|
On October 17 2011 07:50 VPVash wrote: I love balance discussions...the level of idiotic talk in these thread is quite enjoyable
User was banned for this post. I must agree, some of the statements in here are pretty stupid... I think people should really not write anything about balance until they are top grandmaster, because before that, balance doesn't really hold you back.
|
On October 17 2011 14:54 kofman wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 07:50 VPVash wrote: I love balance discussions...the level of idiotic talk in these thread is quite enjoyable
User was banned for this post. I must agree, some of the statements in here are pretty stupid... I think people should really not write anything about balance until they are top grandmaster, because before that, balance doesn't really hold you back.
Are you top grandmaster?
|
Who the hell cares about what holds me or anyone else in this thread back. I barely even ladder, and I think I'm perfectly capable of winning at my level anyways. This whole thing is about me wanting to be a spectator, and being sick of seeing Terrans everywhere. You don't have to be Grandmaster to think that.
On October 17 2011 09:13 Dalavita wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 09:10 Roxy wrote:On October 17 2011 09:04 SolidMoose wrote:On October 17 2011 06:01 Roxy wrote: Problem: Mass SCV repair is able to give insane amounts of life to different buildings (specifically the planetary fortress)
Solution: 1 SCV should repair a building at a speed equal to the time it would take to build it (example. If it takes 60 seconds to repair a building, and it is at 50% life. 1 scv should take 30 seconds to repair it)
Each additional SCV should repair at 75% the speed of the last one attached.
Side Effects: You cant put a disgusting amount of SCV on a PF or Thor and repair indefinitely Side Effect: TvP has 0% winrate because 4 gate will always win That is a very bold statement that I find hard to beleive 4 gate is not really a viable strategy in TvP and it really doesnt have too much to do with the repair mechanism. Defending could easily be supplemented with more units instead of cutting units to get an even further SCV advantage. 4gate is easily scoutable (your first clue is lack of a second nexus.. and you have scan). In small armies, MM wrecks protoss and the only way you would lose to 4gate is if you are going to fast expand and tech at the same time (obviously an incorrect response to seeing a 4gate) First of all, a 4gate hits at a time where you can't count a lack of nexus as an an all-in, and early MM needs its upgrades to deal with a protoss bio force, and while terran bio works pretty well against protoss gateway units in small numbers, the point of a 4gate is to not have small numbers.
I've seen a Terran 1 rax FE, not scout at all, and still defend the 4gate easily. Huk vs Nada in GSL September, on Xel'Naga Fortress. Maybe if repair was weaker or Warpgate was un-nerfed, then Terran wouldn't be able to tech behind a bunker and 4 marines and still be safe against any Protoss all-in.
|
On October 17 2011 15:02 Brotocol wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 14:54 kofman wrote:On October 17 2011 07:50 VPVash wrote: I love balance discussions...the level of idiotic talk in these thread is quite enjoyable
User was banned for this post. I must agree, some of the statements in here are pretty stupid... I think people should really not write anything about balance until they are top grandmaster, because before that, balance doesn't really hold you back. Are you top grandmaster? No, and that is why I'm not posting idiotic statements about how this or that is OP.
|
On October 17 2011 14:50 Brotocol wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 08:58 aksfjh wrote:On October 17 2011 06:51 SeaSwift wrote:On October 17 2011 06:35 aksfjh wrote:On October 17 2011 06:24 Toadvine wrote:On October 17 2011 06:03 aksfjh wrote:On October 17 2011 05:47 Toadvine wrote: About the Sentry suggestion - are you actually saying that Protoss all-ins are too good against Terran? Hongun is arguably only in Code S because of Protoss all-ins against Terran. He wins even when Terran knows they're coming... I see your HongUnPrime, and raise you a PuMa. Honestly though, like 1/3rd of the Terrans in Code S are only capable of 1 base all-ining in TvP. And HongUn doesn't even do all-ins with mass Sentries, he's more of a "2-3Gate VR, and maybe win, if not do as much damage as possible, and transition" guy. He's also in the Up/Down matches, not in Code S. You said all-in. MC does sentry all-ins quite a bit, and is quite successful with them. If he didn't go making things hard for himself by willingly putting himself into the hardest group in Code S, we'd likely see him in GSL still. MC does sentry TIMING PUSHES quite a bit. All-in is like a 4gate or an Xgate with no economy. MC consistently makes scary pushes, but doesn't very often actually all-in. There is normally at least some economy behind it. Yea, this is fair, timing pushes that are as effective as all-is. That's the problem with Protoss which nobody wants to talk about or deal with because in ONE single tournament they can't get their damn act together. I can't believe you're attributing this to Protoss. Protoss actually takes a hit when a P push is thwarted. That's actually a major problem with Terran... Terran all-ins with SCVs brought off the line aren't even all in because of mules. If you've been paying attention, like, at all, the problem with Terran pseudo-all-ins is that you can thwart them against all odds, but the Terran just does a second and even a third push and then wins the game. edit: regarding mules... I'd like to point your attention to this post at the top of page 140: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=255254¤tpage=140How can anyone argue that this is fair/balanced?
