|
On July 01 2012 11:42 h0oTiS wrote:
- Baracks nerf they now take 5 seconds longer
=> This was because zerg was having a hard time dealing with 11/11's and bunker rushed, I feel its safe to say or atleast test the effects of reverting back since the queen buff which will greatly medigate the dammage from these rushes.
-Reaper nerf +10 seconds train time and speed required from the factory
=> This was done because zergs couldn't defend against early or mass reapers, however if the time was reverted the dammage would be prevented from the queen * leaving the speed nerf due to mass reaper problems*
Reverting the queen buff would obviously do nothing since an 11/11 would be hitting before you have enough queens out to really take advantage of the change. A basic understanding of the game would have ruled this out. Arguably, you could have 2 queens but that means no lings. Not to mention they will be firing down at your nat hatch just before its even done unless they flat-out suck at timing.
First, reapers don't come from factories. Second reapers really don't make great harassment tools compared to hellions because they can't clean up early lings like hellions can. You'll find great resistance to the reaper replacing the hellion as the opening for TvZ amongst Terrans based on its design.
|
On July 01 2012 11:47 sCCrooked wrote:
Reverting the queen buff would obviously do nothing since an 11/11 would be hitting before you have enough queens out to really take advantage of the change. A basic understanding of the game would have ruled this out. Arguably, you could have 2 queens but that means no lings. Not to mention they will be firing down at your nat hatch just before its even done unless they flat-out suck at timing.
First, reapers don't come from factories. Second reapers really don't make great harassment tools compared to hellions because they can't clean up early lings like hellions can. You'll find great resistance to the reaper replacing the hellion as the opening for TvZ amongst Terrans based on its design.
I am not talking about reverting the queen buff, I am talking about removing previous terran nerfs
- If the bunker rush actually dose dammage that means you proabably have one or two queens out which will help with the clean up, also the bunker nerf in my book is good and shoud not be changed
- The hellion replaced the reaper after it was nerfed... And the reaper fills a compeltely different role, scouting and early game harras mainly before the dropship...
|
On July 01 2012 12:13 h0oTiS wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2012 11:47 sCCrooked wrote:
Reverting the queen buff would obviously do nothing since an 11/11 would be hitting before you have enough queens out to really take advantage of the change. A basic understanding of the game would have ruled this out. Arguably, you could have 2 queens but that means no lings. Not to mention they will be firing down at your nat hatch just before its even done unless they flat-out suck at timing.
First, reapers don't come from factories. Second reapers really don't make great harassment tools compared to hellions because they can't clean up early lings like hellions can. You'll find great resistance to the reaper replacing the hellion as the opening for TvZ amongst Terrans based on its design. I am not talking about reverting the queen buff, I am talking about removing previous terran nerfs - If the bunker rush actually dose dammage that means you proabably have one or two queens out which will help with the clean up, also the bunker nerf in my book is good and shoud not be changed - The hellion replaced the reaper after it was nerfed... And the reaper fills a compeltely different role, scouting and early game harras mainly before the dropship...
I know you are. Reverting the 11/11 nerf because of queens supposedly being there to help mitigate damage is very flawed reasoning.
The hellion opening was used for scouting and early game harassment before the dropship. I fail to see how the reaper's role is "compeltely different" in its role based on this assessment.
|
When you look at the two units from a broad view they are similar, but there is no reason for an old nerf to be continued if the reason for its creaton is irrelivent. It can only lead to more builds diversifying the game. On a map such as Cloud kingdom a player may choose a reaper opener, then on a map like Ohanna choose to go hellions. Each unit has different way it can be used. While the reaper and the hellion won't be over powered the zerg will have to prepare differently for each attack makeing the zerg have to do more than hepr derp i have 2 queens and spreading creep in the front of their base, they also have to worry about their main and natural's exposure to ledges
"I know you are. Reverting the 11/11 nerf because of queens supposedly being there to help mitigate damage is very flawed reasoning."
explain?
Current timmings on shankuras close by air spawn locations
11/11 hits with 3 marines/ 3 scv at 4:20 this is just one variant that i do
14 hatch 16pl gives lings at 4:20 you can scout and make to defend
2 queens ready at 4:40
So assume that the baracks give you 5 more seconds that just mean that zerg has to defend with drones or hold off for a few seconds to get a swell of lings. Decreasing baracks build time only slightly widens the window before you have to get out. If the rush dose get a bunker up you can rush it with 2 queens at 4:40 with minimal losses.
HERP DERP SORRY
I meant the 5 second delay in 1.4 not the supply depo requirement
|
On July 01 2012 12:42 h0oTiS wrote:
When you look at the two units from a broad view they are similar, but there is no reason for an old nerf to be continued if the reason for its creaton is irrelivent. It can only lead to more builds diversifying the game. On a map such as Cloud kingdom a player may choose a reaper opener, then on a map like Ohanna choose to go hellions. Each unit has different way it can be used. While the reaper and the hellion won't be over powered the zerg will have to prepare differently for each attack makeing the zerg have to do more than hepr derp i have 2 queens and spreading creep in the front of their base, they also have to worry about their main and natural's exposure to ledges
"I know you are. Reverting the 11/11 nerf because of queens supposedly being there to help mitigate damage is very flawed reasoning."
explain?
