Designated Balance Discussion Thread - Page 1162

Prev 1 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1266 Next

DinoMight

United States3725 Posts

October 21 2014 23:27 GMT

#23221

On October 22 2014 07:44 TheDwf wrote:
To be perfectly clear, all I'm saying is you cannot claim that Protoss is forced to open robo immediately after expand every game in PvT. Stargate forge and blink gate gate (= builds that delay the robo for 1-2 minute(s)) are currently commonly used at pro level.

Complaining that Mutas are a "freewin" and saying that Terrans are winning most tournaments (they are, really) are two different things.

I complained about this guy's post because it made the ridiculous claim that anyone who goes Mutas simply wins (which is not true and is plainly balance whine).

My comment re: your post was that just because people are opening Stargate... it doesn't mean that it's a good build. You can open forge first against Terran if you want too, but you won't win.

Currently Terrans are winning more than 50% of the time by a large margin. So you can't just say something is viable because people do it if those people are losing.

I will admit that I am Protoss biased, because I dedicate a lot of time to playing this game and I play Protoss. But I also feel like sometimes I make valid posts that are overlooked because I was Protoss biased when Protoss was strong.

TheDwf is now in that camp of being the guy with the Terran bias during a time when Terran is strong, and his posts are starting to sound a bit ridiculous.

I admit that his posts typically have more evidence and research than others, but they can be equally biased nonetheless.

Re: Oracles vs Widow mines. I posted what is in my view a reasonable argument as to why Oracles are a bad opening vs. Widow Mines. Oracle openings want to be aggressive and kill workers and mine openings not only threaten instant death for the Oracle but also require the Oracle to be AT HOME detecting the mines... greatly reducing its utility. In that case, you'd have been much better off just going Colossus.

Which is why I'm saying that while, yes, you CAN go Stargate, you're forced into Robo/Colossus if you want to play ideally and safely (because you can't scout for a while as toss until your first halu or obs).

Now, if you have a counter point to that, I'd love to hear it

Lexender

Mexico2623 Posts

October 21 2014 23:35 GMT

#23222

Re: Oracles vs Widow mines. I posted what is in my view a reasonable argument as to why Oracles are a bad opening vs. Widow Mines. Oracle openings want to be aggressive and kill workers and mine openings not only threaten instant death for the Oracle but also require the Oracle to be AT HOME detecting the mines... greatly reducing it's utility. In that case, you'd have been much better off just going Colossus.

Which is why I'm saying that while, yes, you CAN go Stargate, you're forced into Robo/Colossus if you want to play ideally and safely (because you can't scout for a while as toss until your first halu or obs).

Now, if you have a counter point to that, I'd love to hear it

TBH a situation like is quite ridiculous, it will be a base trade sort of situation, and to be honest oracles would be better in that case, since WM shot only once and if the shot is bad your screwed were the oracle can kill much more.

Enigmasc

United Kingdom147 Posts

October 22 2014 01:35 GMT

#23223

On October 22 2014 08:35 Lexender wrote:

Show nested quote +

hero did go for 100% unscouted fastest possible proxy oracle literally just outside bbyongs natural in that game not to mention waited untill he had 2 to go in, id hardly call that a standard stargate opener :L
if hed done so muhc as just go in with 1 oracle the widowmine would have been more than adequate

Pursuit_

United States1330 Posts

October 22 2014 02:42 GMT

#23224

On October 22 2014 08:27 DinoMight wrote:
Re: Oracles vs Widow mines. I posted what is in my view a reasonable argument as to why Oracles are a bad opening vs. Widow Mines. Oracle openings want to be aggressive and kill workers and mine openings not only threaten instant death for the Oracle but also require the Oracle to be AT HOME detecting the mines... greatly reducing its utility. In that case, you'd have been much better off just going Colossus.

Which is why I'm saying that while, yes, you CAN go Stargate, you're forced into Robo/Colossus if you want to play ideally and safely (because you can't scout for a while as toss until your first halu or obs).

