|
On April 15 2012 02:56 Zealos wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 01:32 Shiori wrote:On April 14 2012 21:16 Toastie wrote:
Problem:
The possibility of Mass roach (aka Stephano Style) in ZvP makes it impossible for Protoss to take and hold a third, forcing Protoss into 2 base allins or cheesy and unsafe expansions hoping for the Zerg to make a mistake.
Solution:
Reduce Roach HP by ±20 to 125 HP and give the Roach Warren an upgrade upon Hive to increase Roach HP with 30 to give it a total of 155, making the roach slightly more effective in the late- game.
Side Effects:
Roaches might be come harder to use in ZvT vs Hellions/Marine; ZvZ might become more diverse than Roach Only midgames; Roaches are weaker vs Protoss to max out on without Hive. I think this is a decent idea. Again, it's not that it's impossible to hold Roach aggression, but that it's too difficult for what it is, much like the 1-1-1 used to be before the Immortal buff. 9/10 times, 3base Roach denies the third. That's not good. Denies the third, but the toss can still just max off 2 base with immortals and win.
No kidding, protoss has been babied throughout the entirety of this game, receiveing buffs and dishing out nerfs for every little issue, rather than figure out a way to deal with it in game... they just expect it now
|
On April 15 2012 02:56 Zealos wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 01:32 Shiori wrote:On April 14 2012 21:16 Toastie wrote:
Problem:
The possibility of Mass roach (aka Stephano Style) in ZvP makes it impossible for Protoss to take and hold a third, forcing Protoss into 2 base allins or cheesy and unsafe expansions hoping for the Zerg to make a mistake.
Solution:
Reduce Roach HP by ±20 to 125 HP and give the Roach Warren an upgrade upon Hive to increase Roach HP with 30 to give it a total of 155, making the roach slightly more effective in the late- game.
Side Effects:
Roaches might be come harder to use in ZvT vs Hellions/Marine; ZvZ might become more diverse than Roach Only midgames; Roaches are weaker vs Protoss to max out on without Hive. I think this is a decent idea. Again, it's not that it's impossible to hold Roach aggression, but that it's too difficult for what it is, much like the 1-1-1 used to be before the Immortal buff. 9/10 times, 3base Roach denies the third. That's not good. Denies the third, but the toss can still just max off 2 base with immortals and win.
lol most zergs i play now transition into spire tech and into muta ling infestor, and immortals are worth even less than collosi at that point imho...
|
On April 15 2012 03:17 CruelZeratul wrote:
What do you guys think of Stim for Ghosts to help TvP? If that is to much perhaps just the movement speed boost, so they don't all die while the rest of the army is kiting.
PLEASE! anything to make them less fragile/worthless, after the emp AND snipe nerf Im not sure anyone even builds ghosts anymore
|
On April 15 2012 03:17 teamhozac wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 02:56 Zealos wrote:On April 15 2012 01:32 Shiori wrote:On April 14 2012 21:16 Toastie wrote:
Problem:
The possibility of Mass roach (aka Stephano Style) in ZvP makes it impossible for Protoss to take and hold a third, forcing Protoss into 2 base allins or cheesy and unsafe expansions hoping for the Zerg to make a mistake.
Solution:
Reduce Roach HP by ±20 to 125 HP and give the Roach Warren an upgrade upon Hive to increase Roach HP with 30 to give it a total of 155, making the roach slightly more effective in the late- game.
Side Effects:
Roaches might be come harder to use in ZvT vs Hellions/Marine; ZvZ might become more diverse than Roach Only midgames; Roaches are weaker vs Protoss to max out on without Hive. I think this is a decent idea. Again, it's not that it's impossible to hold Roach aggression, but that it's too difficult for what it is, much like the 1-1-1 used to be before the Immortal buff. 9/10 times, 3base Roach denies the third. That's not good. Denies the third, but the toss can still just max off 2 base with immortals and win. No kidding, protoss has been babied throughout the entirety of this game, receiveing buffs and dishing out nerfs for every little issue, rather than figure out a way to deal with it in game... they just expect it now
And out comes the bias!
|
On April 14 2012 21:16 Toastie wrote:
Problem:
The possibility of Mass roach (aka Stephano Style) in ZvP makes it impossible for Protoss to take and hold a third, forcing Protoss into 2 base allins or cheesy and unsafe expansions hoping for the Zerg to make a mistake.
Solution:
Reduce Roach HP by ±20 to 125 HP and give the Roach Warren an upgrade upon Hive to increase Roach HP with 30 to give it a total of 155, making the roach slightly more effective in the late- game.
