EPThttp://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/3278812810
Designated Balance Discussion Thread - Page 135
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
iky43210
United States2099 Posts
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/3278812810 | ||
|
Alzadar
Canada5009 Posts
On October 04 2011 04:55 ChristianS wrote: Comparing scouting zerg to scouting terran or protoss just doesn't make sense. With T and P you want to look for production buildings so you can have an idea of hte kind of composition they'll have in a few minutes. With zerg they just need one tech building for each unit and they can have whatever quantity of whatever unit they want. That means if I scout a spire, I still can't be sure he won't mass banelings and bust my front. I'm not going to look up individual games of Puma killing people with a 111. Suffice to say it appears that Puma has a very intimidating 1-1-1 build he's set up. But you don't need to get a robotics blindly every time any more than a zerg needs to get spore crawlers blindly every game right when DTs show up just in case. Instead zerg tries to get a sentry count, and if it's too low, then they know stargate or DT could be coming, and have to invest accordingly. So if you see 2 marines and a bunker building when you do your pressure with your first stalker (another excellent scouting tool), then there probably isn't a high barracks count. If you see five marines or three marines and a marauder, or three marines and two marauders, or some other high barracks unit count, then he can not be doing a very efficient 1-1-1, and you can afford to delay your robo. Or you can get the robo anyway, start pumping immortals, and kill the marauders from range 6. Your choice. Here you are relying on the Terran player being stupid and tipping his hand. The deal is, after your probe scout is chased away, a Terran simply has to put a bunker at his front with 2-3 marines, and from then on it is impossible to know what the Terran is doing for the next 3 minutes. He could be massing marines just out of vision, he could be doing a 1-1-1, he could be expanding, or he could be rushing cloaked banshees. A Terran that lets you see a Marauder or more than 4 marines with your Stalker poke is playing very poorly. Let me give you an example. Recently I was practicing an Immortal bust build versus a Terran buddy (he's Platinum, I'm Master). The first game I see his forward bunker protecting his natural, so I go for the bust, and since he only has one bunker and like 8 marines, I kill him. The second game I once again see the exact same thing (a forward bunker protecting his natural), and go for the same build. This time though, he actually stayed on one base and got Ghosts and stim. When my bust came, he EMPed my face, stimmed his marines and annihilated my force, and won the game thereafter. To beat a Terran, a Protoss has to both blindly guess correctly what he is doing, and then outplay his opponent. | ||
|
Shiori
3815 Posts
On October 04 2011 05:22 Thrombozyt wrote: Except that there is an extreme pressure on terrans to use MULE because they have the weakest straight up economy because they build worker the slowest. So every time terran scans he falls behind. I'm all for Zerg being able to scan by sacrificing a full inject. Not that the complaining would stop... sacrificing 1 mule to scan isn't the life and death scenario you make it out to be. terran has an extremely efficient mineral dump in the marine, and once they get a second orbital, they can easily maintain a decent economy as long as they're not massing production buildings and pulling scvs off the line. like that's just a ridiculous line of argument. i would certainly sacrifice a few probes for a minute if it means i'd get instant vision of the other guy's entire base. that's still less that a hallucinated phoenix or a robo+obs. nobody is saying your scan is free for opportunity cost. we're saying that sacrificing a paltry amount of minerals to get perfect knowledge is pretty much worth it every time, especially in comparison to what other races have to do (i'd like to point out that if a protoss chronos out probes against terran he's going to lose). | ||
|
Shebuha
Canada1335 Posts