Now, if you have a counter point to that, I'd love to hear it

Stargate Forge after expand as TheDwf put it, assuming Widow Mines after expand, can just get cannons at home in reaction to seeing the factory with your Oracle. Typically getting Turrets with a Mine Drop after expo build is quite hard because you have less minerals to spare, and as long as you keep the Oracle alive getting 2-3 makes it really difficult for your opponent to safely mine from their natural. In the worst case scenario, the Terran keeps his mines at home, oracle flies in and dies to widow mine, Protoss makes cannons at home and plays greedier in tech because theres no chance of a pre-medivac bio timing.

HerO vs Polt IEM finals Game 6 is a pretty good example of this. HerO transitions into Zealot / HT since it's pre-patch but you could just as easily transition into Stalker Collosi.

On October 22 2014 06:57 DinoMight wrote:
Right, Protoss needs to blindly go Robo every game because the possibility of widow mines force us to (note that a Terran going Widow Mines can't reliably be scouted doing so before the robo would have to be started to be ready in time). Any build that doesn't incorporate a Robo pretty much immediately after 2nd Nexus is a coinflip IMO.

Sending a probe into the Terran's base after the reaper leaves will guarantee you get to see the follow up gas / building choices. Really just probe scouting can usually tell you since most Reaper -> Bio builds involve pulling SCV's off gas before the reaper finishes.

vs CC first it's really easy, they'll either go double gas after 2 rax or 1 rax gas, no other opening will get enough gas for a factory to be done at a relevant time.

Stalker / MsC pressure will also reliably get this info, as will most Stargate openings.

Even unscouted, Widow Mine drops aren't particularly scary as long as you react quickly. One Widow Mine will kill 2 workers in the time it takes for Protoss to build a Robo + Observer in reaction to a Widow Mine burrowing in your mineral line, and you can be 100% certain no pre-medivac bio timing is coming in exchange.

playa

United States1284 Posts

October 22 2014 03:03 GMT

#23225

On October 22 2014 08:27 DinoMight wrote:

Show nested quote +

Have you ever thought that Terrans might be winning "everything" because their race does better versus Zerg? I personally find P vs T very easy and dull. Terran makes, what, 3 units? If you don't make a huge blunder in handling a 2 pronged attack, Toss is very imbalanced until Terran has 4+ bases. And, most players aren't good enough to get to the point where they have mass ghosts and vikings.

Versus Zerg, I've gone from losing every game versus mutas to magically winning every game since having 3 stargates. To me, saying the idea that mutas aren't a free win versus standard builds where you won't have enough phoenix is kinda like arguing that 1 immortal can take on any amount of stalkers because, hey, it's a hard counter. It's still a numbers game, and 1 stargate and even 2 is definitely bordering on free win.

I'm so sick of people complaining about a matchup that is at 50%, while somehow acting like that is more indicative of imbalance than something at 44%. All of the numbers for Toss in macro games are pathetic, yet "we're doing nothing wrong. Nothing is a free win or imbalanced." Give me a break.

Big J

Austria16289 Posts

October 22 2014 08:34 GMT

#23226

Since playa keeps on bringing up that PvZ is superimbalanced and PvT completely fine, I thought it would be interesting to find some statistics telling us what currently the most imbalanced matchup is.

Winrates since July (latest patch).

PvT 289–296 (49.40%)
PvZ 593–616 (49.05%)
TvZ 340–419 (44.80%)

PvT 264–323 (44.97%)
PvZ 418–451 (48.10%)
TvZ 364–338 (51.85%)

PvT 287–346 (45.34%)
PvZ 476–483 (49.64%)
TvZ 353–352 (50.07%)

PvT 126–139 (47.55%)
PvZ 233–245 (48.74%)
TvZ 175–147 (54.35%)

PvT 257–259 (49.81%)
PvZ 364–356 (50.56%)
TvZ 279–263 (51.48%)

PvT 282–344 (45.05%)
PvZ 371–455 (44.92%)
TvZ 338–362 (48.29%)

PvT 230–235 (49.46%)
PvZ 290–382 (43.15%)
TvZ 241–279 (46.35%)