Do the numbers yourself. Constant MULE usage has the mineral income of 4.5 SCVs. The conversion of a CC to an OC takes a little more time than training 2 SCVs. Thus if you constantly use MULES you can pull TWO extra SCVs for an attack compared to other races. So if you see a T pulling 12 SCVs from the line, he is as all-in as a P or Z pulling 10 workers for an attack.
The only power of the MULE is the supersaturation (which does not come into play in the scenario you are complaining about), because else having 2 extra mineral only workers is a little weak in comparison to chronoboost and larva inject, isn't it?
|
On October 17 2011 09:30 wonkwink wrote:Protoss usually just FFs the bunkers so it doesn't matter how fast the SCVs that can't repair them could repair them if they could... which they can't.
Imagine the power of a push where toss does NOT have to invest into sentries to block mass repair but can focus on units doing dmg with just one sentry for guardian shield..
|
On October 17 2011 15:22 Thrombozyt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 14:50 Brotocol wrote:On October 17 2011 08:58 aksfjh wrote:On October 17 2011 06:51 SeaSwift wrote:On October 17 2011 06:35 aksfjh wrote:On October 17 2011 06:24 Toadvine wrote:On October 17 2011 06:03 aksfjh wrote:On October 17 2011 05:47 Toadvine wrote: About the Sentry suggestion - are you actually saying that Protoss all-ins are too good against Terran? Hongun is arguably only in Code S because of Protoss all-ins against Terran. He wins even when Terran knows they're coming... I see your HongUnPrime, and raise you a PuMa. Honestly though, like 1/3rd of the Terrans in Code S are only capable of 1 base all-ining in TvP. And HongUn doesn't even do all-ins with mass Sentries, he's more of a "2-3Gate VR, and maybe win, if not do as much damage as possible, and transition" guy. He's also in the Up/Down matches, not in Code S. You said all-in. MC does sentry all-ins quite a bit, and is quite successful with them. If he didn't go making things hard for himself by willingly putting himself into the hardest group in Code S, we'd likely see him in GSL still. MC does sentry TIMING PUSHES quite a bit. All-in is like a 4gate or an Xgate with no economy. MC consistently makes scary pushes, but doesn't very often actually all-in. There is normally at least some economy behind it. Yea, this is fair, timing pushes that are as effective as all-is. That's the problem with Protoss which nobody wants to talk about or deal with because in ONE single tournament they can't get their damn act together. I can't believe you're attributing this to Protoss. Protoss actually takes a hit when a P push is thwarted. That's actually a major problem with Terran... Terran all-ins with SCVs brought off the line aren't even all in because of mules. If you've been paying attention, like, at all, the problem with Terran pseudo-all-ins is that you can thwart them against all odds, but the Terran just does a second and even a third push and then wins the game. edit: regarding mules... I'd like to point your attention to this post at the top of page 140: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=255254¤tpage=140How can anyone argue that this is fair/balanced? Do the numbers yourself. Constant MULE usage has the mineral income of 4.5 SCVs. The conversion of a CC to an OC takes a little more time than training 2 SCVs. Thus if you constantly use MULES you can pull TWO extra SCVs for an attack compared to other races. So if you see a T pulling 12 SCVs from the line, he is as all-in as a P or Z pulling 10 workers for an attack. The only power of the MULE is the supersaturation (which does not come into play in the scenario you are complaining about), because else having 2 extra mineral only workers is a little weak in comparison to chronoboost and larva inject, isn't it?
