|
On September 28 2011 00:35 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2011 22:15 Thezzy wrote:On September 27 2011 21:23 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 27 2011 20:29 Thezzy wrote:On September 27 2011 19:14 Plansix wrote:On September 27 2011 17:41 Cloudster wrote:
The point I was trying to make is that two or more well placed storms rip Terran bio apart (which is what it was designed for of course) so Terran have EMP which has better range to avoid being pwned to pieces by a couple of storms.
Everything seems pretty balanced to me, high risk with high reward. Sadly the numbers do not support your theory. Also with the exception of zealots, emp does equal damage to storm to Protoss units, instantly. Storm does damage over 4 in game seconds. So the argument that if HTs where faster terrans would auto lose is kinda silly. There could be a good reason HTs are slow, but right now Protoss are getting crushed in the GSL and Korea in general. Some tweaks are likely needed. EMP cannot kill and does not stop damage from being applied to the Terran. Yes, it is instant and 100 damage, but on Zealots, Sentries and Stalkers you aren't getting the full 100% out of it. When a Storm lands, you have to move your Bio out of it. They'll take anywhere from 20-80 damage and the time Bio is moving is equal to time they are not shooting back but are getting shot at. Storm can directly kill a unit, whereas EMP cannot, meaning that Storm is very spammable, but EMP is not, after 2-3 spread out over the army it's mostly done and Protoss will still keep shooting. Also keep in mind on what gets hits by these spells. Zealots and Stalkers, even when hit by EMP can still participate just fine in the battle, especially Chargelots. Marines/Marauders getting whacked by a Storm have to move out and will lose most of their HP before they can fire again. Ghosts and EMP in TvP are very important in keeping the HTs and Storms to a manageable number. Without them, Bio would likely vaporize to mass Storm carpets. As it is far easier for Protoss to mass on HT (with Chargelots for example) than it is for Terran to mass up on Ghosts I feel the EMP vs Storm debate is hardly screaming that it needs a tweak. 1. EMP doesn't need to kill- it does plenty of damage as is. It already had to be nerfed once because it did too much damage. There's no guarantee they got the amount right yet. 2. Of course you have to move your units during a battle. It's called micro. Both players should be doing this. Unfortunately, Protoss don't get the luxury of moving out of the way of an EMP because those are instantaneous. 3. Storm and EMP are just as spammable. Keep in mind that Storm doesn't stack, so they need to be spread out anyway. Also, since Storm is damage over a decently long period of time, moving your infantry back just a tiny bit negates a large portion of the entire spell. 4. Ghosts directly counter high templar, not the other way around. They also counter archons. It's also the case that ghosts are all-around more useful with their other spells (snipe, cloak, nuke). They're also faster and have longer range. They're also lower tech. Feedback can't reach ghosts before ghosts kill them. High templar is what some Protoss try to make to counter a traditional bio ball (if they don't want to deal with the colossi vs. viking struggle). But it's effective mostly if the Terran doesn't use ghosts. 1. Whether or not 100 shields (it did 100% in BW) is good or bad is something too open to debate to really make a statement. Racial bias will always come into this. The fact it does not kill is a big difference from being able to kill. If it could kill, it would be hugely overpowered even if it did 50 damage so it definitely matters. 2. Protoss doesn't have to move once EMPed, the micro against the spell itself ends with splitting up your casters. Terran has to move constantly throughout the battle dodging Colossi beams, Chargelots, Forcefields on top of Storms. Not saying Protoss doesn't have to micro, but anti-EMP micro is very small vs anti-Storm micro. 3. How is EMP spammable against anything other than Archons and 200 energy casters? Once the shields are down or the energy is low any additional EMPs do nothing to Protoss and only cost energy. Continual storms, even if they don't do full damage force Terran to keep moving the Bioball, not dealing any damage to Protoss. 4. Ghosts are not a counter to HT anymore than HT are a counter to Ghosts. Both can nullify the other with Snipe or Feedback. EMP can outrange Feedback, but Feedback can insta-nuke a Ghost. A HT without energy can form an Archon, a Ghost without energy can still shoot at Zealots. The units cannot be compared in any direct way, all they share is that they both have an AoE and anti-caster ability. As much as Protoss may need HT against Bio, Terran needs Ghosts to stay alive just as much. Still, if its going to be a caster duel, I would like both sides to be on equal footing. Both snipe and EMP outrange feedback. Rather than nerf the Ghost, I would like to see HTs speed be equal to the other casters. This puts the burden on the protoss players to control them well, rather than nerf the Ghost. HTs move as slow as the Thor and are out-ranged by Ghosts. This doesn't even go into the fact Ghosts cost less gas, have a cheaper starting building and come with EMP. Saying that they are on equal footing is silly. A speed increase isn't out of this world buff.
A speed increase for HT would be fine by me, I agree they are strangely slow.
Ghosts may cost 50 less gas but keep in mind they cost 200 minerals.
They can come out earlier but massing Ghosts is far less effective than massing HTs due to the mineral differential.
As for starting with EMP, without it they'd have just one out of three abilities available to them at start (which early game is useless against anything but zealots, which you normally kite with concussive shells), at 50 starting energy, it would be similar to making Fungal Growth require an upgrade.
On September 28 2011 00:48 Condor Hero wrote:
You are white knighting so much about how hard Terrans have it.
Reminds me of Painuser. Terrans killing everything and he's making a huge deal about how +1 Immortal range is going to turn the matchup upside down.
Are you happy with the state of PvT?
If not, how would you change it?
Let's skip the part where you suggest Protosses have 400 apm on the new apm measuring scale and spread every single Templar, having 4 speed observers on 4 sides of the main army so we never get caught out of position, and somehow simultaneously be prepared for 1-1-1 and aggressive early rax pressure.
"Terrans killing everything" is a rather loose statement.