Its not really a broad view. If you personally believe hellions did not fill the niche of early map control with harassment potential pre-dropship, I am open to your argument as to why this is not the case.
The Zerg response to both unit types would be the same. We would make a decent amount of queens with a few lings for both. This was an extremely common response both before and after the queen buff and would be the correct one I think for reapers or hellions. In short, according to me, your proposed reverting of the change would have little to no effect.
Lastly, I should not have to explain that very obvious statement I made. My previous post stated that queens are not usually out by the time 1-3 bunkers and an odd amount of scvs + marines are arriving at the front of your natural to build the offensive-defense front. Although its possible to have 2 queens started the second the nat hatch finishes, a good proxy 11/11 will hit before the hatch has completed. In fact there should be bunkers into yellow health of construction before the nat hatch completes unless I've been facing some extraordinary Terrans. In the face of this observed fact, it seems to me that your suggestion of reverting the barracks changes using the change in queens who will not be in sufficient numbers to make any difference is flawed.
|
On July 01 2012 13:13 sCCrooked wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2012 12:42 h0oTiS wrote:
When you look at the two units from a broad view they are similar, but there is no reason for an old nerf to be continued if the reason for its creaton is irrelivent. It can only lead to more builds diversifying the game. On a map such as Cloud kingdom a player may choose a reaper opener, then on a map like Ohanna choose to go hellions. Each unit has different way it can be used. While the reaper and the hellion won't be over powered the zerg will have to prepare differently for each attack makeing the zerg have to do more than hepr derp i have 2 queens and spreading creep in the front of their base, they also have to worry about their main and natural's exposure to ledges
"I know you are. Reverting the 11/11 nerf because of queens supposedly being there to help mitigate damage is very flawed reasoning."
explain?
Its not really a broad view. If you personally believe hellions did not fill the niche of early map control with harassment potential pre-dropship, I am open to your argument as to why this is not the case. The Zerg response to both unit types would be the same. We would make a decent amount of queens with a few lings for both. This was an extremely common response both before and after the queen buff and would be the correct one I think for reapers or hellions. In short, according to me, your proposed reverting of the change would have little to no effect. Lastly, I should not have to explain that very obvious statement I made. My previous post stated that queens are not usually out by the time 1-3 bunkers and an odd amount of scvs + marines are arriving at the front of your natural to build the offensive-defense front. Although its possible to have 2 queens started the second the nat hatch finishes, a good proxy 11/11 will hit before the hatch has completed. In fact there should be bunkers into yellow health of construction before the nat hatch completes unless I've been facing some extraordinary Terrans. In the face of this observed fact, it seems to me that your suggestion of reverting the barracks changes using the change in queens who will not be in sufficient numbers to make any difference is flawed.
The current problem with hellions in my personal opinion is that they are totally shut down by queens due to the fact that a good zerg will be able to make a semi wall blocked by a queen (Evo Evo Spine / Evo Evo Hatch seems very common) and hellions will only be able to harass the third and or attempt to harass creep spread. The thing that reapers would allow would be easy access into the main on many maps which would do what hellions used to do and now require a much heavier investment to do (Medivac Drop). Reapers turn into the harassing unit (with this proposed patch) that allows the terran to fill a niche between banshees (High tech investment to harass main and force detection) and the hellions who have now been reduced to creep harassment. Reapers will do the creep harass just as well as a hellion does currently but will allow a terran to go to siege marine or bio faster and more efficiently then hellions. This would put hellions as an option yes but would, in fact, make reapers a viable if not more favorable choice depending firstly, on build and secondly, on map.
To give a better example of when I feel the proposed reaper would be a better choice and a different choice than the hellion would be on a map like antiga ship yard. The reaper would allow a terran player to play a more biocentric build (Techlab straight into marauders necessary for blocking banelings whilst allowing his factory to go straight into reactor and then medivacs) Whilst a hellion opening would promote mech play which is very strong on a map like antiga (Easily defensible 3 bases whilst hard for zerg to get a fourth.)
Please explain to me how you don't see a clear distinction between first the type of harass that each unit does and secondly how you don't see a difference between the choices that each option would allow one greatly promoting bio play another greatly promoting mech play on a map where either is viable and the choice would help the respective build that it promotes (reapers bio/marine tank, hellion mech)
|
On July 01 2012 13:35 pFISTKitteh wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2012 13:13 sCCrooked wrote:On July 01 2012 12:42 h0oTiS wrote:
When you look at the two units from a broad view they are similar, but there is no reason for an old nerf to be continued if the reason for its creaton is irrelivent. It can only lead to more builds diversifying the game. On a map such as Cloud kingdom a player may choose a reaper opener, then on a map like Ohanna choose to go hellions. Each unit has different way it can be used. While the reaper and the hellion won't be over powered the zerg will have to prepare differently for each attack makeing the zerg have to do more than hepr derp i have 2 queens and spreading creep in the front of their base, they also have to worry about their main and natural's exposure to ledges
"I know you are. Reverting the 11/11 nerf because of queens supposedly being there to help mitigate damage is very flawed reasoning."
explain?