I feel like when I macro vs. a Terran on the ladder I shouldn't lose because I know I have a good grasp on the MU and my builds and strategies feel solid. I feel like when I see the Terran going 1/1/1 that I will either win in a super close battle and have to probably pull probes or lose a Nexus, or I will lose terribly and hardly dent his army. I don't think the 1/1/1 creates a good 'balance' to the mu. It creates, imo, a very heavy favor toward Terran in the early game because even though 1/1/1 is allin, you atleast have a ton of tech going into midgame if you somehow come out of the fight even. Although, if you make a CC while pushing, or before your push, then it will be way weaker and you will probably lose because Protoss almost always has an expo vs. 1/1/1. If a Terran goes 1/1/1 unit composition all game, he will get crushed a lot of the time because when Protoss gets multiple techs (immortals, or HT/archons, or Colossus) he gets waaaaay stronger, but gateway units are pretty darn bad vs. 1/1/1. You either need a TON of them, or a bunch of Immortals for support. In my opinion, if you scout a build or strategy you should be able to stop it if you have the right reaction, but it is hard to react to and stop the 1/1/1 because it has different variations and on each map and spawn positions the attack varies in strength and your defensive positioning will be different. I still need to try more builds vs. 1/1/1 and keep fighting. I feel like my only hope is 1g1r expo or 1g exp --> robo into like 5-6 gates. Can you go 1 gate expand --> fast templar can you get storm out quick enough with constant chrono? I'll have to try that I guess. | ||
|
NoobSkills
United States1601 Posts
On October 04 2011 04:47 SeaSwift wrote: Actually, the Jangbi vs Fantasy games support my argument far more than they do yours. The 2base Carrier build that Jangbi used in TWO of the 5 games was really map dependant (on Pathfinder), and without the maps being so heavily favouring that build it is quite safe to say he would not have won using that build. So, he did not "follow jangbi's strategy". He followed a strategy that was really fucking good on that map, and was well known to be really fucking good on that map. I also find it funny that you accuse me of using too small a sample size later on and then bolster your argument with Jangbi winning one league. I explained why the state was very different for the 1-1-1 and the ZvP in BW before Bisu-era. The win rates were just evidence to back it up, and I apologise that there is not enough evidence out there to use for this decisively. You reference JYP and Genius. Genius beat ThorZain because ThorZain played abominably, forgetting to seige his tanks before fighting. JYP massively outplayed his opponent, both through micro and macro so it is no surprise he managed to win that one. JYP then went on to get crushed by Puma using the same build, so it clearly isn't a case of consistently beating a cheese and having "figured it out". You're looking too far into the maps rather than the overall game. I agree that those maps favor protoss and that strategy, but he didn't only get those maps throughout all his OSL run and he didn't only play Fantasy, but Flash and Baby as well. Your sample size is one month of 1-1-1 in Korean SC2. The sample size I was using was that PvZ in Korea was an extremely hard match up for years until someone decided to add a little something extra. Now, I'm not totally going to throw out ALL balance discussion. 1-1-1 Probably still can be beaten by using FF to keep the opponenet up his ramp until you get colossi. Chronoboosting upgrades and citadel upgrades also help a ton. This all aside though I think the one thing that should/could be discussed about imbalance is the mule. Early game +300 minerals several times really helps any push. Chronoboost and Larva inject are just not nearly as powerful as that. The mule late game also becomes an issue where now terran can basically go down to 18 SCVs and just use mules, but this isn't the bigger factor yet. But as far as the 1-1-1 being proven OP after 1 month I don't see it yet. | ||
|
jsemmens
United States439 Posts
| ||
|
Thrombozyt
Germany1269 Posts
On October 04 2011 06:04 Shiori wrote: sacrificing 1 mule to scan isn't the life and death scenario you make it out to be. terran has an extremely efficient mineral dump in the marine, and once they get a second orbital, they can easily maintain a decent economy as long as they're not massing production buildings and pulling scvs off the line. like that's just a ridiculous line of argument. i would certainly sacrifice a few probes for a minute if it means i'd get instant vision of the other guy's entire base. that's still less that a hallucinated phoenix or a robo+obs. nobody is saying your scan is free for opportunity cost. we're saying that sacrificing a paltry amount of minerals to get perfect knowledge is pretty much worth it every time, especially in comparison to what other races have to do (i'd like to point out that if a protoss chronos out probes against terran he's going to lose). I never said that sacrificing a MULE for a scan is life and death threatening. I just said you fall behind in economy, so you better have to get something substantial. Also let me just state that you vastly overestimate the scan range. Even in the smallest base like XNC you cannot gain perfect information from one scan. Scan does not magically reveal the whole map, which would be required for 'perfect knowledge'. One scan is a gamble just like saccing an overlord. Zerg can place their buildings either in the main, or the nat or on the creep highway inbetween. Once lair hits, they can put their tech anywhere they deem it safe. No terran can spare 3 scans for a proper base sweep that early in the game like you propose. Again, give protoss the ability to sacrifice 3 probes for a scan.. doubt it would be used that much. | ||
