EPTI would say stuff like "How could you possibly be more wrong" when you post obviously contradictory information.
Designated Balance Discussion Thread - Page 1155
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Deleted User 137586
7859 Posts
I would say stuff like "How could you possibly be more wrong" when you post obviously contradictory information. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
When watching Zest, he always wins in macro games. The only times he loses is he cheeses or gets cheesed. Similarily for Classic, he usually wins ZvP when he goes defensive. Now this is only an observation and mainly built on their series vs soO and a few other games I remember. As I remember it, in the Zest vs soO finals, Zest won every game he attempted to macro. In the Zest vs soO semifinals, he won every game he attempted to macro and didnt get cheesed. And again he lost (some?) the games in which he allinned himself. Obviously that's just very few players and an overgeneralization, but could it be something like that? The more a Protoss relies on attacks, the worse his winrate? (which makes sense; we call one playstyle standard for a reason) | ||
|
tomatriedes
New Zealand5356 Posts
On October 17 2014 08:30 Swisslink wrote: Or the most earning players: 1. Stephano 2. Naniwa 3. Snute 4. Mana 5. Scarlett 6. Nerchio 7. Sen 8. Huk 9. Thorzain 10. Vortix -> 6 Zerg, 4 Protoss, 0 Terran I mean... how could you possibly be more wrong? Thorzain isn't terran? | ||
|
Swisslink
2954 Posts
On October 17 2014 14:12 Ghanburighan wrote: @Swisslink: Math is hard, yo. I would say stuff like "How could you possibly be more wrong" when you post obviously contradictory information. What's contradictory about the information? - There have been barely any Terrans, which completely contradicts his statement that it would be nice to have a good non Korean who isn't Zerg or Terran for a change - Zerg and Protoss are about evenly distributed, which definitely contradicts to his statement that there are no non-Korean Protoss. 43/42 in terms of Premier League participations seems insanely even. Of course Stephano was the most earning player - but his statement was that there haven't been any good "non Koreans who aren't Terran or Zerg" which is... wrong. Sorry xD I'm stupid. Still: the point remains. His statement that there are lots of non Korean Zerg and Terran and no Protoss was wrong. To my defense: I wrote the post at 2 o'clock in the morning after a night out! *cough* :-P | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25637 Posts
On October 17 2014 17:24 Big J wrote: I would love to see an analysis of how often top-Protoss players lose ZvP when allinning/cheesing/doing timings compared to how often they win when they just turtle it out. When watching Zest, he always wins in macro games. The only times he loses is he cheeses or gets cheesed. Similarily for Classic, he usually wins ZvP when he goes defensive. Now this is only an observation and mainly built on their series vs soO and a few other games I remember. As I remember it, in the Zest vs soO finals, Zest won every game he attempted to macro. In the Zest vs soO semifinals, he won every game he attempted to macro and didnt get cheesed. And again he lost (some?) the games in which he allinned himself. Obviously that's just very few players and an overgeneralization, but could it be something like that? The more a Protoss relies on attacks, the worse his winrate? (which makes sense; we call one playstyle standard for a reason) I think it would vary wildly based on the player, because both styles are pretty effective in the hands of a player who is comfortable in said style. This was best exemplified to me as we approached the end of WoL, but before Zergs had their BL/Infestor as watertight. Parting had his soul train, HerO had his equally legendary lategame Warp Prism army-splitting style. Both own plenty of games, but I saw Parting lose/look weaker when he played lategame, and I saw HerO's allins fail because they weren't crisp enough, he didn't have the confidence to fully commit and watered down his builds. | ||
|
playa
United States1284 Posts