Whenever a tournament has one race come out ahead the two other ones are suddenly underpowered.
I can distinctly remember when a tournament final ended up being a ZvZ and everyone was talking about how amazing the Zerg players 'must have been'.
The next tournament its a TvT and everyone goes 'nerf Terran'.
Stating that "Terrans killing everything" doesn't add anything.
I'm fine with the Immortal change, I don't see why I wouldn't be.
Given its role it's only fair it has the same range as the Marauder and Stalker.
I never even mentioned the Immortal, yes it can decimate my Bio push if I don't micro and prepare properly and I'm fine with that.
My biggest gripe in TvP is how forced both sides are to generally go down the same path.
Bio is generally the most effective composition so Terrans go for it and Protoss build up either Colossi or Templar mixed in with Chargelots and gateway units to deal with it.
If any strong mech or air play from Terran (outside of cheese) proves to be just as effective as time goes on, that may change.
As for white knighting, I'm merely defending my view point of EMP and why I feel in its current state it's okay.
Personally I've seen a lot "Remove EMP, remove marauders, remove stim" cries coming from Protoss rather than seeing Protoss actually trying to find a way to deal with it.
I'm not seeing any massive cries about the +5 seconds to the Barracks and the Blue Flame Hellion change has mostly resulted in Terrans discussing about going for red flame or getting more Hellions rather than creating dozens of topics about how unfair this or that is.
Again, this is my own personal opinion and as I play Terran myself I'll obviously be Terran biased.
|
On September 28 2011 00:48 Condor Hero wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 00:34 Thezzy wrote:On September 28 2011 00:31 FLuE wrote:
Time to put the amulet back in?
I think that would be a good help to Toss. At the time when Amulet was removed ghosts were more expensive and hardly being used, and nobody used infestors. Now that both races are using those units a ton more, the amulet won't be as OP and I think needs to be put back in the game. That was such a saving grace for protoss players. Just a thought. Warp-in Storms are the problem with this, not the specifically the Amulet itself. Being able to warp-in a Storm anywhere on the map instantly makes it incredibly hard to drop, harass or even keep a sustained attack going. I'd be fine with Amulet if it only applied to HTs coming from a Gateway rather than a Warpgate. To me a warp-in Storm is equal to being able to hotdrop a Ghost in the middle of a fight like a MULE. You are white knighting so much about how hard Terrans have it. Reminds me of Painuser. Terrans killing everything and he's making a huge deal about how +1 Immortal range is going to turn the matchup upside down. Are you happy with the state of PvT? If not, how would you change it? Let's skip the part where you suggest Protosses have 400 apm on the new apm measuring scale and spread every single Templar, having 4 speed observers on 4 sides of the main army so we never get caught out of position, and somehow simultaneously be prepared for 1-1-1 and aggressive early rax pressure.
Even if terran were winning every single game I still wouldn't want to see warp-in storm come back. It doesn't address the problem with the matchup at all and it is just far too powerful.
I'd love to see the amulet come back in it's BW form (62.5 energy, +50 max energy and faster regen rate). But warp in storm is too much.
|
On September 28 2011 02:28 Thezzy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 00:35 Plansix wrote:On September 27 2011 22:15 Thezzy wrote:On September 27 2011 21:23 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 27 2011 20:29 Thezzy wrote:On September 27 2011 19:14 Plansix wrote:On September 27 2011 17:41 Cloudster wrote:
The point I was trying to make is that two or more well placed storms rip Terran bio apart (which is what it was designed for of course) so Terran have EMP which has better range to avoid being pwned to pieces by a couple of storms.
Everything seems pretty balanced to me, high risk with high reward. Sadly the numbers do not support your theory. Also with the exception of zealots, emp does equal damage to storm to Protoss units, instantly. Storm does damage over 4 in game seconds. So the argument that if HTs where faster terrans would auto lose is kinda silly. There could be a good reason HTs are slow, but right now Protoss are getting crushed in the GSL and Korea in general. Some tweaks are likely needed. EMP cannot kill and does not stop damage from being applied to the Terran. Yes, it is instant and 100 damage, but on Zealots, Sentries and Stalkers you aren't getting the full 100% out of it. When a Storm lands, you have to move your Bio out of it. They'll take anywhere from 20-80 damage and the time Bio is moving is equal to time they are not shooting back but are getting shot at. Storm can directly kill a unit, whereas EMP cannot, meaning that Storm is very spammable, but EMP is not, after 2-3 spread out over the army it's mostly done and Protoss will still keep shooting. Also keep in mind on what gets hits by these spells. Zealots and Stalkers, even when hit by EMP can still participate just fine in the battle, especially Chargelots. Marines/Marauders getting whacked by a Storm have to move out and will lose most of their HP before they can fire again. Ghosts and EMP in TvP are very important in keeping the HTs and Storms to a manageable number. Without them, Bio would likely vaporize to mass Storm carpets. As it is far easier for Protoss to mass on HT (with Chargelots for example) than it is for Terran to mass up on Ghosts I feel the EMP vs Storm debate is hardly screaming that it needs a tweak. 1. EMP doesn't need to kill- it does plenty of damage as is. It already had to be nerfed once because it did too much damage. There's no guarantee they got the amount right yet. 2. Of course you have to move your units during a battle. It's called micro. Both players should be doing this. Unfortunately, Protoss don't get the luxury of moving out of the way of an EMP because those are instantaneous. 3. Storm and EMP are just as spammable. Keep in mind that Storm doesn't stack, so they need to be spread out anyway. Also, since Storm is damage over a decently long period of time, moving your infantry back just a tiny bit negates a large portion of the entire spell. 