On October 15 2011 15:22 Wire wrote: Just curious to see the flavors of answers to this question:
why is hydralisk not tier 1?
I don't know, but given how bad it is I'm glad it isn't :p at least we're not forced to make any.
Seriously, roaches are good for ZvZ, and make the matchup more stable. They're also needed to deal with gateway pushes. If the hydralisk stays what it is, a weak high DPS unit that can shoot up and down, I don't see any reason why it would be better than roaches at T1.
ZvP would become 100% winrate with Hydra rushes.
Queens just don't cut it when it comes to voidray or banshees, and having hydras at tier 1 would allow zerg to defend without sacrificing as much eco to make spores.
I havent heard that since beta. Zerg pros seem to do fantastic against Stargate/Banshees with the proper scouting and preparation.
And yet 1-1-1 is metagame apparently and not imbalanced, according to Blizz.
What about the immortal buff? Blizz specifically said 1-1-1 was a problem. I think they did the right move in trying to let the metagame work it out, but giving a small nudge.
For what it's worth, it's nowhere near as big as the roach buff for several reasons:
- 5 to 6 is a smaller % increase than 3 to 4 - You can't make that many immortals, it's not a staple unit like the roach
I'm not saying it sucks, but it's not a very large buff and it does not address the problem at all. So what if your handful of immortals will shoot 1cm further? How does that relate to stopping banshee + Raven + marines + siege tanks?
And, sure, Blizzard is "nudging" toward potential 1-1-1 solutions. But as Toadvine indicated earlier, if this is their general policy, then they sure have a funny way of applying it across the board, with the gigantic nerfs Protoss has received.
Why didn't they apply this "soft nudge" policy to warpgates, or blink rush, instead of delaying them by half a minute? Did Void Rays get a soft nudge? Did KA warrant full on removal, instead of a value nerf?
Blizzard has no problem taking a hammer to things. And yet they are only nudging at a solution to 1-1-1. Why the double standard? The very same patch which is "nudging" against 1-1-1 just wrecked blink rush.
I don't like the way David Kim operates, especially if things like Catz' influence (mentioned in Toadvine's post) are true.
For the record, I'm not suggesting that Catz has some sort of nefarious influence over David Kim. If I remember correctly, it was a game between Kiwikaki and Machine on Lost Temple in some tournament, with Catz co-casting it, and commenting upon Kiwi's build, which he obviously faced in practice a fair bit. In no way am I claiming that I know who holds the most influence with David Kim and his balancing ideas.
Still, that was the first time I heard about the notion of removing Flux Vanes.
Edit:
Jump to 5:30.
Thanks for posting a source! Obviously it's not some silly conspiracy theory .
It's just that David Kim's approach, or at least what we know about it, seems completely inconsistent (the double standards have been pointed out above, so I won't repeat them here). I obviously don't think he would have some malicious ulterior motive, but it's clear that there should be a much larger panel of people handling balance at Blizzard.
The contradictions in his approach are piling up, and it's hurting the game.
I think one of the fundamental imbalances in the game is that the race that needs the least expansions has the easiest and safest time taking them by a mile, and also has by far the easiest time defending expansions. Terran can stay on one base for so long and be on even footing with a two base Protoss or Zerg thanks to MULEs and extremely cost-efficient units, but at the same time they can expand with virtually no risk at any time, thanks to the ability to build a CC in-base. When a Terran expansion is busted, they can just lift off, pull their SCVs and fall back to their ramp, but a Protoss or Zerg will take crippling damage.
I'm not sure what could really be done about it, maybe making building lift require a Factory?
Hydra/ling/roach is very effective against gateway units, but pure hydra trades fairly evenly in a straight up fight (and suffers badly if Protoss engages smartly).
Hydra/ling/roach is very effective against gateway units, but pure hydra trades fairly evenly in a straight up fight (and suffers badly if Protoss engages smartly).