On October 17 2014 17:35 Swisslink wrote: What's contradictory about the information? - There have been barely any Terrans, which completely contradicts his statement that it would be nice to have - Zerg and Protoss are about evenly distributed, which definitely contradicts to his statement that there are no non-Korean Protoss. 43/42 in terms of Premier League participations seems insanely even. Of course Stephano was the most earning player - but his statement was that there haven't been any good "non Koreans who aren't Terran or Zerg" which is... wrong. Sorry xD I'm stupid. Still: the point remains. His statement that there are lots of non Korean Zerg and Terran and no Protoss was wrong. To my defense: I wrote the post at 2 o'clock in the morning after a night out! *cough* :-P The main point was Zerg always does the best. Foreign Terrans have always been an endangered species when it comes to good ones. That said, atm, non Korean Terrans are better than the Toss players we have playing now. Do you know anyone you would take over Major or Bunny that plays Toss? Only Huk could even be in the discussion. The fact that non Korean Terran players usually don't do well, either, only helps my main point... that Zerg is clearly the easiest race to give Koreans a challenge with. We've gone from "sick fungals" to, every now and then, "that's some impressive creep spread." Outside of Stephano, who would always set up flanks, it's hard to watch any of them and be like "wow, that person is good." The race is bland. I often wish they would bring back a unit selection limit, just so I could appreciate Zerg games. They really need to find a way to make Zerg micro more BW'ish. Sure, I'm nostalgic, but I really don't understand how people can watch T vs Z in SC 2 after watching it in BW. The game is so lack luster in comparison. It would be so much better to watch if there were scourges and lurkers (or something else), and mutas were a harassment unit that scaled with micro abilities. As a Toss player, I've always wanted scourges to be in the game due to hating the "risk free" feel of drops. As a viewer, it's depressing. I wish it would simply not be able to attack colossi or do that much damage. This game is just so bad to watch, which bugs me more than anything. And, mutas are a big reason. I don't want to see 40 mutas every game, with no distinguishable micro going on. Ideally, they would make the game "hard again," and they would have a real region lock, so everyone can "win." Whether phoenix are great or not, I think sooner or later, everyone will play exactly the same, build wise, due to the lack of soft counters and needing to find a way to get each hard counter unit in the game. Given Zerg can make each tech building and corresponding units, it seems inevitable in macro games. But, I guess that's what expansions are for. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25637 Posts
I do feel I agree on Mutas in ZvP. The issue I've always had is that you should be able to get more done with 10 Mutas in terms of harassment and microability, but it shouldn't scale so that having huge muta flocks can be devastating. I don't really feel it's a balance issue though, more something I don't particularly like. | ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12129 Posts
To me, the only problem is when zerg is on 3 bases and I see hydra den and spire. And I need to decide whether to build a stargate or chrono colossus. 1 from 3 games my decision is wrong :/ Well I return to all ins, but it sucks really hard, there's no fun in PvZ right now. Man, I wish I can tell whether it will be mutaswitch or this spire is for corruptors. But I cannot, PvZ was always to me the worst MU, because I cannot exactly tell what the opponent is doing, usually I see some larvas waiting for my next step... grrrr >< | ||
|
Deleted User 261926
960 Posts
On October 17 2014 19:09 playa wrote: The main point was Zerg always does the best. Foreign Terrans have always been an endangered species when it comes to good ones. That said, atm, non Korean Terrans are better than the Toss players we have playing now. Do you know anyone you would take over Major or Bunny that plays Toss? Only Huk could even be in the discussion. The fact that non Korean Terran players usually don't do well, either, only helps my main point... that Zerg is clearly the easiest race to give Koreans a challenge with. We've gone from "sick fungals" to, every now and then, "that's some impressive creep spread." Outside of Stephano, who would always set up flanks, it's hard to watch any of them and be like "wow, that person is good." The race is bland. I often wish they would bring back a unit selection limit, just so I could appreciate Zerg games. They really need to find a way to make Zerg micro more BW'ish. Sure, I'm nostalgic, but I really don't understand how people can watch T vs Z in SC 2 after watching it in BW. The game is so lack luster in comparison. It would be so much better to watch if there were scourges and lurkers (or something else), and mutas were a harassment unit that scaled with micro abilities. As a Toss player, I've always wanted scourges to be in the game due to hating the "risk free" feel of drops. As a viewer, it's depressing. I wish it would simply not be able to attack colossi or do