4. Ghosts directly counter high templar, not the other way around. They also counter archons. It's also the case that ghosts are all-around more useful with their other spells (snipe, cloak, nuke). They're also faster and have longer range. They're also lower tech. Feedback can't reach ghosts before ghosts kill them. High templar is what some Protoss try to make to counter a traditional bio ball (if they don't want to deal with the colossi vs. viking struggle). But it's effective mostly if the Terran doesn't use ghosts. 1. Whether or not 100 shields (it did 100% in BW) is good or bad is something too open to debate to really make a statement. Racial bias will always come into this. The fact it does not kill is a big difference from being able to kill. If it could kill, it would be hugely overpowered even if it did 50 damage so it definitely matters. 2. Protoss doesn't have to move once EMPed, the micro against the spell itself ends with splitting up your casters. Terran has to move constantly throughout the battle dodging Colossi beams, Chargelots, Forcefields on top of Storms. Not saying Protoss doesn't have to micro, but anti-EMP micro is very small vs anti-Storm micro. 3. How is EMP spammable against anything other than Archons and 200 energy casters? Once the shields are down or the energy is low any additional EMPs do nothing to Protoss and only cost energy. Continual storms, even if they don't do full damage force Terran to keep moving the Bioball, not dealing any damage to Protoss. 4. Ghosts are not a counter to HT anymore than HT are a counter to Ghosts. Both can nullify the other with Snipe or Feedback. EMP can outrange Feedback, but Feedback can insta-nuke a Ghost. A HT without energy can form an Archon, a Ghost without energy can still shoot at Zealots. The units cannot be compared in any direct way, all they share is that they both have an AoE and anti-caster ability. As much as Protoss may need HT against Bio, Terran needs Ghosts to stay alive just as much. Still, if its going to be a caster duel, I would like both sides to be on equal footing. Both snipe and EMP outrange feedback. Rather than nerf the Ghost, I would like to see HTs speed be equal to the other casters. This puts the burden on the protoss players to control them well, rather than nerf the Ghost. HTs move as slow as the Thor and are out-ranged by Ghosts. This doesn't even go into the fact Ghosts cost less gas, have a cheaper starting building and come with EMP. Saying that they are on equal footing is silly. A speed increase isn't out of this world buff. A speed increase for HT would be fine by me, I agree they are strangely slow. Ghosts may cost 50 less gas but keep in mind they cost 200 minerals. They can come out earlier but massing Ghosts is far less effective than massing HTs due to the mineral differential. As for starting with EMP, without it they'd have just one out of three abilities available to them at start (which early game is useless against anything but zealots, which you normally kite with concussive shells), at 50 starting energy, it would be similar to making Fungal Growth require an upgrade. Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 00:48 Condor Hero wrote:
You are white knighting so much about how hard Terrans have it.
Reminds me of Painuser. Terrans killing everything and he's making a huge deal about how +1 Immortal range is going to turn the matchup upside down.
Are you happy with the state of PvT?
If not, how would you change it?
Let's skip the part where you suggest Protosses have 400 apm on the new apm measuring scale and spread every single Templar, having 4 speed observers on 4 sides of the main army so we never get caught out of position, and somehow simultaneously be prepared for 1-1-1 and aggressive early rax pressure. "Terrans killing everything" is a rather loose statement. Whenever a tournament has one race come out ahead the two other ones are suddenly underpowered. I can distinctly remember when a tournament final ended up being a ZvZ and everyone was talking about how amazing the Zerg players 'must have been'. The next tournament its a TvT and everyone goes 'nerf Terran'. Stating that "Terrans killing everything" doesn't add anything. I'm fine with the Immortal change, I don't see why I wouldn't be. Given its role it's only fair it has the same range as the Marauder and Stalker. I never even mentioned the Immortal, yes it can decimate my Bio push if I don't micro and prepare properly and I'm fine with that. My biggest gripe in TvP is how forced both sides are to generally go down the same path. Bio is generally the most effective composition so Terrans go for it and Protoss build up either Colossi or Templar mixed in with Chargelots and gateway units to deal with it. If any strong mech or air play from Terran (outside of cheese) proves to be just as effective as time goes on, that may change. As for white knighting, I'm merely defending my view point of EMP and why I feel in its current state it's okay. Personally I've seen a lot "Remove EMP, remove marauders, remove stim" cries coming from Protoss rather than seeing Protoss actually trying to find a way to deal with it. I'm not seeing any massive cries about the +5 seconds to the Barracks and the Blue Flame Hellion change has mostly resulted in Terrans discussing about going for red flame or getting more Hellions rather than creating dozens of topics about how unfair this or that is. Again, this is my own personal opinion and as I play Terran myself I'll obviously be Terran biased.
The perception of Terran "dealing" with nerfs likely come from the fact that Terrans are the least active race on these forums. Most polls have shown Z>P>>T in numbers. Z and P whining about T probably just discourages people from posting unpopular opinions.
|
On September 28 2011 02:28 Thezzy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 00:35 Plansix wrote:On September 27 2011 22:15 Thezzy wrote:On September 27 2011 21:23 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 27 2011 20:29 Thezzy wrote:On September 27 2011 19:14 Plansix wrote:On September 27 2011 17:41 Cloudster wrote:
The point I was trying to make is that two or more well placed storms rip Terran bio apart (which is what it was designed for of course) so Terran have EMP which has better range to avoid being pwned to pieces by a couple of storms.