Current (unfinished):
+ Show Spoiler +

PvT 94–137 (40.69%)
PvZ 134–161 (45.42%)
TvZ 140–121 (53.64%)

excluding the - since it is unfinished - current periode, some statistics to determine imbalance:
PvT mean: 47.37
PvT median: 47.55
Summed Square Error from 50: 78.21

PvZ mean: 47.74
PvZ median: 48.74
Summed Square Error from 50: 79.27

TvZ mean: 49.60
TvZ median: 50.07
Summed Square Error from 50: 67.83

So in conclusion, in all aligulac based statistics TvZ looks most balanced (I'd even say it looks perfectly balanced), PvZ and PvT slightly anti-Protoss and in every statistic the order from most balanced to most imbalanced is TvZ>PvZ>PvT.

TheDwf

France19747 Posts

October 22 2014 08:43 GMT

#23227

On October 22 2014 08:27 DinoMight wrote:
Complaining that Mutas are a "freewin" and saying that Terrans are winning most tournaments (they are, really) are two different things.

Already changed from "Terran is winning everything" to "Terrans are winning most tournaments," what's next in the rewriting contest?

I complained about this guy's post because it made the ridiculous claim that anyone who goes Mutas simply wins (which is not true and is plainly balance whine).

Meanwhile saying that Terrans wins everything or Protoss is forced to open robo every single PvT are high quality statements backed with overwhelming evidence. OK.

My comment re: your post was that just because people are opening Stargate... it doesn't mean that it's a good build. You can open forge first against Terran if you want too, but you won't win.

Lol. Tell that to the top players of your race then. I'm sure the likes of herO, Sora or First are eager to learn from you why the Stargate builds they're using are bad.

TheDwf is now in that camp of being the guy with the Terran bias during a time when Terran is strong, and his posts are starting to sound a bit ridiculous.

Yeah, what a huge bias to simply look at how top Korean Protosses play in PvT and call out ignorant statements for what they are. But keep lecturing other people about random claims based on nothing when you do basically the same as soon as Terran is involved; the "ridiculous" might not be in my camp in the end. The Mote and the Beam never gets old.

playa

United States1284 Posts

October 22 2014 09:04 GMT

#23228

On October 22 2014 17:34 Big J wrote:
Since playa keeps on bringing up that PvZ is superimbalanced and PvT completely fine, I thought it would be interesting to find some statistics telling us what currently the most imbalanced matchup is.

Winrates since July (latest patch).

PvT 289–296 (49.40%)
PvZ 593–616 (49.05%)
TvZ 340–419 (44.80%)

PvT 264–323 (44.97%)
PvZ 418–451 (48.10%)
TvZ 364–338 (51.85%)

PvT 287–346 (45.34%)
PvZ 476–483 (49.64%)
TvZ 353–352 (50.07%)

PvT 126–139 (47.55%)
PvZ 233–245 (48.74%)
TvZ 175–147 (54.35%)

PvT 257–259 (49.81%)
PvZ 364–356 (50.56%)
TvZ 279–263 (51.48%)

PvT 282–344 (45.05%)
PvZ 371–455 (44.92%)
TvZ 338–362 (48.29%)

PvT 230–235 (49.46%)
PvZ 290–382 (43.15%)
TvZ 241–279 (46.35%)

Current (unfinished):
+ Show Spoiler +

PvT 94–137 (40.69%)
PvZ 134–161 (45.42%)
TvZ 140–121 (53.64%)

When I play P vs T, I get the sense that stalkers are horrible. When I watch P vs T, I see that stalkers are horrible. Until people play with more phoenix styles, and are far less reliant on stalkers, I don't even know how to guage P vs T balance when players are playing with a handicap by making stalkers.

To me, P vs T illustrates the importance of looking at all-ins vs macro game statistics: when blink stalker all-ins were a thing, everyone who used this on ladder would have around a 70% win rate. It's silly to me, to think that because one all-in or all-ins, in general, are in favor of your race that macro players have to be punished, as long as the all-in games skew the numbers towards 50%.