Its not really a broad view. If you personally believe hellions did not fill the niche of early map control with harassment potential pre-dropship, I am open to your argument as to why this is not the case. The Zerg response to both unit types would be the same. We would make a decent amount of queens with a few lings for both. This was an extremely common response both before and after the queen buff and would be the correct one I think for reapers or hellions. In short, according to me, your proposed reverting of the change would have little to no effect. Lastly, I should not have to explain that very obvious statement I made. My previous post stated that queens are not usually out by the time 1-3 bunkers and an odd amount of scvs + marines are arriving at the front of your natural to build the offensive-defense front. Although its possible to have 2 queens started the second the nat hatch finishes, a good proxy 11/11 will hit before the hatch has completed. In fact there should be bunkers into yellow health of construction before the nat hatch completes unless I've been facing some extraordinary Terrans. In the face of this observed fact, it seems to me that your suggestion of reverting the barracks changes using the change in queens who will not be in sufficient numbers to make any difference is flawed. The current problem with hellions in my personal opinion is that they are totally shut down by queens due to the fact that a good zerg will be able to make a semi wall blocked by a queen (Evo Evo Spine / Evo Evo Hatch seems very common) and hellions will only be able to harass the third and or attempt to harass creep spread. The thing that reapers would allow would be easy access into the main on many maps which would do what hellions used to do and now require a much heavier investment to do (Medivac Drop). Reapers turn into the harassing unit (with this proposed patch) that allows the terran to fill a niche between banshees (High tech investment to harass main and force detection) and the hellions who have now been reduced to creep harassment. Reapers will do the creep harass just as well as a hellion does currently but will allow a terran to go to siege marine or bio faster and more efficiently then hellions. This would put hellions as an option yes but would, in fact, make reapers a viable if not more favorable choice depending firstly, on build and secondly, on map. To give a better example of when I feel the proposed reaper would be a better choice and a different choice than the hellion would be on a map like antiga ship yard. The reaper would allow a terran player to play a more biocentric build (Techlab straight into marauders necessary for blocking banelings whilst allowing his factory to go straight into reactor and then medivacs) Whilst a hellion opening would promote mech play which is very strong on a map like antiga (Easily defensible 3 bases whilst hard for zerg to get a fourth.) Please explain to me how you don't see a clear distinction between first the type of harass that each unit does and secondly how you don't see a difference between the choices that each option would allow one greatly promoting bio play another greatly promoting mech play on a map where either is viable and the choice would help the respective build that it promotes (reapers bio/marine tank, hellion mech)
Its very obvious how the harassment type is different and I have stated several times that although the mechanics of the two units are different and their production structures also different, their niche is one and the same. I suppose its simply a difference of how you and I look at the game and its units. You prefer to look at its stats, I prefer to look at how its used in the flow of the match-up.
It could slightly affect your economy or army numbers because of the order in which you're building the structures but the difference would be rather small and unhelpful in the long run because you have completely missed the true issue that has everyone so agitated lately. The problem is still a design in the basics of the game in my opinion.
|
On July 01 2012 11:42 h0oTiS wrote:
So with this latest patch every terran from NA to EU has been getting there panties in a wad AND I HAVE A SOLUTION
- Baracks nerf; they now take 5 seconds longer to build
=> This was because zerg was having a hard time dealing with 11/11's and bunker rushes, I feel its safe to say or atleast test the effects of reverting back since the queen buff which will greatly medigate the dammage from these rushes. Map size has also signifigantly increased slowing the 11/11
-Reaper nerf; +10 seconds train time and SPEED UPGRADE requiring a FACTORY
=> This was done because zergs couldn't defend against early or mass reapers, however if the time was reverted the dammage would be prevented from the queen's new range * leaving the speed nerf due to mass reaper problems*
Removing these nerfs wouldn't hopefully have any direct effects on the balance but it would open the game up more, just about every unit in the terran arsenal has been nerfed and it feels like there arn't any options. This would bring some of those options back since they may no longer be imbalanced. Also I feel that the BFH nerf should be under consideration, I'm not sure how it could be changed since hellions were straight up overpowered; a decrease in cost or time of blue flame upgrade perhaps to make up for the dammage nerf...
The Barracks change would make 11/11 more stupid than it currently is. You previously stated that the Queen change would help this, well it has almost no effect. Wether or not a Zerg holds a 11/11 is dependent on how close and how many bunkers finish near the expansion hatchery. This is entirely dependent on how many and how well the Zerg micros his drones to prevent bunkers. Assuming only 1 bunker finishes in range of the hatch, Zerg will drop a spine, and protect it till it finishes. This all happens before a Queen has finished, sometimes the queen finishes in time to defend the spine. Once the spine finishes its just a race to see if the Zerg can clean up the bunker using the spine + support before the hatch dies, this race is almost impossible if more than one bunker is in range of the hatch.
The Queen buff did nothing to stop this, and the accumulation of various bunker and the mentioned rax buff are exactly what allow Zergs a shadow of a chance to stop 11/11.