Side Effects:
Roaches might be come harder to use in ZvT vs Hellions/Marine; ZvZ might become more diverse than Roach Only midgames; Roaches are weaker vs Protoss to max out on without Hive.
Nerfing zerg at this point doesn't seem like a good idea tbh.
Might want to check the GSL list.
|
On April 15 2012 03:34 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 03:17 teamhozac wrote:On April 15 2012 02:56 Zealos wrote:On April 15 2012 01:32 Shiori wrote:On April 14 2012 21:16 Toastie wrote:
Problem:
The possibility of Mass roach (aka Stephano Style) in ZvP makes it impossible for Protoss to take and hold a third, forcing Protoss into 2 base allins or cheesy and unsafe expansions hoping for the Zerg to make a mistake.
Solution:
Reduce Roach HP by ±20 to 125 HP and give the Roach Warren an upgrade upon Hive to increase Roach HP with 30 to give it a total of 155, making the roach slightly more effective in the late- game.
Side Effects:
Roaches might be come harder to use in ZvT vs Hellions/Marine; ZvZ might become more diverse than Roach Only midgames; Roaches are weaker vs Protoss to max out on without Hive. I think this is a decent idea. Again, it's not that it's impossible to hold Roach aggression, but that it's too difficult for what it is, much like the 1-1-1 used to be before the Immortal buff. 9/10 times, 3base Roach denies the third. That's not good. Denies the third, but the toss can still just max off 2 base with immortals and win. No kidding, protoss has been babied throughout the entirety of this game, receiveing buffs and dishing out nerfs for every little issue, rather than figure out a way to deal with it in game... they just expect it now And out comes the bias!
And out comes the truth! Fixed
|
On April 11 2012 00:54 MetalSlug wrote:
Banelings should dmg all units in range (even your units) equally, creating chainreactions with a moved banes. There, i said it !
This is probably one of the worst ideas of all time. So much so that I had to comment. So if you have a line of banelings, and one of them is shot, it creates a chain reaction and you lose all your banelings + units caught in range?
BRB see idle zerglings spread with banelings, snipe one baneling with a banshee, or drop a unit in the middle to get a baneling explsion and you lose all units
BRB see an incoming attack of lings + banelings, shoot one baneling and destroy the entire attack because of this chain reaction
I can't believe this is even suggested.
|
On April 15 2012 03:46 teamhozac wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 03:34 Shiori wrote:On April 15 2012 03:17 teamhozac wrote:On April 15 2012 02:56 Zealos wrote:On April 15 2012 01:32 Shiori wrote:On April 14 2012 21:16 Toastie wrote:
Problem:
The possibility of Mass roach (aka Stephano Style) in ZvP makes it impossible for Protoss to take and hold a third, forcing Protoss into 2 base allins or cheesy and unsafe expansions hoping for the Zerg to make a mistake.
Solution:
Reduce Roach HP by ±20 to 125 HP and give the Roach Warren an upgrade upon Hive to increase Roach HP with 30 to give it a total of 155, making the roach slightly more effective in the late- game.
Side Effects:
Roaches might be come harder to use in ZvT vs Hellions/Marine; ZvZ might become more diverse than Roach Only midgames; Roaches are weaker vs Protoss to max out on without Hive. I think this is a decent idea. Again, it's not that it's impossible to hold Roach aggression, but that it's too difficult for what it is, much like the 1-1-1 used to be before the Immortal buff. 9/10 times, 3base Roach denies the third. That's not good. Denies the third, but the toss can still just max off 2 base with immortals and win. No kidding, protoss has been babied throughout the entirety of this game, receiveing buffs and dishing out nerfs for every little issue, rather than figure out a way to deal with it in game... they just expect it now And out comes the bias! And out comes the truth! Fixed
Blizzard babied Terran way more than they did Protoss. Just look at how long it took for them to nerf HT vs how long it took for them to nerf Ghost and 1/1/1.
|
On April 15 2012 08:31 ppdealer wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 03:46 teamhozac wrote:On April 15 2012 03:34 Shiori wrote:On April 15 2012 03:17 teamhozac wrote:On April 15 2012 02:56 Zealos wrote:On April 15 2012 01:32 Shiori wrote:On April 14 2012 21:16 Toastie wrote:
Problem:
The possibility of Mass roach (aka Stephano Style) in ZvP makes it impossible for Protoss to take and hold a third, forcing Protoss into 2 base allins or cheesy and unsafe expansions hoping for the Zerg to make a mistake.
Solution:
Reduce Roach HP by ±20 to 125 HP and give the Roach Warren an upgrade upon Hive to increase Roach HP with 30 to give it a total of 155, making the roach slightly more effective in the late- game.