P vs T is interesting atm, because there's no real all-in that players seem to be doing, and it pretty much highlights how shafted macro players have been. It's as if Toss has two matchups within a matchup, and none of them are rarely balanced one way or the other.

-Celestial-

United Kingdom3867 Posts

October 22 2014 09:41 GMT

#23229

On October 22 2014 07:40 Wombat_NI wrote:
That and it took literally a day of Terrans winning anything to bring out the backlash again, I tend to think a lot of people are idiots when it comes to knee jerk responses

I believe that has its roots in GOMTvT and the "Terran are just BETTER" attitude resulting from that which has never truly gone away. It breeds resentment and frustration at people's attitude which makes snapping back more likely.

@playa: To be honest the Stalker has always basically been garbage as a unit. Its expensive and has terrible DPS and dies way too easily. And in particular against Terran it gets DESTROYED by a unit that costs half as much gas and less minerals.The only two reasons its ever been viable or used (since even WoL times) are:
1. Blink, which allows for some survivability and enables certain all-ins.
And
2. Because its the only semi-decent mobile anti-air that Protoss can get without going Stargate.

Meavis

Netherlands1300 Posts

October 22 2014 10:07 GMT

#23230

if stalkers weren't bad it would be everything that protoss makes, it's a reasonably fast 6range unit that can teleport, shoot both ground and air, is armored and has a slight bonus vs armored on top of having 160hp+shield

good damage is basically the only thing it lacks to be a Swiss army knife unit.

antiRW

United Kingdom117 Posts

October 22 2014 10:20 GMT

#23231

On October 22 2014 19:07 Meavis wrote:
if stalkers weren't bad it would be everything that protoss makes, it's a reasonably fast 6range unit that can teleport, shoot both ground and air, is armored and has a slight bonus vs armored on top of having 160hp+shield

good damage is basically the only thing it lacks to be a Swiss army knife unit.

It also lacks ability to scale. While a ranged unit, it is too large to clump and scale effectively in fights between larger armies. Blink somewhat counteracts that, but only up until a certain army size, when its cooldown becomes too long.

Plus, it is horribly expensive for its dps and health. Which is why the unit is mostly used in very specific situations - mirco-intensive, low numbers early game and anti-air defense against drops and to protect colossi.

MTAC

103 Posts

October 22 2014 10:32 GMT

#23232

Plus, it is horribly expensive for its dps and health. Which is why the unit is mostly used in very specific situations - mirco-intensive, low numbers early game and anti-air defense against drops and to protect colossi.

Same old problem: you can't have both warpgates AND very strong early game units before upgrades (Charge/Blink). It's really different with it, kinda like marine CS+Stim. It's day and night.

Cuz 1: you make theses anywhere on the map,
And 2: Toss have one more round of unit rally than other races.

IMO I'd like to get rid of warpgates outside Warp Prism, but eh, it'll never happen. Until then, Toss anti-air will be dedicated to SG units/Archon/Stalkers.

Big J

Austria16289 Posts

October 22 2014 10:40 GMT

#23233

On October 22 2014 19:20 antiRW wrote:

Show nested quote +

It's exactly the same size as a hydralisk, roach, marauder. It scales just as well as those, obviously better than 4range roaches given the range advantage of stalkers. Probably even better than those others too due to blink.
It only just doesn't scale as well as marines, air and artillery.

Yes it is expensive for its health and dps. Would be pretty unfunny if it wasn't but still had blink, 2.95speed, antiair, 1armor, shields...

On October 22 2014 19:32 MTAC wrote:

Show nested quote +

Same old problem: you can't have both warpgates AND very strong early game units before upgrades (Charge/Blink). It's really different with it, kinda like marine CS+Stim. It's day and night.

Remove its antiair, put it to 5range, make it 2.25movement speed and we can talk all day about making it 100/25 or some cost like that.
I don't care about warp gates in that scenario, I'll defend them with a banshee, a MsC, a VR or slowroaches and slowlings.