Everything seems pretty balanced to me, high risk with high reward. Sadly the numbers do not support your theory. Also with the exception of zealots, emp does equal damage to storm to Protoss units, instantly. Storm does damage over 4 in game seconds. So the argument that if HTs where faster terrans would auto lose is kinda silly. There could be a good reason HTs are slow, but right now Protoss are getting crushed in the GSL and Korea in general. Some tweaks are likely needed. EMP cannot kill and does not stop damage from being applied to the Terran. Yes, it is instant and 100 damage, but on Zealots, Sentries and Stalkers you aren't getting the full 100% out of it. When a Storm lands, you have to move your Bio out of it. They'll take anywhere from 20-80 damage and the time Bio is moving is equal to time they are not shooting back but are getting shot at. Storm can directly kill a unit, whereas EMP cannot, meaning that Storm is very spammable, but EMP is not, after 2-3 spread out over the army it's mostly done and Protoss will still keep shooting. Also keep in mind on what gets hits by these spells. Zealots and Stalkers, even when hit by EMP can still participate just fine in the battle, especially Chargelots. Marines/Marauders getting whacked by a Storm have to move out and will lose most of their HP before they can fire again. Ghosts and EMP in TvP are very important in keeping the HTs and Storms to a manageable number. Without them, Bio would likely vaporize to mass Storm carpets. As it is far easier for Protoss to mass on HT (with Chargelots for example) than it is for Terran to mass up on Ghosts I feel the EMP vs Storm debate is hardly screaming that it needs a tweak. 1. EMP doesn't need to kill- it does plenty of damage as is. It already had to be nerfed once because it did too much damage. There's no guarantee they got the amount right yet. 2. Of course you have to move your units during a battle. It's called micro. Both players should be doing this. Unfortunately, Protoss don't get the luxury of moving out of the way of an EMP because those are instantaneous. 3. Storm and EMP are just as spammable. Keep in mind that Storm doesn't stack, so they need to be spread out anyway. Also, since Storm is damage over a decently long period of time, moving your infantry back just a tiny bit negates a large portion of the entire spell. 4. Ghosts directly counter high templar, not the other way around. They also counter archons. It's also the case that ghosts are all-around more useful with their other spells (snipe, cloak, nuke). They're also faster and have longer range. They're also lower tech. Feedback can't reach ghosts before ghosts kill them. High templar is what some Protoss try to make to counter a traditional bio ball (if they don't want to deal with the colossi vs. viking struggle). But it's effective mostly if the Terran doesn't use ghosts. 1. Whether or not 100 shields (it did 100% in BW) is good or bad is something too open to debate to really make a statement. Racial bias will always come into this. The fact it does not kill is a big difference from being able to kill. If it could kill, it would be hugely overpowered even if it did 50 damage so it definitely matters. 2. Protoss doesn't have to move once EMPed, the micro against the spell itself ends with splitting up your casters. Terran has to move constantly throughout the battle dodging Colossi beams, Chargelots, Forcefields on top of Storms. Not saying Protoss doesn't have to micro, but anti-EMP micro is very small vs anti-Storm micro. 3. How is EMP spammable against anything other than Archons and 200 energy casters? Once the shields are down or the energy is low any additional EMPs do nothing to Protoss and only cost energy. Continual storms, even if they don't do full damage force Terran to keep moving the Bioball, not dealing any damage to Protoss. 4. Ghosts are not a counter to HT anymore than HT are a counter to Ghosts. Both can nullify the other with Snipe or Feedback. EMP can outrange Feedback, but Feedback can insta-nuke a Ghost. A HT without energy can form an Archon, a Ghost without energy can still shoot at Zealots. The units cannot be compared in any direct way, all they share is that they both have an AoE and anti-caster ability. As much as Protoss may need HT against Bio, Terran needs Ghosts to stay alive just as much. Still, if its going to be a caster duel, I would like both sides to be on equal footing. Both snipe and EMP outrange feedback. Rather than nerf the Ghost, I would like to see HTs speed be equal to the other casters. This puts the burden on the protoss players to control them well, rather than nerf the Ghost. HTs move as slow as the Thor and are out-ranged by Ghosts. This doesn't even go into the fact Ghosts cost less gas, have a cheaper starting building and come with EMP. Saying that they are on equal footing is silly. A speed increase isn't out of this world buff. A speed increase for HT would be fine by me, I agree they are strangely slow. Ghosts may cost 50 less gas but keep in mind they cost 200 minerals. They can come out earlier but massing Ghosts is far less effective than massing HTs due to the mineral differential. As for starting with EMP, without it they'd have just one out of three abilities available to them at start (which early game is useless against anything but zealots, which you normally kite with concussive shells), at 50 starting energy, it would be similar to making Fungal Growth require an upgrade.
I am ok with the Ghost cost, it was more the cost of the Ghost Academy. For what you get out of it, it has the lowest overhead I've seen. A minor 150/50 to gain access to EMPs and snipe. That is only 25 minerals more than a stalker. With a 40 second build time for the Ghost Academy and 40 seconds for the ghost itself, there is almost no overhead to getting ghosts.
Seriously, if the terran scouts the Templar Archives building, they could have their first(or several, depending on the nubmer of techlabs) ghost on the field before storm finishes researching. Even chronoed, you would be hard pressed to get storm out before that.
|
On September 28 2011 00:34 Sabu113 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 00:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
I'm also really getting tired of hearing Terran players say that they need MULEs to *keep up with the worker count or mining efficiency of Protoss chrono boost*. How long is that nonsensical statement going to last?
Yeah, Protoss has chrono boost. And you realize that Protoss players use chrono boost on their workers like... fewer than ten times the entire game, right? (We're certainly done chrono boosting our nexuses by the ten minute mark.) We need to use it on our tech and other structures, while Terran players make dozens of MULEs throughout the entire game and scan once in a while. You're also ignoring how Bliz tweaked the build times of stuff so that chrono is well required for certain units to come out in a decent time i.e. they made teh carrier build times expecting constant chrono.
Very true. Protoss players develop blink rush by constantly chronoboosting? Hmm.. Increase the research time. And don't even bring up Warp gate research. Chronoboost is by far the least beneficial and most maleable (by Blizzard) macro mechanic. Blizzard can at any time nullify tactics that Protoss players come up with using Chronoboost by making thins take longer.