The only time I have ever seen an "even trade" is if the protoss has more upgrades, has a great spread with guardian sheild, hydras are not being reinforced (but gateway units are), and blink stalkers are micro'd perfectly
Don't recall the exact match, but the I beleive the one I am thinking of is between idra and huk on metalopolis (battle was in top leftish)
On October 16 2011 08:58 Alzadar wrote: I think one of the fundamental imbalances in the game is that the race that needs the least expansions has the easiest and safest time taking them by a mile, and also has by far the easiest time defending expansions. Terran can stay on one base for so long and be on even footing with a two base Protoss or Zerg thanks to MULEs and extremely cost-efficient units, but at the same time they can expand with virtually no risk at any time, thanks to the ability to build a CC in-base. When a Terran expansion is busted, they can just lift off, pull their SCVs and fall back to their ramp, but a Protoss or Zerg will take crippling damage.
I'm not sure what could really be done about it, maybe making building lift require a Factory?
The simplest solution would be to make it so CCs can't lift off. Yes, it doesn't follow the Terran trait of liftable buildings but it puts them on equal footing with the other races in terms of risks you have to take when expanding, and gives the other races vital scouting information because they can actually know if the Terran is planning to expand or do something else instead of going to the natural, seeing nothing, poking up the ramp, seeing a few marines and continuing to be in the dark until appropriate tech comes out to scout effectively (which is too late in some cases).
On October 16 2011 08:58 Alzadar wrote: I think one of the fundamental imbalances in the game is that the race that needs the least expansions has the easiest and safest time taking them by a mile, and also has by far the easiest time defending expansions. Terran can stay on one base for so long and be on even footing with a two base Protoss or Zerg thanks to MULEs and extremely cost-efficient units, but at the same time they can expand with virtually no risk at any time, thanks to the ability to build a CC in-base. When a Terran expansion is busted, they can just lift off, pull their SCVs and fall back to their ramp, but a Protoss or Zerg will take crippling damage.
I'm not sure what could really be done about it, maybe making building lift require a Factory?
The simplest solution would be to make it so CCs can't lift off. Yes, it doesn't follow the Terran trait of liftable buildings but it puts them on equal footing with the other races in terms of risks you have to take when expanding, and gives the other races vital scouting information because they can actually know if the Terran is planning to expand or do something else instead of going to the natural, seeing nothing, poking up the ramp, seeing a few marines and continuing to be in the dark until appropriate tech comes out to scout effectively (which is too late in some cases).
Less drastic would be just making orbital commands unable to lift and leaving normal command centres unchanged. Have to give orbitals a new name, probably.
Would also have the happy consequence adding disincentive to lift-off stalemate play.
Hydra/ling/roach is very effective against gateway units, but pure hydra trades fairly evenly in a straight up fight (and suffers badly if Protoss engages smartly).
The only time I have ever seen an "even trade" is if the protoss has more upgrades, has a great spread with guardian sheild, hydras are not being reinforced (but gateway units are), and blink stalkers are micro'd perfectly
Don't recall the exact match, but the I beleive the one I am thinking of is between idra and huk on metalopolis (battle was in top leftish)
Go test in the unit tester if you don't believe me. A 30 supply stalker/zealot army vs 30 supply of hydras a-moved into one another come out roughly even. You either get a 4 or 5 hydras suriviving or 4-5 stalkers, depending on zealot/stalker mix and exactly how the engagement goes down. A small advantage early on quickly snowballs leaving one side or the other with 4-5 units left. I didn't inlcude guardian shield, which works heavily in Protoss favour, nor engage on creep which heavily shifts the advantage to Zerg. Once blink/charge are researched, and/or Protoss gains the upgrade advantage (something they always should do given chronoboost), it becomes bad for Zerg.
Of course, hydra/ling tears through gateway armies very well, to the point where T1 hydras in their present shape, even without range, really would be overpowered (though nowhere near as well a gateway/collosus army tears through hydras/ling).
problem: marine 3/3 stim DPS is fucking insane Solution: keep baseline dps the same, but make attacks slower and more damaging, diminishing the effects of attack upgrades Side effects: marines wont be used as much (maybe) and it will be harder to go very marine heavy in the late game
Terran can stay on one base for so long and be on even footing with a two base Protoss or Zerg thanks to MULEs
You say this because of the 1/1/1. You must because 1 base all ins vs zerg are shit. I see your 1/1/1 and raise you an Immortal All In.