Side Effects:
Roaches might be come harder to use in ZvT vs Hellions/Marine; ZvZ might become more diverse than Roach Only midgames; Roaches are weaker vs Protoss to max out on without Hive. I think this is a decent idea. Again, it's not that it's impossible to hold Roach aggression, but that it's too difficult for what it is, much like the 1-1-1 used to be before the Immortal buff. 9/10 times, 3base Roach denies the third. That's not good. Denies the third, but the toss can still just max off 2 base with immortals and win. No kidding, protoss has been babied throughout the entirety of this game, receiveing buffs and dishing out nerfs for every little issue, rather than figure out a way to deal with it in game... they just expect it now And out comes the bias! And out comes the truth! Fixed Blizzard babied Terran way more than they did Protoss. Just look at how long it took for them to nerf HT vs how long it took for them to nerf Ghost and 1/1/1.
Let me get this right, so because it took longer for blizzard to nerf ghosts than it did to nerf HT, terran is babied? give me a break, that is quite possibly the worst argument I have ever seen... just look at the list of terran nerfs and protoss buffs and get back to me, if you still think terran is babied youre delusional
|
On April 14 2012 21:16 Toastie wrote:
Problem:
The possibility of Mass roach (aka Stephano Style) in ZvP makes it impossible for Protoss to take and hold a third, forcing Protoss into 2 base allins or cheesy and unsafe expansions hoping for the Zerg to make a mistake.
Solution:
Reduce Roach HP by ±20 to 125 HP and give the Roach Warren an upgrade upon Hive to increase Roach HP with 30 to give it a total of 155, making the roach slightly more effective in the late- game.
Side Effects:
Roaches might be come harder to use in ZvT vs Hellions/Marine; ZvZ might become more diverse than Roach Only midgames; Roaches are weaker vs Protoss to max out on without Hive.
OK, I agree with the problem, but I also want to emphasize on what you wrote in the solution, that roaches right now are terribly strong in the ZvP midgame and too weak in the lategame.
And I want to connect this to the other unit that is on the same techpath and has similar problems (just that it's already not too strong in the midgame): the hydralisk.
So I'd like to change your proposal like this:
Problem:
The possibility of Mass roach (aka Stephano Style) in ZvP makes it impossible for Protoss to take and hold a third, forcing Protoss into 2 base allins or cheesy and unsafe expansions hoping for the Zerg to make a mistake, while the Zerg gets stuck on a very supplyinefficient composition if he does go roach (what it seems like, he has to) but doesn't/can't do damage to the Protoss.
Solution:
Increase Roach costs to 100/25 (~+20%costs) and buff their health by +15/25 to 160/170 (+10-15%health, but no damage increase!), making them lesscostefficient overall (midgame nerf), but better in the lategame, especially in their role to tank damage for hydralisks.
Move Grooved Spines to Hivetech and make it 200/200 for +2 (hydralisk)range.
--> roach(/hydra) nerf in the midgame, but better hivetech/maxed "ranged" army; more need to mix in hydralisks, but also more gain when mixing in those very expensive semiartillery glasscanons.
Side Effects:
Roach/Hydra-->Broodlord/Infestor might become too good (though hydracosts might also just block the possibility to mass those), so possibly nerf BLs slightly in health and/or damage, if this occurs.
Roach openers might become harder to pull of in all MUs.
|
|
|
On April 15 2012 23:18 monkybone wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 23:13 Big J wrote:
Solution:
Increase Roach costs to 100/25 (~+20%costs) and buff their health by +15/25 to 160/170 (+10-15%health, but no damage increase!), making them lesscostefficient overall (midgame nerf), but better in the lategame, especially in their role to tank damage for hydralisks.
. .... Do you realize that gas is the limiting factor for midgame roach? This will make early/mid-game roach even more powerful. In any case, aren't in the position of knowing whether a change is even needed in the current metagame. None of these suggestions are any good. Cost, supply and stats-changes of units MUST be tested thorougly, and only blizzard knows how to do this properly.
No, trust me, gas is not the limiting factor, but minerals are.
A lot of zergs don't even take more than 4 geysers when going 3base roach or roach/ling and only take 5th and 6th gas when transitioning into mutalisks or infestors.