I think a lot of BS we see in Terran all-in can be mitigate to some degree by keeping Mules on cool down. Leave scan and depot drop as they are, but only one Mule per orbital at any given time. Reward those who keep up with their macro, and make T think twice before all-in'ing. It's ridiculous to see a Terran all-in, then follow up with yet another all-in.
|
Do they cheese because theyre bad. Or do they know their race cant play a macrogame and decide to cheese.
Look at sage, 8 dt one trick pony build. Its a cool build but nothing solid.
Sage's build was far from one trick pony or cheesy. It was used much like mutas in ZvZ - to gain a macro advantage and map control. He did some great harass with DT + warp prism, but it was obvious he used the DTs to gain a fast third and take map control.
Hongun has a history of cheesing. He really only stayed in the GSL for as long as he did by doing double stargate proxies and 4 gates, and then doing 3 gate VR all-ins v Terran for a while. He's been struggling the last few months as players learned to hold his cheese, although he's had great success with just massing blink stalkers. So in the case of Hongun, I'd say he cheeses because he has a history of cheesing and is just worse than the other player - in this case, Losira.
Yes, we know, you have no sympathy for Protoss players who 4 gate. We don't blame you. 4-gating is all-in and cheese. So stop going around posting that you have no sympathy. And for the record, no one is asking for your sympathy.
Then stop posting that Zerg > Protoss. No one is 'asking' for your thoughts on PvZ either, but this IS a discussion forum.
I guess you hate all those Terran that 2rax'ed allin or 1-1-1'ed and those Zerg that baneling bust or roach ling allin too.
They're in the GSL, they know to play macro games better than 99.9% of the world, but because so much is on the line, they're only gonna do what they think is going to win. Personally, I think Terran's and Zerg's late game is very strong as Protoss at their level so an allin might have better chances than a macro game.
I'm not saying I hate them, I'm just saying that when the players practice more and the metagame moves toward how to safely go more macro, it should be no surprise when these cheesy players are left in the dust and start to struggle. GSL Open S1 was all about 1 base play, and then 3-4 season later, we saw it dominated by 2 base play (when Jinro got big). Now it's more about 3 base play, T/P/Z stuck on 2 base are losing, and soon it will be about the 4th base as P and T better secure their third. It's just how the game is advancing as it gets more figured out.
2 rax SCV all in, for example, is a horrible build. 1 spine = GG. We also know that hatch first is actually safer against 2 rax SCV all-in, but in season 3 people simply didn't know how to defend against it. BitbyBit did very well for a few seasons, and then he got left in the dust - no one complained that Terran's 1 base play was weak, or that Terran lacked early game aggressive openings, or that Terran was imba because they were getting knocked out.
We also saw baneling busting Zergs get knocked out too. Kyrix is now in Code B, after having only qualified in the GSL for doing 2 base 'macro' baneling busts and not building a single drone afterwards (if you watch the MKP vs Kyrix games of fame, you'll notice Kryix just played like trash and never built a drone after the busts, and went pure bane even though pure speedling would have worked better, and MKP struggled to defend against bane bust even though kryix did it every game that series). He stayed in the GSL as long as he did doing 3 base mass roach all-ins against Protoss FFE, or 6 pooling in ZvZ.
We also have July, a decent PvZ and TvZ player, but soon Protoss will realize to make a forge first against him or do a 1 base opening, or to make more cannons if they see there isn't an expo, but he always all-ins in ZvZ and he's been held back for a long time because of ZvZ. This season he didn't advance when he tried to all-in Losira, even after having a huge lead with his early aggression and could've just expanded, and if he doesn't change his style in PvZ and ZvZ he will quickly fall out of Code S.
There's oGsInca who went DTs every game, where is he now? What about Anypro going 2 base mass gateway a-move every game (remember his 4-gate-every-game a few seasons ago). There's also Rain (who admittedly started to actually do good when he stopped cheesing but still fell from grace), Check never really does well because he MUST 6 pool once a series, Choya, TheBest, Golden.
I dunno about 4gate, but a 2 base all-in is the best way of playing PvZ on Dual Sight, imo, and double Stargate isn't too bad as far as that goes. If Code A is any indication, he could've done the mass DT drop instead, and been hailed as a hero of the Protoss race if it suceeded.
Cheesing is never the best way to play a game, it's only hoping the opponent doesn't scout and react properly. Even after killing Losira's third, his double stargate failed to win the game and put him so damn far behind. Imagine if he just went straight for blink stalkers into third into colossi that game.
I also maintain that opening 1 base is still relevant for Protoss (if you disagree, then you must think maps like XNC where you can't FFE are broken for ZvP right?), as it denies a fast third from Zerg.
|
On September 28 2011 00:03 Thezzy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2011 23:34 usethis2 wrote:On September 27 2011 20:29 Thezzy wrote:
The CC takes twice as long to regenerate enough energy for a spell than a Queen or Nexus.
Mass MULEing is actually bad for Terran because we suddenly get a huge amount of minerals for short time, but it isn't sustainable so adding additional production facilities would leave us starved later on when the MULEs die.
This is what I hear from T players all the time, and I think P/Z players agree. Yes, late MULEs are lost opportunistic cost you could have earlier on. And you even go further and say that it's "actually bad" to mass MULE. Then the solution should be simple, isn't it? Put cool down on mules so that every OC can only have 1 active mule at any given time. Mass Mule'ing is bad for T, anyway. (Remember, that's per your own words) P and Z players want to help with a sensible solution. I think you should welcome such a change with open arms. Or maybe you're just a hypocrite/liar. A cooldown on MULEs is something I wouldn't mind that much to be honest, but not 1 per OC as this means the energy buildup of OCs becomes nearly useless.