Reaper Nerf: Here sure the Queen change does mean reapers are in check. However, as we have seen with Hellions, I don't see reapers getting more than 2 drone kills against a 4+ Queen opening. In fact, I belive they would be worse that opening reactored Hellions.
Opening 4-6 Hellions atleast threatens the ability to run buy the Queens infront spreading creep and also allows for vision at the front of the Zerg base. Meanwhile, Hellions will stop pure Ling-Bling all-ins as you can micro 4 Hellions against Lings off creep very cost efficiently.
I truely don't see the point of the changes, at all.
Deal with TvZ in some other way, learn 3 CC into Bio or 3 CC Into Mech depending on the map.
|
On July 01 2012 11:47 sCCrooked wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2012 11:42 h0oTiS wrote:
- Baracks nerf they now take 5 seconds longer
=> This was because zerg was having a hard time dealing with 11/11's and bunker rushed, I feel its safe to say or atleast test the effects of reverting back since the queen buff which will greatly medigate the dammage from these rushes.
-Reaper nerf +10 seconds train time and speed required from the factory
=> This was done because zergs couldn't defend against early or mass reapers, however if the time was reverted the dammage would be prevented from the queen * leaving the speed nerf due to mass reaper problems*
Reverting the queen buff would obviously do nothing since an 11/11 would be hitting before you have enough queens out to really take advantage of the change. A basic understanding of the game would have ruled this out. Arguably, you could have 2 queens but that means no lings. Not to mention they will be firing down at your nat hatch just before its even done unless they flat-out suck at timing. First, reapers don't come from factories. Second reapers really don't make great harassment tools compared to hellions because they can't clean up early lings like hellions can. You'll find great resistance to the reaper replacing the hellion as the opening for TvZ amongst Terrans based on its design.
Timings depend largely on the map size as well because "11/11 Marines" still need to get to the Zerg base before they can deal any damage.
[I wouldnt consider it past Blizzard to test for balance primarily on their own - rather smaller - maps, which screws up balance a lot. Maybe I am too harsh towards Blizzard, but the obviously totally broken concepts of many of the HotS units/skills leads me to believe they are sitting in their ivory tower and dont concern themselves with anything happening outside.]
|
On July 01 2012 14:41 Kajarn wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2012 11:42 h0oTiS wrote:
So with this latest patch every terran from NA to EU has been getting there panties in a wad AND I HAVE A SOLUTION
- Baracks nerf; they now take 5 seconds longer to build
=> This was because zerg was having a hard time dealing with 11/11's and bunker rushes, I feel its safe to say or atleast test the effects of reverting back since the queen buff which will greatly medigate the dammage from these rushes. Map size has also signifigantly increased slowing the 11/11
-Reaper nerf; +10 seconds train time and SPEED UPGRADE requiring a FACTORY
=> This was done because zergs couldn't defend against early or mass reapers, however if the time was reverted the dammage would be prevented from the queen's new range * leaving the speed nerf due to mass reaper problems*
Removing these nerfs wouldn't hopefully have any direct effects on the balance but it would open the game up more, just about every unit in the terran arsenal has been nerfed and it feels like there arn't any options. This would bring some of those options back since they may no longer be imbalanced. Also I feel that the BFH nerf should be under consideration, I'm not sure how it could be changed since hellions were straight up overpowered; a decrease in cost or time of blue flame upgrade perhaps to make up for the dammage nerf...
The Barracks change would make 11/11 more stupid than it currently is. You previously stated that the Queen change would help this, well it has almost no effect. Wether or not a Zerg holds a 11/11 is dependent on how close and how many bunkers finish near the expansion hatchery. This is entirely dependent on how many and how well the Zerg micros his drones to prevent bunkers. Assuming only 1 bunker finishes in range of the hatch, Zerg will drop a spine, and protect it till it finishes. This all happens before a Queen has finished, sometimes the queen finishes in time to defend the spine. Once the spine finishes its just a race to see if the Zerg can clean up the bunker using the spine + support before the hatch dies, this race is almost impossible if more than one bunker is in range of the hatch. The Queen buff did nothing to stop this, and the accumulation of various bunker and the mentioned rax buff are exactly what allow Zergs a shadow of a chance to stop 11/11. Reaper Nerf: Here sure the Queen change does mean reapers are in check. However, as we have seen with Hellions, I don't see reapers getting more than 2 drone kills against a 4+ Queen opening. In fact, I belive they would be worse that opening reactored Hellions. Opening 4-6 Hellions atleast threatens the ability to run buy the Queens infront spreading creep and also allows for vision at the front of the Zerg base. Meanwhile, Hellions will stop pure Ling-Bling all-ins as you can micro 4 Hellions against Lings off creep very cost efficiently. I truely don't see the point of the changes, at all. Deal with TvZ in some other way, learn 3 CC into Bio or 3 CC Into Mech depending on the map.
11/11 hasn't worked for the past month. Zerg just has to pull more drones and shift q's the scv with three drones and if the scv pulls of the bunker they just focus the bunker down.