SC2Toastie

Netherlands5725 Posts

October 22 2014 10:41 GMT

#23234

On October 22 2014 19:40 Big J wrote:

Show nested quote +

It's exactly the same size as a hydralisk, roach, marauder. It scales just as well as those, obviously better than 4range roaches given the range advantage of stalkers. Probably even better than those due to blink.
It only just doesn't scale as well as marines, air and artillery.

Yes it is expensive for its health and dps. Would be pretty unfunny if it wasn't but still had blink, 2.95speed, antiair, 1armor, shields...

Exactly.

WombaT

Northern Ireland23745 Posts

October 22 2014 10:44 GMT

#23235

Stalkers are a good unit though. Microable in early game skirmishes, can snowball with allin play, blink allows for dynamic repositioning to shield Collosus for example, and lategame PvZ they work well as harassment hitsquads.

Outside of certain timing attacks I think it's good that they don't scale as efficiently as other race's units, they force Protoss to actually create balanced comps rather than massing 1/2 unit types.

I mean we went through a reasonably long phase where Zergs could prosper with a few Lings and then nothing but Roaches in PvZ, which I found somewhat dull.

Swisslink

2949 Posts

October 22 2014 10:53 GMT

#23236

On October 22 2014 12:03 playa wrote:
I'm so sick of people complaining about a matchup that is at 50%, while somehow acting like that is more indicative of imbalance than something at 44%. All of the numbers for Toss in macro games are pathetic, yet "we're doing nothing wrong. Nothing is a free win or imbalanced." Give me a break.

You're right if you look at the overall stats. For someone who ladders a lot, that might be a problem. But I think most people agree upon the fact that the balance should revolve around the very top of the scene. And these stats were posted by AntiRW a few pages:

+ Show Spoiler +

For the period from Sep-01 until today:

Top 50 active players: ['Solar', 'herO', 'YoDa', 'Sacsri', 'INnoVation', 'TaeJa', 'Zest', 'jjakji', 'Rain', 'Life', 'Flash', 'MMA', 'HyuN', 'Polt', 'Bomber', 'soO', 'San', 'sOs', 'Cure', 'Scarlett', 'First', 'Bunny', 'ForGG', 'Dear', 'Maru', 'KingKong', 'Soulkey', 'TY', 'Leenock', 'PartinG', 'Stats', 'Bbyong', 'Classic', 'StarDust', 'Heart', 'Jaedong', 'Patience', 'VortiX', 'Sora', 'Snute', 'viOLet', 'Hurricane', 'TargA', 'GuMiho', 'Happy', 'DongRaeGu', 'Ourk', 'Super', 'Pet', 'Mvp']

171 meetings between these players

Total games: 485

PvT - 47.90% - 119
PvZ - 50.94% - 106
TvZ - 61.96% - 92

If we include the top 100:

Top 100 active players: ['Solar', 'herO', 'YoDa', 'Sacsri', 'INnoVation', 'TaeJa', 'Zest', 'jjakji', 'Rain', 'Life', 'Flash', 'MMA', 'HyuN', 'Polt', 'Bomber', 'soO', 'San', 'sOs', 'Cure', 'Scarlett', 'First', 'Bunny', 'ForGG', 'Dear', 'Maru', 'KingKong', 'Soulkey', 'TY', 'Leenock', 'PartinG', 'Stats', 'Bbyong', 'Classic', 'StarDust', 'Heart', 'Jaedong', 'Patience', 'VortiX', 'Sora', 'Snute', 'viOLet', 'Hurricane', 'TargA', 'GuMiho', 'Happy', 'DongRaeGu', 'Ourk', 'Super', 'Pet', 'Mvp', 'ByuL', 'MajOr', 'Trap', 'Jim', 'Rogue', 'Lilbow', 'Dark', 'Hydra', 'MC', 'RagnaroK', 'TRUE', 'Impact', 'Center', 'Nerchio', 'Reality', 'KangHo', 'Golden', 'Petraeus', 'ShoWTimE', 'HeRoMaRinE', 'Pigbaby', 'Journey', 'Sen', 'EffOrt', 'MaNa', 'SuperNova', 'MaSa', 'Symbol', 'Avenge', 'Dayshi', 'Kas', 'Trust', 'Ryung', 'Hack', 'Check', 'HerO', 'EnDerr', 'Curious', 'Stork', 'FanTaSy', 'Starbuck', 'Thermal', 'Revival', 'Squirtle', 'ParalyzE', 'TLO', 'Spear', 'MorroW', 'HuK', 'Sorry']

466 meetings between these players

Total games: 1279

PvT - 47.37% - 247
PvZ - 52.49% - 261
TvZ - 54.44% - 349

85 PvP, 150 TvT, 186 ZvZ

=> Z looks weak, T looks strong. TvZ is not as off as before.