So, what's your opinion on the immortal all in? Is it stronger than the 1-1-1? I understand that Blizzard increased the range of the immortal because of the 1-1-1's power. Do any changes to Terran units need to be changed as a result of this immortal all in?
Immortals are excellent against bunkers. Should units in bunkers have more range?
On October 15 2011 15:42 kofman wrote: TvZ is balanced, the only reason why people are suddenly complaining about it is the GSL graph. However, if you actually play the MU, I think you would find that its probably the best MU in the game, both in terms of balance and gameplay. One mistake for either side could cost you the game; having a bad engagement as zerg, or getting caught unseiged as terran. It's pretty ridiculous how much people read into just a number. Remember, Nestea lost to the the best player in the world, MVP, 3-2. It could have gone either way.
This. Blizzard did a poll a while back about people's favorite matchups to watch. All the mirror match-ups were in last, with PvP at 1%. TvP was the least favorite of the other match-ups, then PvZ, and ZvT was easily on top with like 33% of the total vote.
Metagames shift. Look at winrates for Brood War in TvZ, and you'll see massive "imbalances" in the direction of one race, then the other for long periods of time. But between when Terran was winning constantly and when Zerg was winning constantly, the game wasn't patched to fix balance. People just figured out new strategies and the other race needed a while to figure out a response.
Indeed, there were long periods of time in BW, where Terran was dominating TvZ, and long periods of time where Zerg was winning more.
Now, show me a period of time where either Protoss or Zerg dominated Terran in SC2. The only time Protoss was notably ahead in PvT (at like 55% or somesuch), they instantly got KA removed, which was a huge gamechanging nerf. What's even funnier, judging by current Terran play, KA could easily be reintroduced back into the game without making PvT imbalanced. So yeah, David Kim (and the legion of Terran players whining about KA on forums) clearly don't believe in the BW doctrine of "letting it work itself out".
I'd actually prefer to have Protoss and Zerg staight-up buffed for the time being. And even though I do believe Terran is by far the best-designed race, I don't necessarily think they should be looked up to as an good example to follow. Some aspects of Terran - like Salvage or MULEs - are just stupid, and would make the game worse even if it was balanced.
@bolded part: exactly!
That's where most of the whining comes from imo. Only with Terran does Blizzard err on the side of "letting it work itself out."
Meanwhile, benign rushes like blink rush (which is a huge risk) get nerfed to the ground. I keep saying it, because I find it ridiculous. 30 seconds is way, way too huge a nerf. That's half a minute nerf on a build that wasn't even a problem!
Have you seen the list of Protoss nerfs since beta? They're huge. You've got values like "30 seconds" being thrown around. Protoss as a race was practically butchered, with entire things being removed straight up (Flux Vanes, KA). And yet 1-1-1 is metagame apparently and not imbalanced, according to Blizz.
Even the absolute earliest beta complaint from Protoss was deemed metagame. Gateway units get creamed by rax units. The complaints fell on deaf ears. This resulted in using FF to survive on 1 base and get colossus asap. The very foundations of Protoss play are based on this lopsided consideration from Blizzard.
Many people have been of the opinion that Terran is the "most complete" race. This does not mean that they are imbalanced, but it does mean that many consider them the best-constructed (most fun to play, most intuitive, most strategically interesting are all examples of "better-constructed" traits that are not necessarily imbalanced). As a result, Blizzard has been a lot more eager to make changes (both positive AND negative) to the other races, rather than Terran. Protoss has gotten some big nerfs (although 30 seconds is not so high. Honestly, anything less than 30 seconds and a nerf just doesn't really mean anything, e.g. barracks nerf) as well as buffs (massive changes to immortal and warp prism, for instance). Terran has gotten some big and obvious nerfs (reaper rush nerf being probably the biggest), but nothing too game-changing. I can't remember the last time Terran got a really big buff (ghost cost is significant, but not all that huge).
On October 16 2011 10:46 Orbiter wrote: problem: marine 3/3 stim DPS is fucking insane Solution: keep baseline dps the same, but make attacks slower and more damaging, diminishing the effects of attack upgrades Side effects: marines wont be used as much (maybe) and it will be harder to go very marine heavy in the late game
So marines with 3/3 and stim (and presumably medivacs?) have high DPS. They are also incredibly low on hit points, and with small unit models, they get destroyed by AoE (tanks, banelings, FG, colossi, etc.).