3cc builds usually get crushed by zerg all ins as well as putting the terran at an even footing with the zerg. Basically, terran is taking a big risk early mid game, in order to stay even with the zerg. As it is right now, terran is having trouble keeping the zerg on his toes. Because now terrans are left with gimicky strats that require the zerg to screw up. Also, what i don't get is that I never see zerg check for proxy locations, if thats hard to deal with, just send a drone out. 50 min of lost mining time won't loose you the game compared to not knowing if the t is doing 11/11... like if zerg finds the 11/11 rax, it's basically gg. I would agree with the revert of the 5 second build time on the rax.
Nony talks about terran finding that sweet spot, but with the mechanics of zerg, it's for ever changing. I know that zerg like to get a 3rd down by roughly 7:30 8:00 so i make a push around that. But if the zerg is already all inning. It's auto loose for me. As the all in usually hits at 9:00 and his units pop at 8:30. So by the time i get to his third, he'll have surrounded the marines. Right now, that sweet spot Nony talks about is probably a 15-20 second window... Like finding a needle in a hay stack. But oh well, maybe one of us will find it...
|
I've come to realise one of the fundamental problems with Terran IMHO is not being able to tech switch.
Zerg have tech switch ability to any unit they can make instantly, as it only takes the infrastructure of 2-3 buildings to have any given unit, and the resources and larvae.
Protoss have tech switch ability between collossus and ht's at the drop of a hat in late game. These are 2 extremely powerful units to swtich between. Collosus obviously aren't as fast to switch to, but with chrono use, which always seems to be plentiful late game it definitely helps.
Terran seemingly can only mass produce vikings or medi's. Unlike Protoss and Zerg tech switches, one of these units is garuanteed useless if made at the wrong time. If toss goes collossus and you mass medi's gg. If you produce more vikings upon destroying a collossus army, anticipating a rebuild, and you get caught out with ht's, gg.
It would appear the obvious fix is to scout better, but this isn't alwyas as easy said than done. Scan in the wrong place at the wrong time, or even the right place at the wrong time, you are sent down a spiralling path of doom and destrcution.
It would be nice if Terran had a choice of tech paths, and tech paths that were close to replenishable as our P an Z counterparts.
|
Problem:Cannon rush in all forms,is to strong.
Evidence:A player can reach grandmaster by only doing the cannonrush, (gaulzi), this prooves that even at the highest level defending a cannonrush without falling significantly behind is extremely difficult.
At lower level the problem only increases, since the execution of the rush is way easier then the defence, a lower lvl player can still do a verry good and efficient cannonrush, while a lower lvl player can not reasonably defend this.
This is not only a problem with solo games, also with teamgames.
Manny monobattles end prematurely because one side decides to cannonrush wich is insta win, (monobattle are mostly verry low lvl players like bronze and silver) wich spoils manny manny games and takes the fun out of playing for manny players.
To sum it up:Cannonrush is spoiling the game for manny players while it adds verry little interesting strategic or tactical options for pro players.
Solution:
A-Remove the cannon from the game and replace it with the mothership core to give protoss the option of early defences while expanding
B-Make cannons require a robo bay besides or instead of a forge
Side Effects:None.
I also support the reduction of build time for the reaper.
Reapers beeing to strong against zerg early game was one of the reasons for the nerve (i remember it came shortly after morrow won one of the first european sc tournaments with mass reapers, defeating idra amongst others)
Now with the queen buff i think it would not be unreasonable to reduce the reaper build time again.
|
On July 01 2012 20:26 Rassy wrote:
Problem:Cannon rush in all forms,is to strong.
Evidence:A player can reach grandmaster by only doing the cannonrush, (gaulzi), this prooves that even at the highest level defending a cannonrush without falling significantly behind is extremely difficult.
At lower level the problem only increases, since the execution of the rush is way easier then the defence, a lower lvl player can still do a verry good and efficient cannonrush, while a lower lvl player can not reasonably defend this.
This is not only a problem with solo games, also with teamgames.
Manny monobattles end prematurely because one side decides to cannonrush wich is insta win, (monobattle are mostly verry low lvl players like bronze and silver) wich spoils manny manny games and takes the fun out of playing for manny players.
To sum it up:Cannonrush is spoiling the game for manny players while it adds verry little interesting strategic or tactical options for pro players.
Solution:
A-Remove the cannon from the game and replace it with the mothership core to give protoss the option of early defences while expanding
B-Make cannons require a robo bay besides or instead of a forge
Side Effects:None.
I also support the reduction of build time for the reaper.
Reapers beeing to strong against zerg early game was one of the reasons for the nerve (i remember it came shortly after morrow won one of the first european sc tournaments with mass reapers, defeating idra amongst others)
Now with the queen buff i think it would not be unreasonable to reduce the reaper build time again.
Are you kidding me? Cannon rushing is not a problem. It's a problem for people cause they don't scout. That's literally it
|
On July 01 2012 21:00 Chaggi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2012 20:26 Rassy wrote:
Problem:Cannon rush in all forms,is to strong.
Evidence:A player can reach grandmaster by only doing the cannonrush, (gaulzi), this prooves that even at the highest level defending a cannonrush without falling significantly behind is extremely difficult.