Mule is weak compared to chrono and larva inject? Sorry, but I'm not seeing it.
I'm certain there are parts of the equation that your list is missing. For example, it's not "constant" use of Mules that is required for compensating the 2 delayed SCVs. The first mule does a good job of this and subsequent mules probably go beyond merely compensating for this. There's obviously going to be more than 1 mule in the game.
How do you explain that 1base Terran can take on 2base FFE from Protoss? I'm curious.
@kofman:
On October 17 2011 15:18 kofman wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 15:02 Brotocol wrote:On October 17 2011 14:54 kofman wrote:On October 17 2011 07:50 VPVash wrote: I love balance discussions...the level of idiotic talk in these thread is quite enjoyable
User was banned for this post. I must agree, some of the statements in here are pretty stupid... I think people should really not write anything about balance until they are top grandmaster, because before that, balance doesn't really hold you back. Are you top grandmaster? No, and that is why I'm not posting idiotic statements about how this or that is OP.
Yea, you've only posted such nuggets of wisdom as:
On October 17 2011 02:48 kofman wrote: This could be evidence that Terran players are just stronger than players of the other races.
Very constructive.
|
On October 17 2011 15:25 Thrombozyt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 09:30 wonkwink wrote:Side Effect: TvP has 0% winrate because 4 gate will always win Protoss usually just FFs the bunkers so it doesn't matter how fast the SCVs that can't repair them could repair them if they could... which they can't. Imagine the power of a push where toss does NOT have to invest into sentries to block mass repair but can focus on units doing dmg with just one sentry for guardian shield..
I don't even think that makes a huge difference. The only threatening sentry all-in vs Terran currently, is an Immortal bust, which works because of FF to zone the army and good range on everything. It wouldn't work better if it had Zealots instead of Sentries, because trying to bruteforce a fortified position with 3 bunkers by putting units in a spot where the whole Terran army can attack them simply doesn't do a whole lot.
Not that I think repair needs to be nerfed, but I doubt it would suddenly make Protoss all-ins too powerful. I'd much rather have CCs unliftable, serves a similar purpose without actuallly removing defenders advantage (which the game needs more, not less of).
|
No one wants to see TvT's all day, not even T's. The high number of T's in Code S really has very little to do with balance, but with the format of the tournament. The way round-robin works + the difficulty in getting knocked out.
MLG is a great example, if the T's were significantly stronger as a race, shouldn't we see the 2 code S T's dominate everyone?
|
On October 17 2011 15:18 kofman wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 15:02 Brotocol wrote:On October 17 2011 14:54 kofman wrote:On October 17 2011 07:50 VPVash wrote: I love balance discussions...the level of idiotic talk in these thread is quite enjoyable
User was banned for this post. I must agree, some of the statements in here are pretty stupid... I think people should really not write anything about balance until they are top grandmaster, because before that, balance doesn't really hold you back. Are you top grandmaster? No, and that is why I'm not posting idiotic statements about how this or that is OP.
It's just as idiotic to think that because someone is in GM they will have a completely objective view of balance- as though entering gm magically frees you of any bias. This is a balance discussion thread mostly about what happens at pro level and not about our own games and if people can make a case for one thing or another backed up by games from pros or by statistics then why not discuss it? It's like saying you shouldn't discuss baseball unless you've played for a major league team.
If there are any statements that you think are wrong then you can contribute by pointing out why they're wrong. And in the end if this thread bothers you so much then don't read it. Nobody's forcing you to.
|
On October 17 2011 15:52 architecture wrote: No one wants to see TvT's all day, not even T's. The high number of T's in Code S really has very little to do with balance, but with the format of the tournament. The way round-robin works + the difficulty in getting knocked out.
MLG is a great example, if the T's were significantly stronger as a race, shouldn't we see the 2 code S T's dominate everyone?
Up until this MLG they pretty much were- remember who the last three winners were?