that much damage. This game is just so bad to watch, which bugs me more than anything. And, mutas are a big reason. I don't want to see 40 mutas every game, with no distinguishable micro going on. Ideally, they would make the game "hard again," and they would have a real region lock, so everyone can "win." Whether phoenix are great or not, I think sooner or later, everyone will play exactly the same, build wise, due to the lack of soft counters and needing to find a way to get each hard counter unit in the game. Given Zerg can make each tech building and corresponding units, it seems inevitable in macro games. But, I guess that's what expansions are for. Could you do another post like this by tomorrow? I'm waking up late and nothing better than some comedy to start the day happy! | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On October 17 2014 19:44 deacon.frost wrote: Well, I think it is a balance issue which was badly resolved. Think about it this way - I remember several games from Scarlett - she always won with a huge muta flock. This is why the Thor change happen, right? But the problem is Mutalisk as a unit. Zerg received buff to the spore, Terran received "buff" for Thors and one for mines(well, reversed nerf more than anything else, but, you know.. .reasons = mutalisk). Protoss has the only way to answer this - phoenixes and they were buffed too because of mutalisks! So the problem in all MU is mutalisk with its regeneration and still we do not see nerf of that unit instead buffing other units around... WTF? Like seriously, Protoss is a race of hardcounters more than in WoL now, if this trend will continue I cannot imagine what can happen in LotV. This is so true, they should have long nerfed the mutalisk and balanced from there. On October 17 2014 19:44 deacon.frost wrote: To me, the only problem is when zerg is on 3 bases and I see hydra den and spire. And I need to decide whether to build a stargate or chrono colossus. 1 from 3 games my decision is wrong :/ Well I return to all ins, but it sucks really hard, there's no fun in PvZ right now. My only question here is: Shouldn't you just have a Stargate already? I mean, that's your opening. Having a Stargate is as much bread and butter for Protoss, as having a 3rd base is for zerg. I don't think there is a way around it aside from not playing macro games. I guess those blink aggression third bases have their viability, yet, I think they still rely too much on the Zerg getting a false read these days. | ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On October 17 2014 19:54 Big J wrote: This is so true, they should have long nerfed the mutalisk and balanced from there. My only question here is: Shouldn't you just have a Stargate already? I mean, that's your opening. Having a Stargate is as much bread and butter for Protoss, as having a 3rd base is for zerg. I don't think there is a way around it aside from not playing macro games. I guess those blink aggression third bases have their viability, yet, I think they still rely too much on the Zerg getting a false read these days. Frankly, I don't play Stargate opening these days, because I feel I don't do enough damage with it. I'm more like Rain, I like my style to be around good macro and to be consistent as much as possible. And my play is obsolete(as was Rain's few months ago) and I need to transform the play somehow. I think this will be solved by new map pool in 2015, because the current one is horrible for me. And you know, if I don't feel good on the map, it may affect the scouting too. | ||
|
antiRW
United Kingdom117 Posts
My only question here is: Shouldn't you just have a Stargate already? I mean, that's your opening. Having a Stargate is as much bread and butter for Protoss, as having a 3rd base is for zerg. I don't think there is a way around it aside from not playing macro games. I guess those blink aggression third bases have their viability, yet, I think they still rely too much on the Zerg getting a false read these days. Which in itself would be a bad result of Blizzard's balancing though. Opening every game with the same T2 tech choice is boring. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On October 17 2014 20:25 antiRW wrote: Which in itself would be a bad result of Blizzard's balancing though. Opening every game with the same T2 tech choice is boring. In most matchups the openings are very much figured out and opening differently is pretty much bad or forces you to allin. Edit: I'd like to have various options for all races in all matchups. | ||
|
SC2Toastie
Netherlands5725 Posts