Can I ask why this is a bad thing? They're strong for attack, but they die quickly. TvP and TvT, Terrans rarely go very marine-heavy late game anyway, because of the aforementioned tanks and colossi. TvZ they are largely used in drops, which is the primary Terran way to get any control back when faced with mutalisk harass.
Hydras are bad because of their design (low health, relatively low damage, high cost). Zerg anti-air is just fine, no one is having any trouble with anti-air as Zerg right now. Hydras should be fully removed from the game, since they fit no role. Currently they lose to mutas, phoenix, and banshees when timed (only single stargate is when hydras shine), and have no place in end game or even mid-game battles. Even in ZvZ mutas beat them, as well as roaches.
I'm not a zerg player and i think that Hydra DPS and life is fine. They are kind of in the glass canon role and given that roaches have so much life and are the best meat sheild ever (and still do a ton of damage), I think this is fine.
however one thing that has bothered me about the hydra is how slow it is. for the sake of zergs everywhere, i sure hope u get an upgrade that gives you more speed. slow hydras just dont feel very swarmy.
No matter the army size, though, the only way a protoss army is going to trade evenly with a hydra army is if it is heavily micro'd and is able to engage on a friendly area of the map
It is very rare to face JUST hydras though, and raoches and lings just make hydras even more powerful
Hydra's DPS is actually one of the strongest in the game. It's just that they have too little HP and are slow as hell off creep.
That's why Roach/Hydra was such a popular unit composition vs gateway units until mass Colo got popular.
Hm.. I just looked it up and Zealots and Immortals are actually as slow as Hydras off creep. All 3 units have 2.25 movement speed. Edit: And the Marauder apparently.. it's actually not as slow as I thought it was.. -_____-;;
On October 15 2011 15:42 kofman wrote: TvZ is balanced, the only reason why people are suddenly complaining about it is the GSL graph. However, if you actually play the MU, I think you would find that its probably the best MU in the game, both in terms of balance and gameplay. One mistake for either side could cost you the game; having a bad engagement as zerg, or getting caught unseiged as terran. It's pretty ridiculous how much people read into just a number. Remember, Nestea lost to the the best player in the world, MVP, 3-2. It could have gone either way.
This. Blizzard did a poll a while back about people's favorite matchups to watch. All the mirror match-ups were in last, with PvP at 1%. TvP was the least favorite of the other match-ups, then PvZ, and ZvT was easily on top with like 33% of the total vote.
Metagames shift. Look at winrates for Brood War in TvZ, and you'll see massive "imbalances" in the direction of one race, then the other for long periods of time. But between when Terran was winning constantly and when Zerg was winning constantly, the game wasn't patched to fix balance. People just figured out new strategies and the other race needed a while to figure out a response.
Indeed, there were long periods of time in BW, where Terran was dominating TvZ, and long periods of time where Zerg was winning more.
Now, show me a period of time where either Protoss or Zerg dominated Terran in SC2. The only time Protoss was notably ahead in PvT (at like 55% or somesuch), they instantly got KA removed, which was a huge gamechanging nerf. What's even funnier, judging by current Terran play, KA could easily be reintroduced back into the game without making PvT imbalanced. So yeah, David Kim (and the legion of Terran players whining about KA on forums) clearly don't believe in the BW doctrine of "letting it work itself out".
I'd actually prefer to have Protoss and Zerg staight-up buffed for the time being. And even though I do believe Terran is by far the best-designed race, I don't necessarily think they should be looked up to as an good example to follow. Some aspects of Terran - like Salvage or MULEs - are just stupid, and would make the game worse even if it was balanced.
@bolded part: exactly!
That's where most of the whining comes from imo. Only with Terran does Blizzard err on the side of "letting it work itself out."
Meanwhile, benign rushes like blink rush (which is a huge risk) get nerfed to the ground. I keep saying it, because I find it ridiculous. 30 seconds is way, way too huge a nerf. That's half a minute nerf on a build that wasn't even a problem!