+ Show Spoiler +
Also, MC and Huk were both fortunate the the two best PvTers (Polt and Bomber) were eliminated before they had to face them.
|
|
On October 17 2011 15:30 Brotocol wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 15:22 Thrombozyt wrote:On October 17 2011 14:50 Brotocol wrote:On October 17 2011 08:58 aksfjh wrote:On October 17 2011 06:51 SeaSwift wrote:On October 17 2011 06:35 aksfjh wrote:On October 17 2011 06:24 Toadvine wrote:On October 17 2011 06:03 aksfjh wrote:On October 17 2011 05:47 Toadvine wrote: About the Sentry suggestion - are you actually saying that Protoss all-ins are too good against Terran? Hongun is arguably only in Code S because of Protoss all-ins against Terran. He wins even when Terran knows they're coming... I see your HongUnPrime, and raise you a PuMa. Honestly though, like 1/3rd of the Terrans in Code S are only capable of 1 base all-ining in TvP. And HongUn doesn't even do all-ins with mass Sentries, he's more of a "2-3Gate VR, and maybe win, if not do as much damage as possible, and transition" guy. He's also in the Up/Down matches, not in Code S. You said all-in. MC does sentry all-ins quite a bit, and is quite successful with them. If he didn't go making things hard for himself by willingly putting himself into the hardest group in Code S, we'd likely see him in GSL still. MC does sentry TIMING PUSHES quite a bit. All-in is like a 4gate or an Xgate with no economy. MC consistently makes scary pushes, but doesn't very often actually all-in. There is normally at least some economy behind it. Yea, this is fair, timing pushes that are as effective as all-is. That's the problem with Protoss which nobody wants to talk about or deal with because in ONE single tournament they can't get their damn act together. I can't believe you're attributing this to Protoss. Protoss actually takes a hit when a P push is thwarted. That's actually a major problem with Terran... Terran all-ins with SCVs brought off the line aren't even all in because of mules. If you've been paying attention, like, at all, the problem with Terran pseudo-all-ins is that you can thwart them against all odds, but the Terran just does a second and even a third push and then wins the game. edit: regarding mules... I'd like to point your attention to this post at the top of page 140: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=255254¤tpage=140How can anyone argue that this is fair/balanced? Do the numbers yourself. Constant MULE usage has the mineral income of 4.5 SCVs. The conversion of a CC to an OC takes a little more time than training 2 SCVs. Thus if you constantly use MULES you can pull TWO extra SCVs for an attack compared to other races. So if you see a T pulling 12 SCVs from the line, he is as all-in as a P or Z pulling 10 workers for an attack. The only power of the MULE is the supersaturation (which does not come into play in the scenario you are complaining about), because else having 2 extra mineral only workers is a little weak in comparison to chronoboost and larva inject, isn't it? Mule is weak compared to chrono and larva inject? Sorry, but I'm not seeing it. I'm certain there are parts of the equation that your list is missing. For example, it's not "constant" use of Mules that is required for compensating the 2 delayed SCVs. The first mule does a good job of this and subsequent mules probably go beyond merely compensating for this. There's obviously going to be more than 1 mule in the game. How do you explain that 1base Terran can take on 2base FFE from Protoss? I'm curious.
I made the point that the strenght of MULE is the supersaturation. Without the supersaturation, constant MULE would equal 4.5 workers that can only harvest minerals. Do the math. 270 min per MULE during it's 90 sec lifetime means 180 minerals/min. Each harvester pulls in 40 minerals per minute excluding saturation problems. This means that constant MULE is as good as 4.5 workers. You could have build 2 workers in the time it takes to convert the CC, so you are left with 2.5 workers 'bonus' EXCLUDING supersaturation.
As super saturation is not an point in the scenario you brought up (T pulling tons of SCV for an 'all-in'), this means that MULE gives T 2.5 extra workers to pull. Something chronoboost or larva inject easily negate up to the time such an all-in usually hit.
Obviously, for the early attacks there is only 1 MULE present from good terrans (because steady income is better than spiky) because I haven't seen an all-in that builds extra OC.
I'm curious.. which protoss EVER gos FFE against terran? Also it seems pretty clear, that if toss expands and T hits with an early attack, toss is screwed. Same is true with Terran expanding and toss going for early tech/attack. Bunkers at the front are fail if toss goes for blink+obs or warpprism + DT.