At lower level the problem only increases, since the execution of the rush is way easier then the defence, a lower lvl player can still do a verry good and efficient cannonrush, while a lower lvl player can not reasonably defend this.
This is not only a problem with solo games, also with teamgames.
Manny monobattles end prematurely because one side decides to cannonrush wich is insta win, (monobattle are mostly verry low lvl players like bronze and silver) wich spoils manny manny games and takes the fun out of playing for manny players.
To sum it up:Cannonrush is spoiling the game for manny players while it adds verry little interesting strategic or tactical options for pro players.
Solution:
A-Remove the cannon from the game and replace it with the mothership core to give protoss the option of early defences while expanding
B-Make cannons require a robo bay besides or instead of a forge
Side Effects:None.
I also support the reduction of build time for the reaper.
Reapers beeing to strong against zerg early game was one of the reasons for the nerve (i remember it came shortly after morrow won one of the first european sc tournaments with mass reapers, defeating idra amongst others)
Now with the queen buff i think it would not be unreasonable to reduce the reaper build time again. Are you kidding me? Cannon rushing is not a problem. It's a problem for people cause they don't scout. That's literally it
And what? Robotics bay to make cannons? That sure does make sense ;D
|
On July 01 2012 21:00 Chaggi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2012 20:26 Rassy wrote:
Problem:Cannon rush in all forms,is to strong.
Evidence:A player can reach grandmaster by only doing the cannonrush, (gaulzi), this prooves that even at the highest level defending a cannonrush without falling significantly behind is extremely difficult.
At lower level the problem only increases, since the execution of the rush is way easier then the defence, a lower lvl player can still do a verry good and efficient cannonrush, while a lower lvl player can not reasonably defend this.
This is not only a problem with solo games, also with teamgames.
Manny monobattles end prematurely because one side decides to cannonrush wich is insta win, (monobattle are mostly verry low lvl players like bronze and silver) wich spoils manny manny games and takes the fun out of playing for manny players.
To sum it up:Cannonrush is spoiling the game for manny players while it adds verry little interesting strategic or tactical options for pro players.
Solution:
A-Remove the cannon from the game and replace it with the mothership core to give protoss the option of early defences while expanding
B-Make cannons require a robo bay besides or instead of a forge
Side Effects:None.
I also support the reduction of build time for the reaper.
Reapers beeing to strong against zerg early game was one of the reasons for the nerve (i remember it came shortly after morrow won one of the first european sc tournaments with mass reapers, defeating idra amongst others)
Now with the queen buff i think it would not be unreasonable to reduce the reaper build time again. Are you kidding me? Cannon rushing is not a problem. It's a problem for people cause they don't scout. That's literally it
Not that I think cannon rushing is OP or a problem, but with the size of maps today by the time you do scout it, the cannon has already statrted in your main/nat. Unless you scout with one of your starting workers of course
|
On July 01 2012 21:10 magnaflow wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2012 21:00 Chaggi wrote:On July 01 2012 20:26 Rassy wrote:
Problem:Cannon rush in all forms,is to strong.
Evidence:A player can reach grandmaster by only doing the cannonrush, (gaulzi), this prooves that even at the highest level defending a cannonrush without falling significantly behind is extremely difficult.
At lower level the problem only increases, since the execution of the rush is way easier then the defence, a lower lvl player can still do a verry good and efficient cannonrush, while a lower lvl player can not reasonably defend this.
This is not only a problem with solo games, also with teamgames.
Manny monobattles end prematurely because one side decides to cannonrush wich is insta win, (monobattle are mostly verry low lvl players like bronze and silver) wich spoils manny manny games and takes the fun out of playing for manny players.
To sum it up:Cannonrush is spoiling the game for manny players while it adds verry little interesting strategic or tactical options for pro players.
Solution:
A-Remove the cannon from the game and replace it with the mothership core to give protoss the option of early defences while expanding
B-Make cannons require a robo bay besides or instead of a forge
Side Effects:None.
I also support the reduction of build time for the reaper.
Reapers beeing to strong against zerg early game was one of the reasons for the nerve (i remember it came shortly after morrow won one of the first european sc tournaments with mass reapers, defeating idra amongst others)
Now with the queen buff i think it would not be unreasonable to reduce the reaper build time again. Are you kidding me? Cannon rushing is not a problem. It's a problem for people cause they don't scout. That's literally it Not that I think cannon rushing is OP or a problem, but with the size of maps today by the time you do scout it, the cannon has already statrted in your main/nat. Unless you scout with one of your starting workers of course
so..... just do that maybe? Congrats, you solved your own problem! :D
|
On July 01 2012 16:27 WaKai wrote:
11/11 hasn't worked for the past month. Zerg just has to pull more drones and shift q's the scv with three drones and if the scv pulls of the bunker they just focus the bunker down.