If you go through this thread on 12min max, you can see that TangSC didn't even give timings for any geysers after #4 and from the pictures ("macrobenchmarks" in the thread), you can see on the 12min maxed one, that the income is 448 = 4geysers (the two in the main are not taken, neither are the two at the 4th base)
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=324733
Similar in ZvZ (and for ZvP 2base speedroach allins after gateway expands); 2base mass roach takes only 3gas, to get all the minerals needed for it and if too much minerals are mined, builds more lings, but not the other way round (taking more gas and then trying to spend the gas, because there is nothing you can spend "pure" gas on for those midgame roach attacks).
And yeah I agree, only blizzard has the tools to really see whether or not this works, but this thread is all about such theorycrafts, so I think it's kind of OK to theorycraft here 
|
On April 15 2012 23:40 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 23:18 monkybone wrote:On April 15 2012 23:13 Big J wrote:
Solution:
Increase Roach costs to 100/25 (~+20%costs) and buff their health by +15/25 to 160/170 (+10-15%health, but no damage increase!), making them lesscostefficient overall (midgame nerf), but better in the lategame, especially in their role to tank damage for hydralisks.
. .... Do you realize that gas is the limiting factor for midgame roach? This will make early/mid-game roach even more powerful. In any case, aren't in the position of knowing whether a change is even needed in the current metagame. None of these suggestions are any good. Cost, supply and stats-changes of units MUST be tested thorougly, and only blizzard knows how to do this properly. No, trust me, gas is not the limiting factor, but minerals are. A lot of zergs don't even take more than 4 geysers when going 3base roach or roach/ling and only take 5th and 6th gas when transitioning into mutalisks or infestors. If you go through this thread on 12min max, you can see that TangSC didn't even give timings for any geysers after #4 and from the pictures ("macrobenchmarks" in the thread), you can see on the 12min maxed one, that the income is 448 = 4geysers (the two in the main are not taken, neither are the two at the 4th base) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=324733Similar in ZvZ (and for ZvP 2base speedroach allins after gateway expands); 2base mass roach takes only 3gas, to get all the minerals needed for it and if too much minerals are mined, builds more lings, but not the other way round (taking more gas and then trying to spend the gas, because there is nothing you can spend "pure" gas on for those midgame roach attacks). And yeah I agree, only blizzard has the tools to really see whether or not this works, but this thread is all about such theorycrafts, so I think it's kind of OK to theorycraft here
That's the point: right now you guys don't need geysers to make Roaches. If Roaches were 75/50, do you really think you'd be able to sit on 4 Geysers?
Either way, that might make early timings to hard to defend for Zerg, so I recommend that we look at a health nerf rather than a useless mineral increase. Furthermore, the Roach does not in any way need a lategame buff. It's not SUPPOSED to be amazing lategame. Even with a health nerf, the Roach would be an incredibly solid unit in the midgame. BL/Infestor is already a pretty huge problem in PvZ right now (since it leads to scenarios relying on gimmicks like Vortex) and buffing the Roach lategame would just make the composition even stronger, which isn't necessary.
All we Protoss players want is a weaker Roach in the midgame. We're not going to trade that for a stronger Roach in the lategame, because we're asking for a tweak to imbalance, not a tradeoff.
|
Not that I don't have a bit of rage with the 12 minute max roach army just barrel rolling past my stalkers but wouldnt a health nerf do oh so much to make those blink +2 timings ridiculously hard to hold?
|
On April 15 2012 03:34 Assirra wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2012 21:16 Toastie wrote:
Problem:
The possibility of Mass roach (aka Stephano Style) in ZvP makes it impossible for Protoss to take and hold a third, forcing Protoss into 2 base allins or cheesy and unsafe expansions hoping for the Zerg to make a mistake.
Solution:
Reduce Roach HP by ±20 to 125 HP and give the Roach Warren an upgrade upon Hive to increase Roach HP with 30 to give it a total of 155, making the roach slightly more effective in the late- game.
Side Effects:
Roaches might be come harder to use in ZvT vs Hellions/Marine; ZvZ might become more diverse than Roach Only midgames; Roaches are weaker vs Protoss to max out on without Hive. Nerfing zerg at this point doesn't seem like a good idea tbh. Might want to check the GSL list.
You realise zerg won last GSL against toss? Any balance buffs inbetween? When there are only 2 Zergs left, the race is UP, when only 1 toss is left (killer), it's a matter of meta game change.
|
On April 15 2012 23:56 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 23:40 Big J wrote:On April 15 2012 23:18 monkybone wrote:On April 15 2012 23:13 Big J wrote:
Solution:
Increase Roach costs to 100/25 (~+20%costs) and buff their health by +15/25 to 160/170 (+10-15%health, but no damage increase!), making them lesscostefficient overall (midgame nerf), but better in the lategame, especially in their role to tank damage for hydralisks.