On October 17 2014 20:42 Big J wrote: In most matchups the openings are very much figured out and opening differently is pretty much bad or forces you to allin. Edit: I'd like to have various options for all races in all matchups. Well... PvP - any tech is a viable opener. PvZ - Stargate, Robo are viable openers, TC is strong but more all-in-ish. PvT - Stargate can work, TC works sometimes, Robo is safest. ZvT - open Roach, open Speedlings, transition to either MLB or RH. ZvP - Roaches, Lings are both good openers until Hydra/Muta tech is available. ZvZ - LingsBanes opening, Mutas and Roaches are both viable. TvZ - Mech and Biomech and Biomine all work. TvT - Mech and Biomech and Skyterran work. TvP - Bio. There's only one matchup in which you have to go all in if you open with a different sort of tech. I'd love to see more variety in opening. The problem is not in tech being weak. It is a combination of metagame (what are people comfortable with) and maps (pretty defensively oriented atm). | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On October 17 2014 20:52 SC2Toastie wrote: Well... PvP - any tech is a viable opener. PvZ - Stargate, Robo are viable openers, TC is strong but more all-in-ish. PvT - Stargate can work, TC works sometimes, Robo is safest. ZvT - open Roach, open Speedlings, transition to either MLB or RH. ZvP - Roaches, Lings are both good openers until Hydra/Muta tech is available. ZvZ - LingsBanes opening, Mutas and Roaches are both viable. TvZ - Mech and Biomech and Biomine all work. TvT - Mech and Biomech and Skyterran work. TvP - Bio. There's only one matchup in which you have to go all in if you open with a different sort of tech. I'd love to see more variety in opening. The problem is not in tech being weak. It is a combination of metagame (what are people comfortable with) and maps (pretty defensively oriented atm). You are mixing openings and playstyles. Bio is not an opening in ZvT. An opening is reactored hellions into bio. And yes, we see reactores hellions every TvZ, it is plainly necessary. Same goes for Stargate in PvZ imo. Whether you go oracle, oracle/phoenix, oracle/VR, phoenix or just for 1-2VRs I don't care. The important part is to get the Stargate and then justify its cost. If you can pull a 1gate 3rd into robo+Stargate due to scouting information and mapsetup I'm fine with it too. But you gotta have the Stargate up around the time the spire starts or you simply are cutting corners. | ||
Clonester
Germany2808 Posts
TvT: Marine-Helion(-Elivator). Banshee. Raven. Reaper-FE. 6 Marines + WM Drop. 2 Tanks, 8 Marines, Raven drop ( after Exe ) TvZ: Reaper into reactor Helion. Reaper-FE into Reactor-Helion. CC first into reactor Helion. All of them lead most often into Bio + 1 reactor factory + 1 reactor starport. Sometimes we see a fast 2 factory followed by biomech or mech. TvP: Reaper-FE into 3 Barracks into Bio + Vikings into SCV Pull or Macro. ZvZ: Hatch or Pool first into ling(/bling) danceing into roaches. After a lot of roach battles we can see any tech. ZvT: Hatch into (Speed-)lings, sometimes earlier at some maps, sometimes after 4-6 queens later. Early Roachwaren or Banes for savety, after lair spire + banes. ZvP: Fast 3 hatch, queen + lings into roach. Tech choosen later. PvP: at least 2 gates, 3 gate, stargate into 3 gate, one base dt, 2 base dt, one base blink ( 3 gate ) PvT: 21 Nexus, 5min robo, robobay, most common. Stargate ( Oracle ) proxie or blink all in ( not this mappool ). PvZ: Nexus first or 21 Nexus into robo or TC. StarGate ( against Tefel ). After first Tech choise getting the gates up and be aggressive. | ||
|
Meavis
Netherlands1300 Posts
| ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On October 17 2014 21:40 Meavis wrote: lot's of mentions of mech TvZ, when mech in high level TvZ is pretty much dead thanks to SH/muta, when was the last time you saw mech work? Life vs Gumiho, one minute ago? | ||
|
RaFox17
Finland4581 Posts
On October 17 2014 21:40 Meavis wrote: lot's of mentions of mech TvZ, when mech in high level TvZ is pretty much dead thanks to SH/muta, when was the last time you saw mech work? Gumiho just won against Life 2-1 using mech. | ||
|
SC2Toastie
Netherlands5725 Posts
On October 17 2014 21:04 Big J wrote: You are mixing openings and playstyles. Bio is not an opening in ZvT. An opening is reactored hellions into bio. And yes, we see reactores hellions every TvZ, it is plainly necessary. Same goes for Stargate in PvZ imo. Whether you go oracle, oracle/phoenix, oracle/VR, phoenix or just for 1-2VRs I don't care. The important part is to get the Stargate and then justify its cost. If you can pull a 1gate 3rd into robo+Stargate due to scouting information and mapsetup I'm fine with it too. But you gotta have the Stargate up around the time the spire starts or you simply are cutting corners. Ah, missread that. sorries. | ||
| ||