|
Salteador Neo
Andorra5591 Posts
On October 04 2011 19:38 Thrombozyt wrote: I never said that sacrificing a MULE for a scan is life and death threatening. I just said you fall behind in economy, so you better have to get something substantial. Also let me just state that you vastly overestimate the scan range. Even in the smallest base like XNC you cannot gain perfect information from one scan. Scan does not magically reveal the whole map, which would be required for 'perfect knowledge'. One scan is a gamble just like saccing an overlord. Zerg can place their buildings either in the main, or the nat or on the creep highway inbetween. Once lair hits, they can put their tech anywhere they deem it safe. No terran can spare 3 scans for a proper base sweep that early in the game like you propose. Again, give protoss the ability to sacrifice 3 probes for a scan.. doubt it would be used that much. Lol what a joke. Losing 12+ probes to a cloakshee is so cool. Just watching a minute of GSL TvT here. Quoting the gracken, it totally feels like 2 guys throwing imba crap at each other. | ||
|
TacticalLemur
United States3 Posts
Make Charge 150/150 like in Broodwar or separate the leg speed and charge. Put leg speed on the cybercore to help against speedlings, speed roaches, maruader slow and stim. Leave the charge ability on the Twilight council. Protoss is usually gas starved to any reduction in the cost of this upgrade or even moving it would be a big help. Lower build time by 5 seconds and fucking leave it alone. I should be able to chrono out zealots for early aggression not chrono out zealots so the build time is normal. Stalker: A slight base damage increase is in order I think. They need to be able to kill marines, zerglings, and workers in fewer shots than they do. A 125/50 unit should not lose to marines with no upgrades without taking serious loses but that's not the case. Their uprades should scale a little better also. Either +2 +0 upgrades or +1 +1 upgrades. Just depends on the base damage increase. Stalkers have worse base damage than a 50 mineral marine so this change really should go through. Sentries. Sentry "good unit" they cost a a lot of gas but forcefields are quite good. If any change was done to the sentry I'd want a range increase so they don't get picked off as easily. I try to micro them back and they just get stuck on stalkers and then raped. Again not necessary they are meant to be vulnerable considering how good they are. They could add hallucinated observers like people mentioned probably a year ago. Would help against coin flip builds and make gateway style safe against cloak or borrow units. DarkTemplar: get rid of the dark shrine. DT expand should be a viable build and I guess it is to a certain degree but the investment that it takes may end the game for you. With the change to the overseer I don't forsee this being horrible against Zerg; plus Zergs always get spores to stop stargate play or even DTs to begin with. Add time to the templar archives and the twilight council if time is an issue. The Citadal of Adun and the Templar Archives were 60 seconds in Broodwar their counterparts in SC2 are 50 seconds. I would take whatever time increase they want to throw out to be able to chose to make DTs or HTs depending on what I might scout. High Templar: Increase the movement speed to 2.25. This is the same speed as the other casters and the speed of many protoss units such as the colossus, immortal, sentry, and zealot without speed. Bring back Broodwar Khaydarin Amulet 62/250 energy would be fine with me. Less time to wait on storm and more energy to be taken away with EMP. Immortal: lower build time by 5-10 seconds. It was raised in the beta because immortal busts on terran were imba but I think modern terrans would laugh at such a push now. This would help against 1/1/1 play. Colossus: I hate making colossus for sure especially in PvP. I think the colossus should have a damage nerf in favor of stronger gateway units. To offset this change maybe make the AOE of the colossus bigger. Void Ray: Void rays are situational but still quite good even though they cost 150 gas. The only change I would make right now is give them the 1 armor back that was taken away in the beta to compensate for the other nerfs. They evaporate pretty badly to marine fire so this would help in that respect. Carrier: The most common change brought up for this unit is