. .... Do you realize that gas is the limiting factor for midgame roach? This will make early/mid-game roach even more powerful. In any case, aren't in the position of knowing whether a change is even needed in the current metagame. None of these suggestions are any good. Cost, supply and stats-changes of units MUST be tested thorougly, and only blizzard knows how to do this properly. No, trust me, gas is not the limiting factor, but minerals are. A lot of zergs don't even take more than 4 geysers when going 3base roach or roach/ling and only take 5th and 6th gas when transitioning into mutalisks or infestors. If you go through this thread on 12min max, you can see that TangSC didn't even give timings for any geysers after #4 and from the pictures ("macrobenchmarks" in the thread), you can see on the 12min maxed one, that the income is 448 = 4geysers (the two in the main are not taken, neither are the two at the 4th base) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=324733Similar in ZvZ (and for ZvP 2base speedroach allins after gateway expands); 2base mass roach takes only 3gas, to get all the minerals needed for it and if too much minerals are mined, builds more lings, but not the other way round (taking more gas and then trying to spend the gas, because there is nothing you can spend "pure" gas on for those midgame roach attacks). And yeah I agree, only blizzard has the tools to really see whether or not this works, but this thread is all about such theorycrafts, so I think it's kind of OK to theorycraft here That's the point: right now you guys don't need geysers to make Roaches. If Roaches were 75/50, do you really think you'd be able to sit on 4 Geysers? Either way, that might make early timings to hard to defend for Zerg, so I recommend that we look at a health nerf rather than a useless mineral increase. Furthermore, the Roach does not in any way need a lategame buff. It's not SUPPOSED to be amazing lategame. Even with a health nerf, the Roach would be an incredibly solid unit in the midgame. BL/Infestor is already a pretty huge problem in PvZ right now (since it leads to scenarios relying on gimmicks like Vortex) and buffing the Roach lategame would just make the composition even stronger, which isn't necessary. All we Protoss players want is a weaker Roach in the midgame. We're not going to trade that for a stronger Roach in the lategame, because we're asking for a tweak to imbalance, not a tradeoff.
I don't understand how this is the point of what I was saying. Roaches are limited by minerals, increasing their mineralcosts directly leads to less roaches at the same point in time. Of course, increasing their gas costs is similar, but +100% gas costs means that the roach becomes unplayable early-midgame with 3:2 coststats.
If you nerf health of roaches, splash will just demolish them even harder, which will basically just be a buff for Infestor/SiegeTank/Colossus and to a lesser extend Ultralisk/Baneling/Archon/HT in vZ. Also burrow regeneration - and it's in combat micro - will become even less useful because after combat regeneration will just payoff less.
Roaches are pretty bad in the lategame, because they die in even supply to nearly everything and get already countered very well by splash, while not providing any other role than straight up combat (apart from some cutsie "scrappy game" burrow stuff, that doesn't work in standard games). Hydralisks similarly.
A health increase that goes hand in hand with a costefficency decrease on the other hand, would make roaches better against those splash units, but worse vs singlefire units - that's what (stronger) hydras would be for.
It might, or might not make the lategame composition stronger.
The point is, that to reach the same efficency that pure roach has right now, zerg should be forced to go hydralisks in the midgame, get more gain out of roach/hydra/corruptor in the latemidgame and early lategame, but thereby has to delay broodlords and infestors, because hydras costs 100% more gas than roaches.
Also I said, that a BL nerf might be needed for this. (which wouldn't be bad, if the ideal zerg composition would become less broodlords, more roach/hydra - so more diverse)
|
On April 16 2012 00:16 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 23:56 Shiori wrote:On April 15 2012 23:40 Big J wrote:On April 15 2012 23:18 monkybone wrote:On April 15 2012 23:13 Big J wrote:
Solution:
Increase Roach costs to 100/25 (~+20%costs) and buff their health by +15/25 to 160/170 (+10-15%health, but no damage increase!), making them lesscostefficient overall (midgame nerf), but better in the lategame, especially in their role to tank damage for hydralisks.