Do you expect, that a fast expand will win against any other build?
|
On October 17 2011 16:34 Thrombozyt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 15:30 Brotocol wrote:On October 17 2011 15:22 Thrombozyt wrote:On October 17 2011 14:50 Brotocol wrote:On October 17 2011 08:58 aksfjh wrote:On October 17 2011 06:51 SeaSwift wrote:On October 17 2011 06:35 aksfjh wrote:On October 17 2011 06:24 Toadvine wrote:On October 17 2011 06:03 aksfjh wrote:On October 17 2011 05:47 Toadvine wrote: About the Sentry suggestion - are you actually saying that Protoss all-ins are too good against Terran? Hongun is arguably only in Code S because of Protoss all-ins against Terran. He wins even when Terran knows they're coming... I see your HongUnPrime, and raise you a PuMa. Honestly though, like 1/3rd of the Terrans in Code S are only capable of 1 base all-ining in TvP. And HongUn doesn't even do all-ins with mass Sentries, he's more of a "2-3Gate VR, and maybe win, if not do as much damage as possible, and transition" guy. He's also in the Up/Down matches, not in Code S. You said all-in. MC does sentry all-ins quite a bit, and is quite successful with them. If he didn't go making things hard for himself by willingly putting himself into the hardest group in Code S, we'd likely see him in GSL still. MC does sentry TIMING PUSHES quite a bit. All-in is like a 4gate or an Xgate with no economy. MC consistently makes scary pushes, but doesn't very often actually all-in. There is normally at least some economy behind it. Yea, this is fair, timing pushes that are as effective as all-is. That's the problem with Protoss which nobody wants to talk about or deal with because in ONE single tournament they can't get their damn act together. I can't believe you're attributing this to Protoss. Protoss actually takes a hit when a P push is thwarted. That's actually a major problem with Terran... Terran all-ins with SCVs brought off the line aren't even all in because of mules. If you've been paying attention, like, at all, the problem with Terran pseudo-all-ins is that you can thwart them against all odds, but the Terran just does a second and even a third push and then wins the game. edit: regarding mules... I'd like to point your attention to this post at the top of page 140: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=255254¤tpage=140How can anyone argue that this is fair/balanced? Do the numbers yourself. Constant MULE usage has the mineral income of 4.5 SCVs. The conversion of a CC to an OC takes a little more time than training 2 SCVs. Thus if you constantly use MULES you can pull TWO extra SCVs for an attack compared to other races. So if you see a T pulling 12 SCVs from the line, he is as all-in as a P or Z pulling 10 workers for an attack. The only power of the MULE is the supersaturation (which does not come into play in the scenario you are complaining about), because else having 2 extra mineral only workers is a little weak in comparison to chronoboost and larva inject, isn't it? Mule is weak compared to chrono and larva inject? Sorry, but I'm not seeing it. I'm certain there are parts of the equation that your list is missing. For example, it's not "constant" use of Mules that is required for compensating the 2 delayed SCVs. The first mule does a good job of this and subsequent mules probably go beyond merely compensating for this. There's obviously going to be more than 1 mule in the game. How do you explain that 1base Terran can take on 2base FFE from Protoss? I'm curious. I made the point that the strenght of MULE is the supersaturation. Without the supersaturation, constant MULE would equal 4.5 workers that can only harvest minerals. Do the math. 270 min per MULE during it's 90 sec lifetime means 180 minerals/min. Each harvester pulls in 40 minerals per minute excluding saturation problems. This means that constant MULE is as good as 4.5 workers. You could have build 2 workers in the time it takes to convert the CC, so you are left with 2.5 workers 'bonus' EXCLUDING supersaturation.As super saturation is not an point in the scenario you brought up (T pulling tons of SCV for an 'all-in'), this means that MULE gives T 2.5 extra workers to pull. Something chronoboost or larva inject easily negate up to the time such an all-in usually hit. Obviously, for the early attacks there is only 1 MULE present from good terrans (because steady income is better than spiky) because I haven't seen an all-in that builds extra OC. I'm curious.. which protoss EVER gos FFE against terran? Also it seems pretty clear, that if toss expands and T hits with an early attack, toss is screwed. Same is true with Terran expanding and toss going for early tech/attack. Bunkers at the front are fail if toss goes for blink+obs or warpprism + DT. Do you expect, that a fast expand will win against any other build?