...

If we compare actual series results, i.e., only count BOX wins, we get:

Top 50 players: 'Solar', 'herO', 'YoDa', 'Sacsri', 'INnoVation', 'TaeJa', 'Zest', 'jjakji', 'Rain', 'Life', 'Flash', 'MMA', 'HyuN', 'Polt', 'Bomber', 'soO', 'San', 'sOs', 'Cure', 'Scarlett', 'First', 'Bunny', 'ForGG', 'Dear', 'Maru', 'KingKong', 'Soulkey', 'TY', 'Leenock', 'PartinG', 'Stats', 'Bbyong', 'Classic', 'StarDust', 'Heart', 'Jaedong', 'Patience', 'VortiX', 'Sora', 'Snute', 'viOLet', 'Hurricane', 'TargA', 'GuMiho', 'Happy', 'DongRaeGu', 'Ourk', 'Super', 'Pet', 'Mvp'

171 games between these players since 2014-09-01

Total games: 171

PvT - 44.19% - 43
PvZ - 58.33% - 36
TvZ - 63.64% - 33

10 PvP, 21 TvT, 27 ZvZ

Top 100 players: 'Solar', 'herO', 'YoDa', 'Sacsri', 'INnoVation', 'TaeJa', 'Zest', 'jjakji', 'Rain', 'Life', 'Flash', 'MMA', 'HyuN', 'Polt', 'Bomber', 'soO', 'San', 'sOs', 'Cure', 'Scarlett', 'First', 'Bunny', 'ForGG', 'Dear', 'Maru', 'KingKong', 'Soulkey', 'TY', 'Leenock', 'PartinG', 'Stats', 'Bbyong', 'Classic', 'StarDust', 'Heart', 'Jaedong', 'Patience', 'VortiX', 'Sora', 'Snute', 'viOLet', 'Hurricane', 'TargA', 'GuMiho', 'Happy', 'DongRaeGu', 'Ourk', 'Super', 'Pet', 'Mvp', 'ByuL', 'MajOr', 'Trap', 'Jim', 'Rogue', 'Lilbow', 'Dark', 'Hydra', 'MC', 'RagnaroK', 'TRUE', 'Impact', 'Center', 'Nerchio', 'Reality', 'KangHo', 'Golden', 'Petraeus', 'ShoWTimE', 'HeRoMaRinE', 'Pigbaby', 'Journey', 'Sen', 'EffOrt', 'MaNa', 'SuperNova', 'MaSa', 'Symbol', 'Avenge', 'Dayshi', 'Kas', 'Trust', 'Ryung', 'Hack', 'Check', 'HerO', 'EnDerr', 'Curious', 'Stork', 'FanTaSy', 'Starbuck', 'uThermal', 'Revival', 'Squirtle', 'ParalyzE', 'TLO', 'Spear', 'MorroW', 'HuK', 'Sorry'

466 games between these players since 2014-09-01

Total games: 466

PvT - 42.53% - 87
PvZ - 56.70% - 97
TvZ - 55.38% - 130

28 PvP, 48 TvT,75 ZvZ

Now... what do you think happens to these winrates, if they patch in order to balance out your infamous 44% winrates overall? Probably won't help the Zerg, which seem to lose quite frequently at the very top level anyway. Your argument that these wins are mostly All-ins: might be right. But if it is, the Zergs late game strength is required to balance up the match up at least somewhat. The matchup would require a complete redesign (-> nerf Protoss All-ins + ultra lategame (Airtoss), nerf Zerg in between those two while keeping TvZ/TvP at the current stage. Or even buff them against Terran, depending on whether Terran turns out to be too strong) and let's face it: Probably not gonna happen.