3cc builds usually get crushed by zerg all ins as well as putting the terran at an even footing with the zerg. Basically, terran is taking a big risk early mid game, in order to stay even with the zerg. As it is right now, terran is having trouble keeping the zerg on his toes. Because now terrans are left with gimicky strats that require the zerg to screw up. Also, what i don't get is that I never see zerg check for proxy locations, if thats hard to deal with, just send a drone out. 50 min of lost mining time won't loose you the game compared to not knowing if the t is doing 11/11... like if zerg finds the 11/11 rax, it's basically gg. I would agree with the revert of the 5 second build time on the rax.
Nony talks about terran finding that sweet spot, but with the mechanics of zerg, it's for ever changing. I know that zerg like to get a 3rd down by roughly 7:30 8:00 so i make a push around that. But if the zerg is already all inning. It's auto loose for me. As the all in usually hits at 9:00 and his units pop at 8:30. So by the time i get to his third, he'll have surrounded the marines. Right now, that sweet spot Nony talks about is probably a 15-20 second window... Like finding a needle in a hay stack. But oh well, maybe one of us will find it...
Also with the overlord speed increase its easy to send (example anitiga/shankuras/ taldarim) your first ovy to 1 base, 2nd ovy to your natural it can also scout a little farther out with the speed, easily seeing really close proxy racks or an scv building a bunker, and worse case you send a drone to scout the other 1 or two bases and your compeletely safe. I completely agree, once the zerg see that your proxying 11/11 all you have to do is pull drones, even if you pull all your drones to defend you will still be way ahead because the terran won't be able to put more pressure on again for at least 4 minutes
|
On July 01 2012 20:26 Rassy wrote:
Problem:Cannon rush in all forms,is to strong.
Evidence:A player can reach grandmaster by only doing the cannonrush, (gaulzi), this prooves that even at the highest level defending a cannonrush without falling significantly behind is extremely difficult.
At lower level the problem only increases, since the execution of the rush is way easier then the defence, a lower lvl player can still do a verry good and efficient cannonrush, while a lower lvl player can not reasonably defend this.
This is not only a problem with solo games, also with teamgames.
Manny monobattles end prematurely because one side decides to cannonrush wich is insta win, (monobattle are mostly verry low lvl players like bronze and silver) wich spoils manny manny games and takes the fun out of playing for manny players.
To sum it up:Cannonrush is spoiling the game for manny players while it adds verry little interesting strategic or tactical options for pro players.
Solution:
A-Remove the cannon from the game and replace it with the mothership core to give protoss the option of early defences while expanding
B-Make cannons require a robo bay besides or instead of a forge
Side Effects:None.
Cannon rushes are only a problem in pvz, if your cannon rushing in pvp or pvt your going to lose 99 times out of a 100 if your diamond or above. Even cannon rushing in pvz isn't that much of a big deal, with proper defence it can put the hurt on protoss big time. I don't see any problem with this. Side effects, protoss will most definently lose against zerg completely because the FFE is basically their only opener for pvz and would have far reaching impacts that would be very sever to fix.
|
I have a thought regarding fungal growth, and I'm sure I'm not alone on this line of reasoning.
We could try making it so that it stops the units for only 1 second out of the 4, the other 3 second will be a gradual recovery of speed linearly, throughout the 3 seconds, the units will go from 0% speed to 75% speed, then immediately to 100% after the 4 seconds elapsed.
This way it can still be chained, but also encourages the opponent to try and do something with fungalled units.
I don't think it's that complicated, maybe someone could do it on the editor.
I have a feeling that Blizzard is more interested in the balance numbers rather than the "fun" factor for WoL as they are working on HotS, I wish they could change this for the expansion though.
Maybe someone could make a custom map specifically made for people to fit in their own take on balance.
|
People are now familiar with the common argument that the queen range buff made Zerg OP because Terran can't no longer do damage to Zerg economy early-game and Zerg can just be greedy and drone up to more than 70 and it's very difficult to beat Zerg after that. Before the 1.4.3.2 patch, Terran can do early and serious economic damage to Zerg, so Terran can beat Zerg in the mid-to-late game.
But why is that Terran has to do early economic damage to Zerg to win?
In fact, this is implicitly saying that there are some inherent problems in TvZ late-game. This is saying that if both sides are peaceful before mid-game, and then both sides start battling, Terran will have difficulty beating Zerg.
Is there truly some inherent problems in TvZ late-game? Let's do some analyses.
There are two main late-game Zerg composition these days:
1, ultra + zergling + bane + roach + infestor;
2, broodlord + corruptor + infestor + zergling + bane + roach.
The ratio of different units is different in different situations but the essence is in the above composition.
There are also two main late-game Terran composition in response to the above Zerg composition:
1, marine + marauder + tank + medivac + ghost + thor
2, marine + marauder + tank + medivac + ghost + thor + viking + raven
You may already see the problems in the above compositions. That is you can hardly see the full composition of "marine + marauder + tank + medivac + ghost + thor + viking + raven", though there have been some rare situation that such composition is developed in TvZ.
But it’s much easier to see the full composition of “ultra + zergling + bane + roach + infestor” and “broodlord + corruptor + infestor + zergling + bane + roach”.
Terran mostly is using their tier 1 and tier 2 units to fight the “full-tiers” composition of Zerg. So why doesn’t Terran build higher-tier units?