@bolded part: That's a 1 time delay. After that, mules more than make up for it.
Regarding this:
On October 17 2011 16:34 Thrombozyt wrote: I'm curious.. which protoss EVER gos FFE against terran? Also it seems pretty clear, that if toss expands and T hits with an early attack, toss is screwed. Same is true with Terran expanding and toss going for early tech/attack. Bunkers at the front are fail if toss goes for blink+obs or warpprism + DT
This is so wrong in so many ways.
- Nexus first is the most common way to deal with 1-1-1. Not FFE, my mistake. I meant FE. It doesn't change the point I made though (2base vs. 1base). However - have you been keeping up to date with the metagame? If you claim that no Protoss "ever" does this, then you're simply not keeping up.
- Yes, if T hits with an early attack (fakes 1-1-1, but does 2rax instead) then Protoss is screwed. But if 1-1-1 hits Protoss is also screwed. Why do you think 1-1-1 is so controversial right now?
- What kind of "early build" is blink + robo/observer + warp prism + dark templar? Has Protoss ever had all of this while Terran was in the midst of getting his 1st expansion?
- The truth of the matter is that Terran CAN expand early and hold it easier than the other races. Obviously, early bunkers can't deal with the fairytale build you mentioned above. But they do exceedingly well against any realistic pushes Protoss can make in the early game.
For instance - watch Naniwa vs. Thorzain in Dreamhack Valencia. Naniwa did a blink all-in, while Thorzain expanded. Bunkers held it effortlessly. Naniwa made a balance comment before gg'ing. (Surprisingly, blink rush got nerfed soon thereafter).
|
A protoss winning MLG and another protoss being runner-up kinda surprised me, although I wasn't able to watch the tournament. Could someone who watched whole thing give some insights if protoss' has changed, I mean strats, metagame, builds? Did anyone have success with immortals and warp prisms?
|
On October 17 2011 18:08 bokeevboke wrote: A protoss winning MLG and another protoss being runner-up kinda surprised me, although I wasn't able to watch the tournament. Could someone who watched whole thing give some insights if protoss' has changed, I mean strats, metagame, builds? Did anyone have success with immortals and warp prisms? Well toss played better. Less mistakes, more harass, better defense against harass, better tech switching.
|
On October 17 2011 15:52 architecture wrote: No one wants to see TvT's all day, not even T's. The high number of T's in Code S really has very little to do with balance, but with the format of the tournament. The way round-robin works + the difficulty in getting knocked out.
MLG is a great example, if the T's were significantly stronger as a race, shouldn't we see the 2 code S T's dominate everyone?
How exactly does the GSL format specifically help Terran? The only way I could think of is them being better at Bo1, which is somewhat arguable. Still, we shouldn't constantly have 3/4 and 4/4 Terran Top4s in Code S, even with that taken into account.
Besides, the early GSL Opens were way more balanced than the current Code S. The first Code S tournament actually had the best racial balance, with 9 P, 9 Z and 14 T. Since then, it has only been getting worse. How does your awesome theory explain this, exactly?
|
IEM china ? IPL3? mLG (not fure for IEM new York) and you still go for the same old bulshit T is op.... pull charts from some where make what every you want but remember non of you is david kim or knows any little bit of the game as blizzard knows.
|
On October 17 2011 17:38 Brotocol wrote:
@bolded part: That's a 1 time delay. After that, mules more than make up for it.
It's not just a one time delay, someone that builds an OC will be 2 workers behind someone that doesn't for all eternity (or at least until they hit ~70 workers and stop producing them). The MULE gives a constant mineral flow of 4.5 workers, so until the point is reached where players stop producing workers, the MULE gives a net benefit of 2.5 workers (less if scans are used of course).
|
Mules aren't what make Terran allins strong. Their only benefit over 4 regular workers is that they allow supersaturation and that they aren't affected as much by death. Neither of which come into play during an allin.
|
|
|
|