. .... Do you realize that gas is the limiting factor for midgame roach? This will make early/mid-game roach even more powerful. In any case, aren't in the position of knowing whether a change is even needed in the current metagame. None of these suggestions are any good. Cost, supply and stats-changes of units MUST be tested thorougly, and only blizzard knows how to do this properly. No, trust me, gas is not the limiting factor, but minerals are. A lot of zergs don't even take more than 4 geysers when going 3base roach or roach/ling and only take 5th and 6th gas when transitioning into mutalisks or infestors. If you go through this thread on 12min max, you can see that TangSC didn't even give timings for any geysers after #4 and from the pictures ("macrobenchmarks" in the thread), you can see on the 12min maxed one, that the income is 448 = 4geysers (the two in the main are not taken, neither are the two at the 4th base) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=324733Similar in ZvZ (and for ZvP 2base speedroach allins after gateway expands); 2base mass roach takes only 3gas, to get all the minerals needed for it and if too much minerals are mined, builds more lings, but not the other way round (taking more gas and then trying to spend the gas, because there is nothing you can spend "pure" gas on for those midgame roach attacks). And yeah I agree, only blizzard has the tools to really see whether or not this works, but this thread is all about such theorycrafts, so I think it's kind of OK to theorycraft here That's the point: right now you guys don't need geysers to make Roaches. If Roaches were 75/50, do you really think you'd be able to sit on 4 Geysers? Either way, that might make early timings to hard to defend for Zerg, so I recommend that we look at a health nerf rather than a useless mineral increase. Furthermore, the Roach does not in any way need a lategame buff. It's not SUPPOSED to be amazing lategame. Even with a health nerf, the Roach would be an incredibly solid unit in the midgame. BL/Infestor is already a pretty huge problem in PvZ right now (since it leads to scenarios relying on gimmicks like Vortex) and buffing the Roach lategame would just make the composition even stronger, which isn't necessary. All we Protoss players want is a weaker Roach in the midgame. We're not going to trade that for a stronger Roach in the lategame, because we're asking for a tweak to imbalance, not a tradeoff. I don't understand how this is the point of what I was saying. Roaches are limited by minerals, increasing their mineralcosts directly leads to less roaches at the same point in time. Of course, increasing their gas costs is similar, but +100% gas costs means that the roach becomes unplayable early-midgame with 3:2 coststats. If you nerf health of roaches, splash will just demolish them even harder, which will basically just be a buff for Infestor/SiegeTank/Colossus and to a lesser extend Ultralisk/Baneling/Archon/HT in vZ. Also burrow regeneration - and it's in combat micro - will become even less useful because after combat regeneration will just payoff less. Roaches are pretty bad in the lategame, because they die in even supply to nearly everything and get already countered very well by splash, while not providing any other role than straight up combat (apart from some cutsie "scrappy game" burrow stuff, that doesn't work in standard games). Hydralisks similarly. A health increase that goes hand in hand with a costefficency decrease on the other hand, would make roaches better against those splash units, but worse vs singlefire units - that's what (stronger) hydras would be for. It might, or might not make the lategame composition stronger. The point is, that to reach the same efficency that pure roach has right now, zerg should be forced to go hydralisks in the midgame, get more gain out of roach/hydra/corruptor in the latemidgame and early lategame, but thereby has to delay broodlords and infestors, because hydras costs 100% more gas than roaches. Also I said, that a BL nerf might be needed for this. (which wouldn't be bad, if the ideal zerg composition would become less broodlords, more roach/hydra - so more diverse)
Why would it be bad for splash to be better against Roaches? Nobody gets Roaches against Siege Tanks that often, and by the time Colossi are out, you definitely have the tech to integrate some Infestors or Corruptors or, hell, even BLs into your army. In ZvZ, it's a mirror match, so I don't really think much thought needs to be given to "balance" there.
Nobody uses Burrow micro like Blink, so that's not really relevant.
Interesting note, though: a 75/50 Roach would still be 50 minerals cheaper than a Stalker, which seems to square rather well with how good the Roach is as compared to the Stalker (i.e. it's certainly better than half a Stalker, which is closer to its cost right now). Not saying that warrants any balance change on its own, but it's definitely something to consider.
|
On April 16 2012 00:41 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2012 00:16 Big J wrote:On April 15 2012 23:56 Shiori wrote:On April 15 2012 23:40 Big J wrote:On April 15 2012 23:18 monkybone wrote:On April 15 2012 23:13 Big J wrote:
Solution:
Increase Roach costs to 100/25 (~+20%costs) and buff their health by +15/25 to 160/170 (+10-15%health, but no damage increase!), making them lesscostefficient overall (midgame nerf), but better in the lategame, especially in their role to tank damage for hydralisks.