TokO

Norway577 Posts

October 22 2014 11:18 GMT

#23237

I think we should have Dragoon's at 2.25 ms that shoot reaver shots at a price + for 300/200 with air and ground attack.

Don't you guys feel that TvZ feels a lot more suffocating and unfun to play? From the Zerg's perspective. In PvZ, Macro builds from Protoss have almost complete scouting with Hallucinations, and a powerful defense in the form of Photon Overcharge and Forcefields. We have the counters available. I don't mind having to build 3 stargates, I feel like it's akin to Zerg's needing hive for 3-3 and stuff like that.

In TvZ however, Zerg seems to almost be forced to just run around pick and defend with an army that the Terran seem really well equipped to deal with. I guess Zerg still has diversity with Roach Hydra builds, but I wonder whether they'll get stronger or weaker as the game gets figured out better.

antiRW

United Kingdom117 Posts

October 22 2014 11:28 GMT

#23238

On October 22 2014 19:40 Big J wrote:

Show nested quote +

I don't disagree. In fact, that was my point in response to Meavis claim that the stalker only lacks good damage: The stalker has pros and cons like almost every unit and its use is very situational.

-Celestial-

United Kingdom3867 Posts

October 22 2014 11:40 GMT

#23239

@Everyone going on about Stalkers: You've kind of made my point for me. I'm not saying "they've got a ton of bad points and therefore they need buffing". I'm saying they're bad, but they're all Protoss has for a couple of specific purposes; so people have found ways to work them into unit compositions.

playa just effectively saying "they're terrible, nobody should use them" is sort of glossing over the fact its quite hard to play without them. My point was: I agree they're bad, they've ALWAYS been bad. But they've also always been needed to an extent. Even if you cut down on usage you still need to use some (balance-wise, of course, it then becomes a question of "how bad can we make this unit whilst still letting it fulfill its purpose" because Stalkers have the potential to be the best unit in the game because of Blink if the stats were much higher).

Arguably this cycles back to the problem of ultra specialisation in Protoss units making balancing them tricky. Everything is highly specialised to a couple of specific purposes and they're pretty much awful at anything else. The comment about "a Swiss army knife unit" is especially poignant given the existence of the Marine and its utter dominance in the Terran arsenal. Compare and contrast how a Terran army is built with how a Protoss army is built and the unit roles therein.

(On a minor side note, and a bit of a pet hate of mine, I think people forget that Protoss cannot heal unit damage. So presenting shields and health as the same is somewhat misguided...shields at least regenerate. >_>)

@TokO: I don't know about that. Personally when I random I find TvZ alright from both sides. I guess I'm more comfortable with matches vs Protoss because that was my original race I learned before switching to randoming but I haven't noticed any particular frustrations in the matchup.

I guess my one feeling with it is that, coming originally from a Protoss background and consequently that influencing my style heavily, it isn't a matchup where you can rely on good unit composition and strategic decision making as ZvP. Its much more tactical and relies on the smaller stuff. Given Protoss reliance on heavy counter units I can throw the ZvP match up back and forth with dramatic strategic sweeps until either I run out of steam and ideas or conjure up something my opponent can't deal with. In ZvT that doesn't seem to work quite as effectively so it feels like its a lot more about engagements and the nitty-gritty of the actual fighting.

Big J

Austria16289 Posts

October 22 2014 11:58 GMT

#23240

On October 22 2014 20:40 -Celestial- wrote:
@Everyone going on about Stalkers: You've kind of made my point for me. I'm not saying "they've got a ton of bad points and therefore they need buffing". I'm saying they're bad, but they're all Protoss has for a couple of specific purposes; so people have found ways to work them into unit compositions.

Yeah, and mutalisks are shit too. They are just the only option zerg has got to harass and therefore people have worked them in their builds because it's still better than not harassing.

Prev 1 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1266 Next

Please or register to reply.

Designated Balance Discussion Thread - Page 1162

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming