EPTPhoenixes vs Mutalisks - Obviously there is a problem when the only solution Protoss has against massed Mutalisks is massed Phoenixes, but then again, there are several ways to deal with this problem - Protoss players in Wings of Liberty would perform Immortal-Sentry all-ins every game to either kill the Zerg before he amasses Mutalisks or force him to spend so much resources and larvae on defense that a Mutalisk tech switch would be unviable. Here is the thing - this is not a balance problem, as both sides technically have ways to kill the other side or defend well against their attack - this is a design problem, and it is the hard-counter system that dictates that you must build X to defend against Y, or risk dying. This is seen in all parts of the game, not just PvZ. Problem is bio? Solution is 8 armour, nigh-invincible Ultralisks. Problem is Ultralisks? Solution is Ghost. Problem is Ghost? Solution is Infestors/Mass Lings. Same thing applies here. Problem is Mutalisk? Solution is Phoenix. Problem is even more Mutalisks? Solution is Phoenixes with range. And so the madness continues.
Designated Balance Discussion Thread - Page 1250
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
EatingBomber
1017 Posts
Phoenixes vs Mutalisks - Obviously there is a problem when the only solution Protoss has against massed Mutalisks is massed Phoenixes, but then again, there are several ways to deal with this problem - Protoss players in Wings of Liberty would perform Immortal-Sentry all-ins every game to either kill the Zerg before he amasses Mutalisks or force him to spend so much resources and larvae on defense that a Mutalisk tech switch would be unviable. Here is the thing - this is not a balance problem, as both sides technically have ways to kill the other side or defend well against their attack - this is a design problem, and it is the hard-counter system that dictates that you must build X to defend against Y, or risk dying. This is seen in all parts of the game, not just PvZ. Problem is bio? Solution is 8 armour, nigh-invincible Ultralisks. Problem is Ultralisks? Solution is Ghost. Problem is Ghost? Solution is Infestors/Mass Lings. Same thing applies here. Problem is Mutalisk? Solution is Phoenix. Problem is even more Mutalisks? Solution is Phoenixes with range. And so the madness continues. | ||
|
CheddarToss
534 Posts
On January 05 2016 17:18 EatingBomber wrote: This discussion is so silly - both sides are just talking past each other and bringing up points that are fundamentally flawed, while using refutations that are themselves flawed as well. Phoenixes vs Mutalisks - Obviously there is a problem when the only solution Protoss has against massed Mutalisks is massed Phoenixes, but then again, there are several ways to deal with this problem - Protoss players in Wings of Liberty would perform Immortal-Sentry all-ins every game to either kill the Zerg before he amasses Mutalisks or force him to spend so much resources and larvae on defense that a Mutalisk tech switch would be unviable. Here is the thing - this is not a balance problem, as both sides technically have ways to kill the other side or defend well against their attack - this is a design problem, and it is the hard-counter system that dictates that you must build X to defend against Y, or risk dying. This is seen in all parts of the game, not just PvZ. Problem is bio? Solution is 8 armour, nigh-invincible Ultralisks. Problem is Ultralisks? Solution is Ghost. Problem is Ghost? Solution is Infestors/Mass Lings. Same thing applies here. Problem is Mutalisk? Solution is Phoenix. Problem is even more Mutalisks? Solution is Phoenixes with range. And so the madness continues. I know of a nice way to fix this problem regarding Mutalisks in PvZ. Just give stalkers an AA bonus vs light and be done with it. | ||
|
Weltall
Italy83 Posts
vs Terrans while i got an high winrate vs terrans with adepts all in, my win% is slowly going down in this matchup. This is because mostly terrans starting to cheese me so badly off 1 base, with lib+tank+marine or they just manage to defend drops with fast stim builds, tanks, cyclones. So i'm currently facing more late game pvt, and I admit sometimes I have really bad times, expecially when terran just sits with towers+tanks+libs+mines and take all expansion he can. These games go over 40 minutes, while I can't do anything: towers give total map awarensess while tank+lib+mines melts everything. The only thing I can do is going air, but few scans just scout my switch and I die to mass lib, vikings etc etc. I think this matchup will reveal, as soon as all terrans figure out a build to stay safe from adepts all ins, the hardest for protoss. vs Zergs In this matchup, I feel like zergs gives the tempo. He decide when you have to defend, when you have to attack, when you have to gg. Zergs have plenty of super aggressive starts, like pool first, ling drops, ravager rush, and all these starts manage to put him forward, thanks to fast expansions and to the delayed protoss natural or third base. In hots, protoss had the FFE when we want to be almost safe from everything, now every opening has his drawbacks. Starting off 1 base it's pretty safe but leaves u so far behind that ur only chance is to all in. So here is my conclusion: why protoss, expecially on this expansion, has to be the "kill other before 8 min mark"? I think it's not a matter of units stats: there is no buff/nerf that would allow protoss race to be correcly inserted in lotv. It's mainly a design problem: with the nerf to warp mechanics we miss the chance to reinforce fast our attacks or defenses. You could buff again colossus for example, but like in hots, we would have to rush colossus again to just stand the transition to early to mid game, and to have something good in late game. So I thought that protoss need a design buff, without altering units stats. The main issue vs terrans and zergs is the tech switch: If you need to adapt fast to enemny composition, you just can't, because going from full robo to full stargate requires more and more minutes. I think it could be useful to add Robowarp and Starwarp. Yea, the chance to warp units out of robotics and stargate. Requisite will be: Robowarp -> researched from cybernetics core for 50/50 after a robotics bay is build (so u need robo fac+bay in order to research this) Starwarp -> researched from cybercore core 50/50 after a fleet beacon is build. This way protoss can switch in a bunch of minutes to heavy robo or heavy stargate composition as fas he has resources to do it. This kind of design change, will help protoss to face mid game with faster mid tier units, while allowing him to counter switches from terran and zergs in late game. Also, the higher requisite in tech and time, would it allow it to popup only in the mid/late game, preventing powerful all ins in the early game. What you guys think about this? | ||
|
RaFox17
Finland4581 Posts
On January 05 2016 17:34 CheddarToss wrote: I know of a nice way to fix this problem regarding Mutalisks in PvZ. Just give stalkers an AA bonus vs light and be done with it. Let´s just make sure that we don´t become like Hots, where stalkers were the universal unit to counter anything from Z. | ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12131 Posts
On January 05 2016 20:01 RaFox17 wrote: Let´s just make sure that we don´t become like Hots, where stalkers were the universal unit to counter anything from Z. What else, though? Against mutalisks you need a mobile and fast unit. This is phoenix and blink stalker. Muta regen killed the storm response from WoL. Mutalisk is the only unit in the game which required multiple balance patches for ALL 3 races! Instead of chaning mutalisk they are bending everything else around the unit... | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On January 05 2016 20:06 deacon.frost wrote: What else, though? Against mutalisks you need a mobile and fast unit. This is phoenix and blink stalker. Muta regen killed the storm response from WoL. Mutalisk is the only unit in the game which required multiple balance patches for ALL 3 races! Instead of chaning mutalisk they are bending everything else around the unit... You give the obvious alternative yourself. nerf the muta, don't buff the stalker. | ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12131 Posts
On January 05 2016 20:20 Big J wrote: You give the obvious alternative yourself. nerf the muta, don't buff the stalker. That is my answer from the start of HotS, but Blizzard is bender  | ||
|
MiCroLiFe
Norway275 Posts
On January 05 2016 19:39 Weltall wrote: you have good winrate pvt and you complain about terran beeing op? dude youre making me mad.My protoss POV vs Terrans while i got an high winrate vs terrans with adepts all in, my win% is slowly going down in this matchup. This is because mostly terrans starting to cheese me so badly off 1 base, with lib+tank+marine or they just manage to defend drops with fast stim builds, tanks, cyclones. So i'm currently facing more late game pvt, and I admit sometimes I have really bad times, expecially when terran just sits with towers+tanks+libs+mines and take all expansion he can. These games go over 40 minutes, while I can't do anything: towers give total map awarensess while tank+lib+mines melts everything. The only thing I can do is going air, but few scans just scout my switch and I die to mass lib, vikings etc etc. I think this matchup will reveal, as soon as all terrans figure out a build to stay safe from adepts all ins, the hardest for protoss. vs Zergs In this matchup, I feel like zergs gives the tempo. He decide when you have to defend, when you have to attack, when you have to gg. Zergs have plenty of super aggressive starts, like pool first, ling drops, ravager rush, and all these starts manage to put him forward, thanks to fast expansions and to the delayed protoss natural or third base. In hots, protoss had the FFE when we want to be almost safe from everything, now every opening has his drawbacks. Starting off 1 base it's pretty safe but leaves u so far behind that ur only chance is to all in. So here is my conclusion: why protoss, expecially on this expansion, has to be the "kill other before 8 min mark"? I think it's not a matter of units stats: there is no buff/nerf that would allow protoss race to be correcly inserted in lotv. It's mainly a design problem: with the nerf to warp mechanics we miss the chance to reinforce fast our attacks or defenses. You could buff again colossus for example, but like in hots, we would have to rush colossus again to just stand the transition to early to mid game, and to have something good in late game. So I thought that protoss need a design buff, without altering units stats. The main issue vs terrans and zergs is the tech switch: If you need to adapt fast to enemny composition, you just can't, because going from full robo to full stargate requires more and more minutes. I think it could be useful to add Robowarp and Starwarp. Yea, the chance to warp units out of robotics and stargate. Requisite will be: Robowarp -> researched from cybernetics core for 50/50 after a robotics bay is build (so u need robo fac+bay in order to research this) Starwarp -> researched from cybercore core 50/50 after a fleet beacon is build. This way protoss can switch in a bunch of minutes to heavy robo or heavy stargate composition as fas he has resources to do it. This kind of design change, will help protoss to face mid game with faster mid tier units, while allowing him to counter switches from terran and zergs in late game. Also, the higher requisite in tech and time, would it allow it to popup only in the mid/late game, preventing powerful all ins in the early game. What you guys think about this? | ||
|
Maxie
Sweden2653 Posts
On January 05 2016 20:20 Big J wrote: You give the obvious alternative yourself. nerf the muta, don't buff the stalker. Please no, muta are weak enough (in ZvT). I do wish liberators were a little worse against them, but that's more about wanting the playstyle to be more viable rather than a real balance problem. As for ZvP, don't archons kick muta ass too? At least in a straight up fight. | ||
|
HeroMystic
United States1217 Posts
On January 05 2016 22:04 Maxie wrote: Please no, muta are weak enough (in ZvT). I do wish liberators were a little worse against them, but that's more about wanting the playstyle to be more viable rather than a real balance problem. As for ZvP, don't archons kick muta ass too? At least in a straight up fight. Everything kicks Muta's ass in a straight up fight (except Vikings). Mutalisk aren't ever supposed to engage in fights they can't win, which is why they're such a massive snowball unit. | ||
|
RoomOfMush
1296 Posts
Wouldnt everybody be better off when we trade fast mutalisk regeneration with higher {hp / dps / some other buff} ? There wasnt fast regeneration in BW and mutas were still useful. In my opinion fast regeneration is a problematic feature in an RTS game. | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
The problem is obviously not the strength of the Muta in a straight up fight. It’s the Muta transition/remax after a big fight. 1) All Zerg units are produced from the same structure, the Hatchery, and come out of larvae. Therefore, it’s impossible to know what units Zerg is making. 2) By the mid-late game the Zerg already has most of his tech buildings. 3) Therefore the Zerg can quickly remake a lot of one unit without the opponent’s knowledge. The presence of a Spire doesn’t necessarily mean Muta are coming. Just as the presence of a Roach Warren doesn’t mean the Zerg will continue to make Roaches. The Mutalisk requires a very specific response from Protoss. After a big fight, where both players trade armies and the Protoss doesn’t have the ability to just force a fight at the Zerg base, the ONLY thing that deals with Mutas are Phoenixes. Otherwise, here is what happens: Zerg flies around doing basically free damage wherever it can, never engaging the Protoss army, denying expansions, killing workers, and setting itself up for the NEXT transition. How many games have we seen where the Protoss dedicates so much to fighting the Muta that the Zerg just goes back into Hydras or whatever and rolls over him? Muta transitions are even better in LotV than they were in HotS because of the LURKER. The Lurker counters all Protoss ground except the Disruptor and is very good at making it hard to fight. It stalls and allows the Zerg to build up a huge resource bank because it’s hard to engage. Once the Protoss commits to enough Disruptors Zerg can either switch into Ultras or Muta. 2 different units that just APPEAR in mass quantities and require drastically different responses. And both counter disruptors. Now do you see? | ||
|
playa
United States1284 Posts
| ||
|
Merkmerk
United States96 Posts
phoenix shut down any normal muta play completely to an absurd degree. it's not like normal unit counters. 5 phoenix will shit on 15 muta. so if you're ignoring how useless muta are against the common stargate openers now and just complaining that you let a zerg get 4000 gas for a massive 40 muta switch, then i think you need to examine where your gameplay went wrong 3-4 disruptors will deal with lurkers all day. lurkers are not mobile units, and fortunately for you the 4th base on most maps is pretty hard to defend, let alone the 5th or higher zerg is not 'making whatever he wants' off 3 bases anyhow all of you protoss whiners about mutas should probably play zerg and try muta against protoss above a gold level and see what happens, and see how easy it is to muta switch then come back here and recant your position after getting wiped out by phoenix contain openings and all of the timing pushes | ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12131 Posts
On January 06 2016 00:15 Merkmerk wrote: if your Zerg opponent has the immense amount of gas for a muta switch transition then you've done something wrong and were already losing phoenix shut down any normal muta play completely to an absurd degree. it's not like normal unit counters. 5 phoenix will shit on 15 muta. so if you're ignoring how useless muta are against the common stargate openers now and just complaining that you let a zerg get 4000 gas for a massive 40 muta switch, then i think you need to examine where your gameplay went wrong 3-4 disruptors will deal with lurkers all day. lurkers are not mobile units, and fortunately for you the 4th base on most maps is pretty hard to defend, let alone the 5th or higher zerg is not 'making whatever he wants' off 3 bases anyhow all of you protoss whiners about mutas should probably play zerg and try muta against protoss above a gold level and see what happens, and see how easy it is to muta switch then come back here and recant your position after getting wiped out by phoenix contain openings and all of the timing pushes It's not like pros never did muta switch that worked... but hey, they are not above gold... | ||