. .... Do you realize that gas is the limiting factor for midgame roach? This will make early/mid-game roach even more powerful. In any case, aren't in the position of knowing whether a change is even needed in the current metagame. None of these suggestions are any good. Cost, supply and stats-changes of units MUST be tested thorougly, and only blizzard knows how to do this properly. No, trust me, gas is not the limiting factor, but minerals are. A lot of zergs don't even take more than 4 geysers when going 3base roach or roach/ling and only take 5th and 6th gas when transitioning into mutalisks or infestors. If you go through this thread on 12min max, you can see that TangSC didn't even give timings for any geysers after #4 and from the pictures ("macrobenchmarks" in the thread), you can see on the 12min maxed one, that the income is 448 = 4geysers (the two in the main are not taken, neither are the two at the 4th base) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=324733Similar in ZvZ (and for ZvP 2base speedroach allins after gateway expands); 2base mass roach takes only 3gas, to get all the minerals needed for it and if too much minerals are mined, builds more lings, but not the other way round (taking more gas and then trying to spend the gas, because there is nothing you can spend "pure" gas on for those midgame roach attacks). And yeah I agree, only blizzard has the tools to really see whether or not this works, but this thread is all about such theorycrafts, so I think it's kind of OK to theorycraft here That's the point: right now you guys don't need geysers to make Roaches. If Roaches were 75/50, do you really think you'd be able to sit on 4 Geysers? Either way, that might make early timings to hard to defend for Zerg, so I recommend that we look at a health nerf rather than a useless mineral increase. Furthermore, the Roach does not in any way need a lategame buff. It's not SUPPOSED to be amazing lategame. Even with a health nerf, the Roach would be an incredibly solid unit in the midgame. BL/Infestor is already a pretty huge problem in PvZ right now (since it leads to scenarios relying on gimmicks like Vortex) and buffing the Roach lategame would just make the composition even stronger, which isn't necessary. All we Protoss players want is a weaker Roach in the midgame. We're not going to trade that for a stronger Roach in the lategame, because we're asking for a tweak to imbalance, not a tradeoff. I don't understand how this is the point of what I was saying. Roaches are limited by minerals, increasing their mineralcosts directly leads to less roaches at the same point in time. Of course, increasing their gas costs is similar, but +100% gas costs means that the roach becomes unplayable early-midgame with 3:2 coststats. If you nerf health of roaches, splash will just demolish them even harder, which will basically just be a buff for Infestor/SiegeTank/Colossus and to a lesser extend Ultralisk/Baneling/Archon/HT in vZ. Also burrow regeneration - and it's in combat micro - will become even less useful because after combat regeneration will just payoff less. Roaches are pretty bad in the lategame, because they die in even supply to nearly everything and get already countered very well by splash, while not providing any other role than straight up combat (apart from some cutsie "scrappy game" burrow stuff, that doesn't work in standard games). Hydralisks similarly. A health increase that goes hand in hand with a costefficency decrease on the other hand, would make roaches better against those splash units, but worse vs singlefire units - that's what (stronger) hydras would be for. It might, or might not make the lategame composition stronger. The point is, that to reach the same efficency that pure roach has right now, zerg should be forced to go hydralisks in the midgame, get more gain out of roach/hydra/corruptor in the latemidgame and early lategame, but thereby has to delay broodlords and infestors, because hydras costs 100% more gas than roaches. Also I said, that a BL nerf might be needed for this. (which wouldn't be bad, if the ideal zerg composition would become less broodlords, more roach/hydra - so more diverse) Why would it be bad for splash to be better against Roaches? Nobody gets Roaches against Siege Tanks that often, and by the time Colossi are out, you definitely have the tech to integrate some Infestors or Corruptors or, hell, even BLs into your army. In ZvZ, it's a mirror match, so I don't really think much thought needs to be given to "balance" there. Nobody uses Burrow micro like Blink, so that's not really relevant. Interesting note, though: a 75/50 Roach would still be 50 minerals cheaper than a Stalker, which seems to square rather well with how good the Roach is as compared to the Stalker (i.e. it's certainly better than half a Stalker, which is closer to its cost right now). Not saying that warrants any balance change on its own, but it's definitely something to consider.
Right now roaches scale OK vs low numbers of tanks and colossi. If you make them even less tanky, they lose one of their only roles - to punish techgreedy play. And I disagree, mirror balance is important.
Burrow micro is used preInfestor in ZvZ right now.
75/50 roaches still can't shoot air, still are slower than stalkers before an extra investment and their burrow upgrades are inferior to blink. Also they cannot be warped in, have no shield ability and still lose in 1v1 against a stalker.
Stalkers and roaches are meant to have different roles, comparing them like this is not the way to go about such balance changes.