According to you, mass mule'ing is bad. Did I read you words wrong? Then what is excess energy of OC good for? You can still use OC energy for scans and depot drops. If you keep up with your macro and you shouldn't have energy buildup on OCs except for strategic reasons involving scans/depot drops.
|
On September 28 2011 02:56 Belial88 wrote:
We also saw baneling busting Zergs get knocked out too. Kyrix is now in Code B, after having only qualified in the GSL for doing 2 base 'macro' baneling busts and not building a single drone afterwards (if you watch the MKP vs Kyrix games of fame, you'll notice Kryix just played like trash and never built a drone after the busts, and went pure bane even though pure speedling would have worked better, and MKP struggled to defend against bane bust even though kryix did it every game that series). He stayed in the GSL as long as he did doing 3 base mass roach all-ins against Protoss FFE, or 6 pooling in ZvZ.
Disagree. Kyrix dropped out because he doesn't practice, and doesn't take the game seriously. He wasn't a one-trick pony at all. Watch the games he played in Open season 2 against ST_Ace, and you will see the most monstrous late game Zerg army, ever. Indeed watch all games he played in that season and see how far ahead he was compared to other Z's. He also went onto win All star tournament and replays are available. He had exceptional sense of scouting and strategical mind, supported by great micro and macro. It's a shame that he didn't give a rat's ass to SC2 because I think/thought he's such a talent. But labeling him as cheeser is 100% incorrect.
|
On September 28 2011 02:59 usethis2 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 00:03 Thezzy wrote:On September 27 2011 23:34 usethis2 wrote:On September 27 2011 20:29 Thezzy wrote:
The CC takes twice as long to regenerate enough energy for a spell than a Queen or Nexus.
Mass MULEing is actually bad for Terran because we suddenly get a huge amount of minerals for short time, but it isn't sustainable so adding additional production facilities would leave us starved later on when the MULEs die.
This is what I hear from T players all the time, and I think P/Z players agree. Yes, late MULEs are lost opportunistic cost you could have earlier on. And you even go further and say that it's "actually bad" to mass MULE. Then the solution should be simple, isn't it? Put cool down on mules so that every OC can only have 1 active mule at any given time. Mass Mule'ing is bad for T, anyway. (Remember, that's per your own words) P and Z players want to help with a sensible solution. I think you should welcome such a change with open arms. Or maybe you're just a hypocrite/liar. A cooldown on MULEs is something I wouldn't mind that much to be honest, but not 1 per OC as this means the energy buildup of OCs becomes nearly useless. According to you, mass mule'ing is bad. Did I read you words wrong? Then what is excess energy of OC good for? You can still use OC energy for scans and depot drops. If you keep up with your macro and you shouldn't have energy buildup on OCs except for strategic reasons involving scans/depot drops.
The excess accounts for the fact that player macro is never perfect.
Forcing a single MULE per OC would be similar to forcing a cooldown on Larva Inject and Chronoboost.
Macro will slip even at the top level.
If you miss a Chronoboost you can still spend the second one earlier straight away.
It's still bad compared to spending the first Chronoboost properly but it allows for some leeway.
You'll always have energy build up even its only 1-5 energy every time but to instantly restrict the MULE by a full cooldown is too harsh, especially when such a cooldown is not present anywhere else.
|
On September 28 2011 02:56 Belial88 wrote:Show nested quote +I dunno about 4gate, but a 2 base all-in is the best way of playing PvZ on Dual Sight, imo, and double Stargate isn't too bad as far as that goes. If Code A is any indication, he could've done the mass DT drop instead, and been hailed as a hero of the Protoss race if it suceeded. Cheesing is never the best way to play a game, it's only hoping the opponent doesn't scout and react properly. Even after killing Losira's third, his double stargate failed to win the game and put him so damn far behind. Imagine if he just went straight for blink stalkers into third into colossi that game. I also maintain that opening 1 base is still relevant for Protoss (if you disagree, then you must think maps like XNC where you can't FFE are broken for ZvP right?), as it denies a fast third from Zerg.
I can imagine what would've happened if he had played standard on Dual Sight, because Protoss players tried it in the past, including MC vs Monster for example. And in a grand majority of those games, they ended up not being able to take a third base ever, and losing shortly afterwards. It's also quite amusing that you're so hellbent on labeling HongUn as a cheeser, when he just played as straight up macro as humanly possible against July, and got rolled by a 3 base timing with tunneling claws and baneling drops.
And to be honest, I don't think opening 1 base really makes a huge difference. 1 base all-ins from Protoss are pretty bad, and the Zerg can pretty much take his third the moment he sees the natural Nexus finish. I think the reason Korean Protosses prefer to FFE on every map, is that a 2 base economy actually allows for some strategic variety, like going DT without being super all-in for instance.
By the way, that mass DT drop from Sage was pretty goddamned all-in too, so I find it funny how you're so hellbent on kicking Hongun out of Code S, while championing Sage's strategic genius. 
|
On September 28 2011 03:23 Thezzy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 02:59 usethis2 wrote:On September 28 2011 00:03 Thezzy wrote:On September 27 2011 23:34 usethis2 wrote:On September 27 2011 20:29 Thezzy wrote:
The CC takes twice as long to regenerate enough energy for a spell than a Queen or Nexus.
Mass MULEing is actually bad for Terran because we suddenly get a huge amount of minerals for short time, but it isn't sustainable so adding additional production facilities would leave us starved later on when the MULEs die.