Many people have said things like “marine counters everything” or “Terran should explore more compositions behind MMM balls” or “Many Terrans overlook that ghost is so good” or “Terran should use raven late-game; they are powerful than most people think”.
But the truth is not that Terran doesn’t want to build higher-tier units or Terran players are too stupid to come up with new late-game compositions but that their higher-tier units are either not worth building or too expensive for the crippled late-game economy.
Let’s do some comparison.
1. Viking vs Corruptor
Viking is widely used in TvZ but it’s not so good compare to corruptor which is considered the most powerful air-to-air unit in the game.
Corruptor:
Cost: 150 / 100
Build time: 40
Life: 200
Viking:
Cost: 150 / 75
Build time: 42
Life: 125
Viking can’t win corruptor with the same supply. Some one may said you can kite Corruptor because Viking’s range is 9. But no you can’t, because corruptor is much faster than Viking. It’s like saying you can use tank to kite roach.
So, you have to use PDD to win an air battle against Corruptor. But your Viking will face the danger of fungal growth.
2. Ultra vs Thor
Normally Terran doesn’t use Thor to fight ultra, but actually Thor wins in one on one against ultra by one shot. But still people normally use marauder to counter ultra. Why? One important reason is that ultra has a build time buff in 1.4.0 where its build time decreased from 75 to 55.
Ultra:
Cost: 300 / 200
Build time: 55
Speed: 2.9531. Speed Multiplier on Creep: 1.3
Thor:
Cost: 300/ 200
Build time: 60
Speed: 1,875
You would just wonder with larvae Zerg can build multiple units much faster than other races, why their late-game units have shorter build time than other races? They just do. When Zerg normally build 3-5 ultra at a time, you never saw a Terran build more than 2 thors at one time. And did you see the mobility of ultra?
3. Ghost / Raven vs Infestor
Infestor
Cost: 100 / 150
Build time: 50
Ghost
Cost: 200 / 100
Build time: 40
Raven
Cost: 100 / 200
Build time: 60
First fungal growth outranges EMP and sniper. The range of fungal is 9 + 2 = 11. EMP is 10 + 1.5 = 11.5 But EMP requires an animation while fungal is instant cast, so fungal can always hit ghost before ghost can shoot EMP. Snipe’s range is 10 and it requires an animation too, so fungal easily outranges snipe too.
Also, the ghost cost change from 150 / 150 to 200 / 100 is definitely a nerf, according to QXC and Bomber. Late-game Terran has excessive gas but lacks mineral, the cost change increased the mineral cost but reduced the gas cost.
This is not my point. It's the words from QXC and Bomber. In SOTG EP72, QXC talks about why ghost's cost will damage the production of other Terran units in the mid-to-late game. Bomber in the GSL interview this season laid out the reason that he built raven late-game is that Terran has excessive gas the late-game but enough mineral. (Raven cost is 100 / 200).
But when do you see auto-turret? Infested terran is now used in almost every TvZ matchup to shot down dropships, to attract enemy fire, and even to mass infested terrans like in Freaky’s play. Infested terran is 25 energy cost but has a range fo 9. Auto-turret is 50 energy cost but has a range of 3. And the DPS of one auto-turret is much lower than two infested terrans.
The infestors pit costs 100 / 100 and a build time of 50. The starport and tech lab combine cost 200 / 125 and a build time of 75. And three raven researches cost 600 / 600 and research time of 330. But the infestor researches cost 300 / 300 and research time of 190.
Several raven is easily shut down by chain fungal + infested terran. But you can’t even use seeker missile to kill infestors before they use fungal and infested terran, because the range of seeker missile is 6 but the fungal growth’s range is 11 and the infested Terran’s range is 9 + 5 = 14.
Creep and Burrowed Unit
Beside all the above comparisons of late-game units, Zerg has several advantages late-game. First, one hatchery’s max larvae number is 19. When Zerg has more than 5 bases, they may have more than 100 larvae at maximum.
Also, Terran’s expansion to the fourth base is easily blocked by creep. Killing the creep and wait for the creep to go away will cost another 2 minutes. In addition, a single burrowed Zergling can deny your further expansion and force you to bring several marines back and use a scan to clean up the burrowed Zerglings.
The suggestion for further patches:
1. Don’t revert the queen buff, but change the range to 4 should be the best solution. Anyone remember of the pre-patch days when BFH just kill all the drones right away will not support reverting the queen buff.
2. Zerg’s burrowed Light units can no longer prevent Terran flying build from landing. The burrowed Light unit will instantly die when building lands. (Terran flying building still cannot land with unburrowed Light units or other non-Light burrowed units underneath.)
3. Revert ghost cost to 150 / 150 or 125 / 150. Snipe changed to 45 (30 vs Massive)
4. Some minor Raven buff:
----Auto-turret's hit point increased to 200, up from 150 and damage increased to 12, up from 10.
----Seeker Missile's casting range increased to 7, up from 6.
----Durable Materials research removed. Auto-Turrets and Point Defense Drones's duration are now 240 seconds. Seeker Missile's duration is now 20 seconds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