|
Weltall
Italy83 Posts
On January 05 2016 20:40 MiCroLiFe wrote: you have good winrate pvt and you complain about terran beeing op? dude youre making me mad. i'm sayng we are in some-kind of hots situation. In hots protoss sucks in early-mid while terran do best in midgame. It has been asked to devs to nerf midgame terrans and protoss late game, to give them some early power. They did nothing in hots, while they nerfed rauders in lotv and added adepts. In lotv it's pretty same: protoss has good early now, but imho their late sucks, while a good terran who plays with new units is really powerful. My winrate are good just because I end game early, this absolutly doesnt mean this matchup is balanced. Protoss should get some early nerf and some late boost, since ht cannot provide enought damage vs bio terran and distruptors does not provide a costant damage to opponent (i think it's near 0 vs a good terran..they already learnt to split vs banelings, they splits also vs distruptors). | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
On January 06 2016 00:15 Merkmerk wrote: if your Zerg opponent has the immense amount of gas for a muta switch transition then you've done something wrong and were already losing phoenix shut down any normal muta play completely to an absurd degree. it's not like normal unit counters. 5 phoenix will shit on 15 muta. so if you're ignoring how useless muta are against the common stargate openers now and just complaining that you let a zerg get 4000 gas for a massive 40 muta switch, then i think you need to examine where your gameplay went wrong 3-4 disruptors will deal with lurkers all day. lurkers are not mobile units, and fortunately for you the 4th base on most maps is pretty hard to defend, let alone the 5th or higher zerg is not 'making whatever he wants' off 3 bases anyhow all of you protoss whiners about mutas should probably play zerg and try muta against protoss above a gold level and see what happens, and see how easy it is to muta switch then come back here and recant your position after getting wiped out by phoenix contain openings and all of the timing pushes Disruptors 2 shot lurkers. So 4 disruptors will kill 2 Lurkers assuming you land the shots. Then you still have a lot of Hydras to deal with. Fighting the Lurkers takes time. If he shows up with 6 lurkers and I've got 4 Disruptors it takes a full minute of landing perfect Disruptor hits on cooldown to kill them. During that time the Zerg is sitting there mining and building his bank while denying/slowing your 4th. The minute it takes to get through 6 Lurkers (with perfect micro) is enough time for Zerg to start making Muta and send you on a Wild goose chase. Even if it's not 40 Muta.... 15-20 or so is still enough to do a lot of economic damage. If he snipes my observer... it takes longer. If he repositions his Lurkers and I miss a Disruptor shot... it takes longer. And in the end he doesn't have to go Muta, he can go Ultras. It's like you've never played the game... | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
On January 06 2016 00:23 deacon.frost wrote: It's not like pros never did muta switch that worked... but hey, they are not above gold... Right. Jaedong basically won every game with Muta switches. But he's bad right? And Solar won his first LotV tournament with Muta switches. But he's such a gold player. | ||
|
Merkmerk
United States96 Posts
Why not just go Templar archon carrier disruptor void Ray? Oh that's right because it costs gas. When you whiners act like 2k gas comes banked easy for a 20 Muta switch or 'just go ultras' you're proving your bronze level status If that is happening in your games you deserve to lose for letting your opponent get a huge Econ uncontested Lurkers cost a lot of gas. The research takes a while. You can't have lurkers and Muta switch and hive and ultras and upgrades at the same time Sounds like y'all are just getting outplayed sry | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
On January 06 2016 00:40 Merkmerk wrote: Lol again the infinite gas zergs - guess I forgot to get that option at Zerg skill Why not just go Templar archon carrier disruptor void Ray? Oh that's right because it costs gas. When you whiners act like 2k gas comes banked easy for a 20 Muta switch or 'just go ultras' you're proving your bronze level status If that is happening in your games you deserve to lose for letting your opponent get a huge Econ uncontested Lurkers cost a lot of gas. The research takes a while. You can't have lurkers and Muta switch and hive and ultras and upgrades at the same time Sounds like y'all are just getting outplayed sry I just explained to you exactly how Zerg banks the gas for a Muta switch. There are several pro games to prove it as well. I'm not at home right now but look up Solar vs Parting from the first LotV tournament and you'll see exactly that. Parting goes Disruptors, to deal with the ground army, Solar makes Mutas and wins. You're not even debating balance right now... you're saying that things that happened don't happen. | ||
| ||