the build time. 120 seconds is a little too long. I'd recommend 100 seconds which is 10 seconds more than a Battlecruiser. Carriers have to build 4 interceptors to become useful in battle anyway so this build time change will offset that. And I think the Carrier should get it's 4 armor back. Carriers melt to Marines and that simply shouldn't happen. The interceptors themselves need a change also; they should bring back the healing aspect from Broodwar but that might be too strong so maybe increase the heal/shields/armor of the interceptors so they can take more punishment. Mothership: Most useless unit in SC2. Can be good but easily destroyed and costs too much. They already pretty much reverted the acceleration change they made in patch 2 of the beta and then some. I think they should just revert all of those changes; I don't see any of them as game breaking considering how bad the Mothership is now. Archons, Warp Prisms, Phoenix, and Observers seem to be in a good place right now. They serve their purpose. A lot of this stuff has been said before over the past year but I just wanted to see what people think now that Protoss is struggling at the professional level. | ||
|
Xequecal
United States473 Posts
2. You can't touch the dark shrine. Even taking 20 seconds off the build time of the dark shrine completely destroys PvP, as now DT rush beats 4 gate. 3. Increasing Stalker damage is fairly imbalanced against Zerg. 6 gate is just retarded if they can naturally three-shot zerglings with +1. Protoss doesn't need buffs, Terran needs to be nerfed. The biggest problem is MULE still gives them an (ever-increasing) advantage in the lategame while spawn larva and chrono boost stop doing much. MULE should just be removed from the game. Supply call is worth ~140 minerals and stops doing anything when you're supply capped, just like the other two macro mechanics. All the "overpowered" Terran units won't seem that way when they have 3000 less minerals in the midgame. Getting rid of MULE fixes everything. It weakens 1 base tech allins by decreasing the mineral income both through having to pull off many SCVs from mining to build everything and from providing less to start with. It fixes the lategame 15 ghost army problem because now they don't have the resources to get that many ghosts off like 3 bases. At the same time it lets them keep their signature unit, the Marine. | ||
|
humbre
353 Posts
| ||
|
Rob28
Canada705 Posts
On October 04 2011 19:38 Thrombozyt wrote: I never said that sacrificing a MULE for a scan is life and death threatening. I just said you fall behind in economy, so you better have to get something substantial. I wouldn't say you "fall behind in economy" so much as you "don't pull as far ahead in economy as you could". This all goes way back to the whole "does not using a MULE actually cost you money" debate that was thouroughly debunked months ago. Fact is, all protoss players would trade chronoboost in a heartbeat for the abilities an orbital has. | ||
|
secretary bird
447 Posts
Protoss and Zergs will always have way more mining without MULES unless they heavily cut economy. Even with MULES if both players play as greedy as possible for 10 min, terran has the worst income , that has been proven before. And even if the terran macro mechanic was better and terran was able to get the better economy almost every game which is somewhat true for Zerg actually, its just one part of the game and doesnt make it imbalanced. The Zerg and Protoss macro mechanics are never useless no matter how late in the game btw. | ||
|
Zanno
United States1484 Posts
On October 04 2011 02:38 NoobSkills wrote: this is very wrong, many things were changedAnyone ever look at balance this way? In broodwar no patches were ever made (from what I see) to change the effects of the units unless it was considered a glitch. http://us.blizzard.com/support/article.xml?locale=en_US&articleId=21150 Now, in Starcraft Vanilla there was a monetary change to the spawning pool changing the mineral requirement from 150 to 200 because of how effective a zergling rush could be. That change made it so the VERY early game was not imbalanced. + Show Spoiler + -------------------- Balance Changes 1.08 -------------------- TERRAN: Valkyrie: - Damage increase to 6 per missile. - Acceleration and velocity increased slightly. - Build time decreased. Science Facility: - Build time decreased. - Irradiate research cost increased to 200 minerals, 200 gas. - Yamato Cannon research cost decreased to 100 minerals, 100 gas. Missile Turret: - Decreased cost to 75 minerals. Factory: - Charon Missile Booster research cost decreased to 100 minerals, 100 gas. Dropship: - Increased speed. Goliath: - Increased ground attack range. Battle Cruiser: - Build time decreased. - Supply cost decreased to 6. PROTOSS: Dragoon: - Build time increased. Scout: - Decreased cost to 275 minerals, 125 gas. Carrier: - Supply cost decreased to 6. Templar: - Psi Storm Damage reduced. Corsair: - Disruption Web spell duration decreased. Zealot: - Shields decreased to 60 and hit points increased to 100. ZERG: Queen: - Decreased build cost to 100 minerals, 100 gas. Ultralisk: - Supply cost decreased to 4. Queen's Nest: - Spawn Broodling cost decreased to 100 minerals, 100 gas. Hydralisk Den: - Lurker Aspect cost increased to 200 minerals, 200 gas. - Hydralisk speed upgrade cost increased to 150 minerals, 150 gas. Spawning Pool: - Increased build cost to 200 minerals Sunken Colony: - Building armor increased to 2. - Hit points decreased to 300. 