Have you seen the list of Protoss nerfs since beta? They're huge. You've got values like "30 seconds" being thrown around. Protoss as a race was practically butchered, with entire things being removed straight up (Flux Vanes, KA). And yet 1-1-1 is metagame apparently and not imbalanced, according to Blizz.
Even the absolute earliest beta complaint from Protoss was deemed metagame. Gateway units get creamed by rax units. The complaints fell on deaf ears. This resulted in using FF to survive on 1 base and get colossus asap. The very foundations of Protoss play are based on this lopsided consideration from Blizzard.
LOL, you are complaining about the toss nerfs, while terran has definetly been nerfed the most: - bunker build time increase -reaper build time increase - seige tank damage nerf - rax build time increase - stim research time increase - hellion nerf - ghost nerf - bunker salvage decrease
To note, people say that the 1-1-1 metagame is not being nerfed? Immortal range was at 5 for a long time, and but the buff came. I'd like to think that they're still observing it, still watching and seeing what can be done so that the nerf (in whatever form) is not entirely game breaking. Or, it will be worked out. Somehow.
On October 15 2011 15:42 kofman wrote: TvZ is balanced, the only reason why people are suddenly complaining about it is the GSL graph. However, if you actually play the MU, I think you would find that its probably the best MU in the game, both in terms of balance and gameplay. One mistake for either side could cost you the game; having a bad engagement as zerg, or getting caught unseiged as terran. It's pretty ridiculous how much people read into just a number. Remember, Nestea lost to the the best player in the world, MVP, 3-2. It could have gone either way.
This. Blizzard did a poll a while back about people's favorite matchups to watch. All the mirror match-ups were in last, with PvP at 1%. TvP was the least favorite of the other match-ups, then PvZ, and ZvT was easily on top with like 33% of the total vote.
Metagames shift. Look at winrates for Brood War in TvZ, and you'll see massive "imbalances" in the direction of one race, then the other for long periods of time. But between when Terran was winning constantly and when Zerg was winning constantly, the game wasn't patched to fix balance. People just figured out new strategies and the other race needed a while to figure out a response.
Indeed, there were long periods of time in BW, where Terran was dominating TvZ, and long periods of time where Zerg was winning more.
Now, show me a period of time where either Protoss or Zerg dominated Terran in SC2. The only time Protoss was notably ahead in PvT (at like 55% or somesuch), they instantly got KA removed, which was a huge gamechanging nerf. What's even funnier, judging by current Terran play, KA could easily be reintroduced back into the game without making PvT imbalanced. So yeah, David Kim (and the legion of Terran players whining about KA on forums) clearly don't believe in the BW doctrine of "letting it work itself out".
I'd actually prefer to have Protoss and Zerg staight-up buffed for the time being. And even though I do believe Terran is by far the best-designed race, I don't necessarily think they should be looked up to as an good example to follow. Some aspects of Terran - like Salvage or MULEs - are just stupid, and would make the game worse even if it was balanced.
@bolded part: exactly!
That's where most of the whining comes from imo. Only with Terran does Blizzard err on the side of "letting it work itself out."
Meanwhile, benign rushes like blink rush (which is a huge risk) get nerfed to the ground. I keep saying it, because I find it ridiculous. 30 seconds is way, way too huge a nerf. That's half a minute nerf on a build that wasn't even a problem!
Have you seen the list of Protoss nerfs since beta? They're huge. You've got values like "30 seconds" being thrown around. Protoss as a race was practically butchered, with entire things being removed straight up (Flux Vanes, KA). And yet 1-1-1 is metagame apparently and not imbalanced, according to Blizz.
Even the absolute earliest beta complaint from Protoss was deemed metagame. Gateway units get creamed by rax units. The complaints fell on deaf ears. This resulted in using FF to survive on 1 base and get colossus asap. The very foundations of Protoss play are based on this lopsided consideration from Blizzard.
LOL, you are complaining about the toss nerfs, while terran has definetly been nerfed the most: - bunker build time increase -reaper build time increase - seige tank damage nerf - rax build time increase - stim research time increase - hellion nerf - ghost nerf - bunker salvage decrease
Terran's been nerfed the most and they're STILL the strongest race of the three. That says a lot.
EPT
.