(though funny enough, the groundsuperiority unit roach loses in high supply to the universal stalker)
|
On April 16 2012 00:41 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2012 00:16 Big J wrote:On April 15 2012 23:56 Shiori wrote:On April 15 2012 23:40 Big J wrote:On April 15 2012 23:18 monkybone wrote:On April 15 2012 23:13 Big J wrote:
Solution:
Increase Roach costs to 100/25 (~+20%costs) and buff their health by +15/25 to 160/170 (+10-15%health, but no damage increase!), making them lesscostefficient overall (midgame nerf), but better in the lategame, especially in their role to tank damage for hydralisks.
. .... Do you realize that gas is the limiting factor for midgame roach? This will make early/mid-game roach even more powerful. In any case, aren't in the position of knowing whether a change is even needed in the current metagame. None of these suggestions are any good. Cost, supply and stats-changes of units MUST be tested thorougly, and only blizzard knows how to do this properly. No, trust me, gas is not the limiting factor, but minerals are. A lot of zergs don't even take more than 4 geysers when going 3base roach or roach/ling and only take 5th and 6th gas when transitioning into mutalisks or infestors. If you go through this thread on 12min max, you can see that TangSC didn't even give timings for any geysers after #4 and from the pictures ("macrobenchmarks" in the thread), you can see on the 12min maxed one, that the income is 448 = 4geysers (the two in the main are not taken, neither are the two at the 4th base) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=324733Similar in ZvZ (and for ZvP 2base speedroach allins after gateway expands); 2base mass roach takes only 3gas, to get all the minerals needed for it and if too much minerals are mined, builds more lings, but not the other way round (taking more gas and then trying to spend the gas, because there is nothing you can spend "pure" gas on for those midgame roach attacks). And yeah I agree, only blizzard has the tools to really see whether or not this works, but this thread is all about such theorycrafts, so I think it's kind of OK to theorycraft here That's the point: right now you guys don't need geysers to make Roaches. If Roaches were 75/50, do you really think you'd be able to sit on 4 Geysers? Either way, that might make early timings to hard to defend for Zerg, so I recommend that we look at a health nerf rather than a useless mineral increase. Furthermore, the Roach does not in any way need a lategame buff. It's not SUPPOSED to be amazing lategame. Even with a health nerf, the Roach would be an incredibly solid unit in the midgame. BL/Infestor is already a pretty huge problem in PvZ right now (since it leads to scenarios relying on gimmicks like Vortex) and buffing the Roach lategame would just make the composition even stronger, which isn't necessary. All we Protoss players want is a weaker Roach in the midgame. We're not going to trade that for a stronger Roach in the lategame, because we're asking for a tweak to imbalance, not a tradeoff. I don't understand how this is the point of what I was saying. Roaches are limited by minerals, increasing their mineralcosts directly leads to less roaches at the same point in time. Of course, increasing their gas costs is similar, but +100% gas costs means that the roach becomes unplayable early-midgame with 3:2 coststats. If you nerf health of roaches, splash will just demolish them even harder, which will basically just be a buff for Infestor/SiegeTank/Colossus and to a lesser extend Ultralisk/Baneling/Archon/HT in vZ. Also burrow regeneration - and it's in combat micro - will become even less useful because after combat regeneration will just payoff less. Roaches are pretty bad in the lategame, because they die in even supply to nearly everything and get already countered very well by splash, while not providing any other role than straight up combat (apart from some cutsie "scrappy game" burrow stuff, that doesn't work in standard games). Hydralisks similarly. A health increase that goes hand in hand with a costefficency decrease on the other hand, would make roaches better against those splash units, but worse vs singlefire units - that's what (stronger) hydras would be for. It might, or might not make the lategame composition stronger. The point is, that to reach the same efficency that pure roach has right now, zerg should be forced to go hydralisks in the midgame, get more gain out of roach/hydra/corruptor in the latemidgame and early lategame, but thereby has to delay broodlords and infestors, because hydras costs 100% more gas than roaches. Also I said, that a BL nerf might be needed for this. (which wouldn't be bad, if the ideal zerg composition would become less broodlords, more roach/hydra - so more diverse) Why would it be bad for splash to be better against Roaches? Nobody gets Roaches against Siege Tanks that often, and by the time Colossi are out, you definitely have the tech to integrate some Infestors or Corruptors or, hell, even BLs into your army. In ZvZ, it's a mirror match, so I don't really think much thought needs to be given to "balance" there. Nobody uses Burrow micro like Blink, so that's not really relevant. Interesting note, though: a 75/50 Roach would still be 50 minerals cheaper than a Stalker, which seems to square rather well with how good the Roach is as compared to the Stalker (i.e. it's certainly better than half a Stalker, which is closer to its cost right now). Not saying that warrants any balance change on its own, but it's definitely something to consider.
Mass roach actually counters mech believe it or not
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41539
4850
289
79
EPT
