have said nothing about this, one can only assume it's because they're addressing it in LotV and, well, I guess you lose hype/reason to buy if you have already solved the problem before expansion...
|
On October 16 2014 23:49 playa wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2014 23:41 Thieving Magpie wrote:
The main problem with PvZ is that there is not interesting design interaction other than Phoenix vs hydra/Queen.
None of the other opening have interesting micro or design play that makes it sexy to watch. Phoenix play is the only time where we see constant Aggression, zoning, harass, etc... The rest feel like all-ins or timing attacks.
In BW, the stilted unit movement and limited controls made PvZ this dance about who could circumvent each other's Marlee units the most effectively. But both zealots and zerglings melt in any midsized fight in SC2 so all we have is blink stalkers + tech units vs roaches + tech units and it's kind of brutish.
The only time the game reaches a point where it's not globs of units smacking each other is when you get to late game Swarm Host/Broodlord play where Protoss becomes a very agile force doing multi-prong attacks.
If there was a way to bring that dynamic to the PvZ midgame it would fantastic, but I don't know how that is possible with unit redesign. Simply the excitement of seeing scourges versus shuttles is greater than anything in P vs Z, if not SC 2... I didn't play P vs Z in BW, but corsairs were better than phoenix vs mutas. You had maelstrom which allowed your ground units to fight them. Storm did serious damage, and there was no get out of jail card with insta regeneration. Cannons seemed far better (maybe it's due to no one making a million mutas in BW). In SC 2, it's just pathetic what Toss has versus mutas. Your backbone unit can't even trade vs a harassment unit. It's just comical. If Zerg adds in any corruptors, you're expected to get a fleet beacon (300 minerals, 200 gas), then get a 150/150 upgrade and then make a lot of 150/100 phoenix off 3 bases, while the Zerg takes the map, making it a moot point if the mutas get killed. Since Blizzard can't be stupid/blind, and they have said nothing about this, one can only assume it's because they're addressing it in LotV and, well, I guess you lose hype/reason to buy if you have already solved the problem before expansion...
Muta flocks were smaller in BW (11-12) as opposed to the 10-30 in SC2. Its not that anti-muta tech was better, its that there were less mutas to deal with.
|
On October 16 2014 23:46 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2014 23:44 Grumbels wrote:
Out of curiosity, suppose that Blizzard does a "state of SC2 balance" panel at Blizzcon with a Q&A, what questions should Blizzard be asked and what do you think their message will be? Depends on the specificit of the question. Remember that they will always say "look at ladder, balanced"
I guess I should rephrase it and instead of asking what questions should be asked I might instead enquire as to what questions people in this thread would like to see answered.
|
What is your concrete evidence that mutalisks are a problem in PvZ today? I just don't see how you've demonstrated that.
Oh and btw, please, tell me what I should feel excited about and to what degree. I really enjoy when people do that.
|
On October 16 2014 23:55 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2014 23:49 playa wrote:On October 16 2014 23:41 Thieving Magpie wrote:
The main problem with PvZ is that there is not interesting design interaction other than Phoenix vs hydra/Queen.
None of the other opening have interesting micro or design play that makes it sexy to watch. Phoenix play is the only time where we see constant Aggression, zoning, harass, etc... The rest feel like all-ins or timing attacks.
In BW, the stilted unit movement and limited controls made PvZ this dance about who could circumvent each other's Marlee units the most effectively. But both zealots and zerglings melt in any midsized fight in SC2 so all we have is blink stalkers + tech units vs roaches + tech units and it's kind of brutish.
The only time the game reaches a point where it's not globs of units smacking each other is when you get to late game Swarm Host/Broodlord play where Protoss becomes a very agile force doing multi-prong attacks.
If there was a way to bring that dynamic to the PvZ midgame it would fantastic, but I don't know how that is possible with unit redesign. Simply the excitement of seeing scourges versus shuttles is greater than anything in P vs Z, if not SC 2... I didn't play P vs Z in BW, but corsairs were better than phoenix vs mutas. You had maelstrom which allowed your ground units to fight them. Storm did serious damage, and there was no get out of jail card with insta regeneration. Cannons seemed far better (maybe it's due to no one making a million mutas in BW). In SC 2, it's just pathetic what Toss has versus mutas. Your backbone unit can't even trade vs a harassment unit. It's just comical. If Zerg adds in any corruptors, you're expected to get a fleet beacon (300 minerals, 200 gas), then get a 150/150 upgrade and then make a lot of 150/100 phoenix off 3 bases, while the Zerg takes the map, making it a moot point if the mutas get killed. Since Blizzard can't be stupid/blind, and they have said nothing about this, one can only assume it's because they're addressing it in LotV and, well, I guess you lose hype/reason to buy if you have already solved the problem before expansion... Muta flocks were smaller in BW (11-12) as opposed to the 10-30 in SC2. Its not that anti-muta tech was better, its that there were less mutas to deal with.
While muta flocks were definitely smaller, mutas are way better in relation, that aside. Speed buffs plus regeneration? I want the science vessel or at least its abilities. And, even then, mutas are still scary to think about. I wish you could change prices on some units and have it be mu specific. Until they give Toss better options, there is no way in hell that the muta should only be 100/100. The muta used to be a harassment unit, now it's the do-everything unit.
Oracles cost 150/150. I can't make an oracle army. DTs are 125/125. I can't make a DT army. I get that you could harass with just one of these units, where as 1 muta would be weak, but my god, 100/100? The corruptor is more expensive...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