This is what I hear from T players all the time, and I think P/Z players agree. Yes, late MULEs are lost opportunistic cost you could have earlier on. And you even go further and say that it's "actually bad" to mass MULE. Then the solution should be simple, isn't it? Put cool down on mules so that every OC can only have 1 active mule at any given time. Mass Mule'ing is bad for T, anyway. (Remember, that's per your own words) P and Z players want to help with a sensible solution. I think you should welcome such a change with open arms. Or maybe you're just a hypocrite/liar. A cooldown on MULEs is something I wouldn't mind that much to be honest, but not 1 per OC as this means the energy buildup of OCs becomes nearly useless. According to you, mass mule'ing is bad. Did I read you words wrong? Then what is excess energy of OC good for? You can still use OC energy for scans and depot drops. If you keep up with your macro and you shouldn't have energy buildup on OCs except for strategic reasons involving scans/depot drops. The excess accounts for the fact that player macro is never perfect. Forcing a single MULE per OC would be similar to forcing a cooldown on Larva Inject and Chronoboost. Macro will slip even at the top level. If you miss a Chronoboost you can still spend the second one earlier straight away. It's still bad compared to spending the first Chronoboost properly but it allows for some leeway. You'll always have energy build up even its only 1-5 energy every time but to instantly restrict the MULE by a full cooldown is too harsh, especially when such a cooldown is not present anywhere else.
Can't believe you're trying to argue this.
Full MULE cooldown is EXACTLY like Larva Inject cooldown, 1 per hatch / 1 per OC.
As for Chrono, you can't chrono the same thing to make it 2x fast similar to how 2x MULEs essentially equals 2x minerals mined.
Btw, I'm sick and tired of people, including casters, who point out it's a bad thing for Terrans to mine out their bases really fast. Seeing as how the only other alternative to mining faster is mining slower, how brain dead do you have to be to see it as a disadvantage?
|
People need to stop acting like two storms rip bio apart. You see it time and time again in high level games now, since terran doesn't need to make vikings they can mass medivacs, and when there are enough medivacs you just have to kite away and stimmed units are faster than anything you want chasing a bioball, allowing them to sit back and heal up. Storm does a lot less to a bioball than people act like it does unless you're massing marines. And no, feedbacking medivacs is not a good trade because protoss is so gas-centric whereas the main gas dump of terran is ghosts and medivacs---assuming the terran even lets his medivacs float ahead of his army by accident.
|
On September 28 2011 03:06 usethis2 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 02:56 Belial88 wrote:
We also saw baneling busting Zergs get knocked out too. Kyrix is now in Code B, after having only qualified in the GSL for doing 2 base 'macro' baneling busts and not building a single drone afterwards (if you watch the MKP vs Kyrix games of fame, you'll notice Kryix just played like trash and never built a drone after the busts, and went pure bane even though pure speedling would have worked better, and MKP struggled to defend against bane bust even though kryix did it every game that series). He stayed in the GSL as long as he did doing 3 base mass roach all-ins against Protoss FFE, or 6 pooling in ZvZ. Disagree. Kyrix dropped out because he doesn't practice, and doesn't take the game seriously. He wasn't a one-trick pony at all. Watch the games he played in Open season 2 against ST_Ace, and you will see the most monstrous late game Zerg army, ever. Indeed watch all games he played in that season and see how far ahead he was compared to other Z's. He also went onto win All star tournament and replays are available. He had exceptional sense of scouting and strategical mind, supported by great micro and macro. It's a shame that he didn't give a rat's ass to SC2 because I think/thought he's such a talent. But labeling him as cheeser is 100% incorrect.
He had some great games, but rewatching the season 2 games and the level of play pales to what is out there now. People were just so ... bad back then lol. He had decent micro, but his macro was horrible. He definitely was creative, and enjoyable to watch, but he was a bit cheesy and his understanding of the game is nowhere near players like leenock or nestea, and when his style of play was figured out he stopped doing as well.
It's also quite amusing that you're so hellbent on labeling HongUn as a cheeser, when he just played as straight up macro as humanly possible against July, and got rolled by a 3 base timing with tunneling claws and baneling drops.
I enjoyed his play that game, but his micro in the final battle (no blink splitting???) was subpar and he was simply hit by a strong timing attack that he barely held. I would say July has shown to be a better player overall, but regardless of that, it wasn't like Hongun was steamrolled. He barely held a strong timing attack and didn't split or use forcefields.
the Zerg can pretty much take his third the moment he sees the natural Nexus finish. I think the reason Korean Protosses prefer to FFE on every map, is that a 2 base economy actually allows for some strategic variety, like going DT without being super all-in for instance.
By the way, that mass DT drop from Sage was pretty goddamned all-in too, so I find it funny how you're so hellbent on kicking Hongun out of Code S, while championing Sage's strategic genius.
No, the Zerg can't take a fast third vs a 3 gate sentry FFE or 2 gate gasless kiwikaki style FE. If you don't have roaches or spines to deal with 3 gate sentry pressure and they see you don't have lair or took a third, you'll die.
The 'mass dt' drop from sage wasn't all-in, and not nearly as all-in as a double stargate or 6 or 7 gate. I never championed Sage as 'strategic genius', I simply said he managed to do a macro oriented opening without losing and without all-inning. He invested less in the DT drop than Zerg had in army at that point in the game too.
|
For EMP and Fungel.... Main problem with game disaing is DINAMIC PATHING.... EMP isnt problem
probem is you cant spleet your army if you ATC only when you in difense... that should be add in HOTS....
you should be able to turn OFF dinamic pathing.... or They could add pathing that when you clock to meve your army they dont gether in BALL but go infront (not group in ball) fowerd not in ball...
pathing is big problem that made SPELLCASTERS wery efective... insted of normal unites...and that is wrong....
|
On September 28 2011 02:56 Belial88 wrote:Show nested quote +Yes, we know, you have no sympathy for Protoss players who 4 gate. We don't blame you. 4-gating is all-in and cheese. So stop going around posting that you have no sympathy. And for the record, no one is asking for your sympathy. Then stop posting that Zerg > Protoss. No one is 'asking' for your thoughts on PvZ either, but this IS a discussion forum.