1.08 was the final balance patch, then warcraft 3 went into alpha testing and from thereon they only released patches for bugfixes 1.08 came out way after broodwar did | ||
|
Capiachi
78 Posts
This thread is looking more and more to what happened to WoW competative arena. Im very scared of what that might do to this game. Because by the looks of it everyone wants the same ability that race X has. And people keep comparing race X's ability 1 to race Z's ability 2. The thing that disturbes me the most is not discussing general balance, but the nonexistant reasoning of wanting races to be different. Im using WoW, only because I've experienced it myself and talked/read what pro's stated. WoW was pretty competative for a while, but as the game progressed blizzard listened to what the general public wanted. A new class(Race if you will, for those of you who did not play it) was born, the Death Knight. A race that could do almost everything good another class could do. This was an igniting spark for WoW. After that other classes(races, again, if you will) began to get similar abilities to what others had. Making them more and more alike eachother. Now I understand this, because balancing a game with different types of classes(races) at different levels of play CAN NOT be done. Its impossible, thats why I would rank Counter-Strike to be one of the most balanced games I've played, because at the end of the day, all they needed to do was to fix maps and weapons to perfect balance. Im getting to the point of that I'm scared that all races in starcraft 2 will have scan, warpgates of little difference and a linear economy. I still like this game for what it is now and I'm sure old BW players like that game for what that is. I like it when a build X counters build Z but Q counters X. Balance discussion is always hard and I agree, hard corners(like the 1-1-1 that you were discussing) could be softened up a little. And balancing this game without making races alike as much as possible is something I will support. But for the love of god, don't make this game into a 1 race different skins game. To sum up, I just wish people would'nt compare(EXAMPLE INC) scans to overseer to observer. Please keep races different... | ||
|
wheelchairs
United States145 Posts
Im not saying this is fact, but it does make some sense, what are you guys' thoughts? Will Protoss get more wins when some older stale players move down and new styles move up into code S and take opponents by surprise? | ||
|
Neelia
Germany599 Posts
On October 04 2011 21:54 Xequecal wrote: Supply call is worth ~140 minerals and stops doing anything when you're supply capped, just like the other two macro mechanics. All the "overpowered" Terran units won't seem that way when they have 3000 less minerals in the midgame. Stockpiling larva to remax in <1 minute after a battle equals "stopped working when maxed"? The supplycap doesn't deny creep spread or chronoboost either. | ||
|
Thrombozyt
Germany1269 Posts
On October 04 2011 20:57 TacticalLemur wrote: Zealot: Give back the 10 shields that were taken away in the beta from Broodwar. Make Charge 150/150 like in Broodwar or separate the leg speed and charge. Put leg speed on the cybercore to help against speedlings, speed roaches, maruader slow and stim. Leave the charge ability on the Twilight council. Protoss is usually gas starved to any reduction in the cost of this upgrade or even moving it would be a big help. Lower build time by 5 seconds and fucking leave it alone. I should be able to chrono out zealots for early aggression not chrono out zealots so the build time is normal. + Show Spoiler + Stalker: A slight base damage increase is in order I think. They need to be able to kill marines, zerglings, and workers in fewer shots than they do. A 125/50 unit should not lose to marines with no upgrades without taking serious loses but that's not the case. Their uprades should scale a little better also. Either +2 +0 upgrades or +1 +1 upgrades. Just depends on the base damage increase. Stalkers have worse base damage than a 50 mineral marine so this change really should go through. Sentries. Sentry "good unit" they cost a a lot of gas but forcefields are quite good. If any change was done to the sentry I'd want a range increase so they don't get picked off as easily. I try to micro them back and they just get stuck on stalkers and then raped. Again not necessary they are meant to be vulnerable considering how good they are. They could add hallucinated observers like people mentioned probably a year ago. Would help against coin flip builds and make gateway style safe against cloak or borrow units. DarkTemplar: get rid of the dark shrine. DT expand should be a viable build and I guess it is to a certain degree but the investment that it takes may end the game for you. With the change to the overseer I don't forsee this being horrible against Zerg; plus Zergs always get spores to stop stargate play or even DTs to begin with. Add time to the templar archives and the twilight council if time is an issue. The Citadal of Adun and the Templar Archives were 60 seconds in Broodwar their counterparts in SC2 are 50 seconds. I would take whatever time increase they want to throw out to be able to chose to make DTs or HTs depending on what I might scout. High Templar: Increase the movement speed to 2.25. This is the same speed as the other casters and the speed of many protoss units such as the colossus, immortal, sentry, and zealot without speed. Bring back Broodwar Khaydarin Amulet 62/250 energy would be fine with me. Less time to wait on storm and more energy to be taken away with EMP. Immortal: lower build time by 5-10 seconds. It was raised in the beta because immortal busts on terran were imba but I think modern terrans would laugh at such a push now. This would help against 1/1/1 play. Colossus: I hate making colossus for sure especially in PvP. I think the colossus should have a damage nerf in favor of stronger gateway units. To offset this change maybe make the AOE of the colossus bigger. Void Ray: Void rays are situational but still quite good even though they cost 150 gas. The only change I would make right now is give them the 1 armor back that was taken away in the beta to compensate for the other nerfs. They evaporate pretty badly to marine fire so this would help in that respect. Carrier: The most common change brought up for this unit is the build time. 120 seconds is a little too long. I'd recommend 100 seconds which is 10 seconds more than a Battlecruiser. Carriers have to build 4 interceptors to become useful in battle anyway so this build time change will offset that. And I think the Carrier should get it's 4 armor back. Carriers melt to Marines and that simply shouldn't happen. The interceptors themselves need a change also; they should bring back the healing aspect from Broodwar but that might be too strong so maybe increase the heal/shields/armor of the interceptors so they can take more punishment. Mothership: Most useless unit in SC2. Can be good but easily destroyed and costs too much. They already pretty much reverted the acceleration change they made in patch 2 of the beta and then some. I think they should just revert all of those changes; I don't see any of them as game breaking considering how bad the Mothership is now. Archons, Warp Prisms, Phoenix, and Observers seem to be in a good place right now. They serve their purpose. A lot of this stuff has been said before over the past year but I just wanted to see what people think now that Protoss is struggling at the professional level. So you honestly think that there should be a buff for two thirds of protoss units to make them balanced? OK.. the colossus change was just a change not a straight buff.. still.. lol? | ||
|
zbedlam
Australia549 Posts
On October 05 2011 00:32 Thrombozyt wrote: So you honestly think that there should be a buff for two thirds of protoss units to make them balanced? OK.. the colossus change was just a change not a straight buff.. still.. lol? I don't think his post should be taken too seriously. If any of those changes were implemented it would basically break ZvP. Although I do agree colossi need something done to them, something like a redesign. Current state of TvP is bad, granted; but remember protoss can still field the strongest endgame army. None of their units need buffs, I feel they need a defenders advantage against terran. | ||
|
Slunk
Germany768 Posts
On October 05 2011 00:47 zbedlam wrote: I don't think his post should be taken too seriously. If any of those changes were implemented it would basically break ZvP. Although I do agree colossi need something done to them, something like a redesign. Current state of TvP is bad, granted; but remember protoss can still field the strongest endgame army. None of their units need buffs, I feel they need a defenders advantage against terran. Best endgame army? What are you talking about? When did you last see a protoss kill a terran army of just cheapass bio, viking and ghosts? | ||
| ||