You are quite pathetic. Clearly I am a huge advocate of ZVP imbalance on these forums. I patrol the forums constantly slamming players who don't play my race for not knowing how to play, and whine OH wait. That would be you.
How is you saying I have no sympathy for Protoss who 4-gate at all relevant to constructive discussion. Do you honestly think that Protoss out there are crying when then GSL Protoss' 4 gate and lose? How is that a topic open for discussion at all. You reserving your sympathy for players who execute an all-in strategy is a discussion topic? If so, thanks for contributing absolutely nothing.
Perhaps you should stop lying about your ladder rank, and teaching people how to play Protoss when you're a Zerg player.
"I'm a Masters random player so I know a thing or two about balance..."
"Oh no I'm going to play to lose my rank 1 Masters because of this infestor change..."
You're a freshly promoted Diamond league player who has NEVER been rank 1 masters EVER.
As sad as it is, you're a liar.
Remember when you told all of us to STFU because Sangho is a Code B Protoss? That was fun.
|
On September 28 2011 03:44 Belial88 wrote:
No, the Zerg can't take a fast third vs a 3 gate sentry FFE or 2 gate gasless kiwikaki style FE. If you don't have roaches or spines to deal with 3 gate sentry pressure and they see you don't have lair or took a third, you'll die.
The 'mass dt' drop from sage wasn't all-in, and not nearly as all-in as a double stargate or 6 or 7 gate. I never championed Sage as 'strategic genius', I simply said he managed to do a macro oriented opening without losing and without all-inning. He invested less in the DT drop than Zerg had in army at that point in the game too.
I didn't say "fast third", I said "third when you confirm the natural being taken", which I stand by. You can take a third against 3 Gate FE at the 7:00 mark and be fine. Not especially familiar with what Kiwikaki does, but I reckon you can take the third after defending his Zealot attack. Do note that one of the primary reasons 3 Gate FE was abandoned, was that it was significantly behind on economy without that much potential for aggression. Nobody does it nowadays. Players prefer to 1 Gate FE when they can't FFE.
And yeah, if that DT drop didn't do damage, Sage would've been way behind. Sounds like an all-in to me. A powerful and cool all-in, perhaps, but an all-in nonetheless. What he did in game 2, with the +1 Zealots sniping the Spore at the third, looked way more stable and promising to me.
|
On September 28 2011 02:28 Thezzy wrote:
"Terrans killing everything" is a rather loose statement.
Whenever a tournament has one race come out ahead the two other ones are suddenly underpowered.
I can distinctly remember when a tournament final ended up being a ZvZ and everyone was talking about how amazing the Zerg players 'must have been'.
The next tournament its a TvT and everyone goes 'nerf Terran'.
Stating that "Terrans killing everything" doesn't add anything.
LoL, I don't even...! How come you act so ignorant, basing your entire point on a single ZvZ final. Look around, 20 Terrans in Code S, 6 Terrans topping MLG. And you say: "Terrans killing everything is loose statement". Last final was TvT if I'm not mistaken, and thats not even a point. Terrans dominate every fucking MLG's, GSL's top-8.
People should stop acting like "everything is ok, balance is fine, and better players happen to play terran". We should really start asking blizzard serious questions. Starcraft 2 is in deep shit, its not even fun to play. 70% of games are not recommended to watch, sooner or later Starcraft 2 will lose all of its viewership. I highly doubt HoTS will change anything. kinda pessimistic, but i don't feel otherwise 
|
On September 28 2011 04:22 bokeevboke wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 02:28 Thezzy wrote:
"Terrans killing everything" is a rather loose statement.
Whenever a tournament has one race come out ahead the two other ones are suddenly underpowered.
I can distinctly remember when a tournament final ended up being a ZvZ and everyone was talking about how amazing the Zerg players 'must have been'.
The next tournament its a TvT and everyone goes 'nerf Terran'.
Stating that "Terrans killing everything" doesn't add anything.
LoL, I don't even...! How come you act so ignorant, basing your entire point on a single ZvZ final. Look around, 20 Terrans in Code S, 6 Terrans topping MLG. And you say: "Terrans killing everything is loose statement". Last final was TvT if I'm not mistaken, and thats not even a point. Terrans dominate every fucking MLG's, GSL's top-8. People should stop acting like "everything is ok, balance is fine, and better players happen to play terran". We should really start asking blizzard serious questions. Starcraft 2 is in deep shit, its not even fun to play. 70% of games are not recommended to watch, sooner or later Starcraft 2 will lose all of its viewership. I highly doubt HoTS will change anything. kinda pessimistic, but i don't feel otherwise
Yeah actually, now that we can watch back one year of the game history,
due to the obvious terran domination during this full year,
we can easily conclude that terran is overpowered in a certain mesure compared to the other races.
|
Terran isn't overpowered. It is simply, as Blizzard themselves have stated, better designed. It flows. If units or tech are forced for whatever reason, it's never a bad thing - it never makes the terran more vulnerable. If anything, forcing tech out of a Terran just gives you more of a headache. But that's a problem with the clunky, uncomfortable Z and P tech trees, nothing more.
|
On September 28 2011 06:22 Umpteen wrote:
Terran isn't overpowered. It is simply, as Blizzard themselves have stated, better designed. It flows. If units or tech are forced for whatever reason, it's never a bad thing - it never makes the terran more vulnerable. If anything, forcing tech out of a Terran just gives you more of a headache. But that's a problem with the clunky, uncomfortable Z and P tech trees, nothing more.
To me, this post seems like generic mumbo-jumbo that doesn't make any sense at all.
TvZ especially feels like walking on a knifes edge - the zerg can force you to overproduce vikings (broodlords), marauders (ultras), ghosts(infestors) and afterwards roll over you with an entirely different army composition. I'm not sure if that's what you mean by forcing tech, but it certainly makes the terran more vulnerable in many ways.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
