|
On July 27 2012 07:40 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 06:36 Bagi wrote:On July 27 2012 06:14 Shiori wrote:On July 27 2012 06:09 Bagi wrote:On July 27 2012 05:47 Shiori wrote:On July 27 2012 05:25 avilo wrote:
I'll be making a post on TL later as well as a video giving urgent feedback on HOTS because earlier today with my stream I just figured out that Blizzard is actually nerfing lategame TvP with HOTS because of how they say they are going to change the ghost.
So, yes, Terran is being nerfed again. If you do not know what i'm talking about, i'm speaking of the ghost cooldown change with cloak. It's a nerf to lategame Terran nuke harrass and the ghost in general. lategame TvP is fine. ..said the protoss. Seriously now, even Blizzard says protoss has an advantage in the lategame. Blizzard said that many months ago, and was as wrong then as they are now. Lategame TvP has been figured out by the top level players. Just because Avilo is notoriously awful at it doesn't mean anything. I guess you have a ton of recent endgame winrates to base this or even high level examples of this occuring? You know, anything other than "because I said so"? Because as far as I can tell, terrans are still winning their games in the midgame. Also, recent Protoss success? I wouldn't say there's been a whole lot of it. Just because Protoss will win a GSL for the first time in over a year doesn't exactly mean there's a huge slew of Protoss wins. A Terran won MLG Summer Arena. A Zerg won NASL. A Zerg won HSC. Where is this wealth of Protoss success?
Recently the top end of tournaments have been characterised by three things: an absence of Terrans, an overabundance of Protosses, a Zerg winning. To take the major recent tournaments (aka. those you mentioned plus Dreamhack):
HSCV Top 8: 37.5% Protoss.
Top 4: 50%.
GSL Top 8: 37.5% Protoss.
Top 4: 50%
MLG Top 8: 50% Protoss.
Top 4: 75%.
NASL Top 8: 62.5% Protoss.
Top 4 50% Protoss.
Dreamhack Top 8: 62.5% Protoss.
Top 4 50%.
Average top 8: 50% Protoss.
Top 4: 55% Protoss.
Edit for fun.
Average top 8: 37.5% Zerg.
Top 4: 35%.
Average top 8: 12.5% Terran
Top 4: 10%.
|
On July 27 2012 07:40 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 06:36 Bagi wrote:On July 27 2012 06:14 Shiori wrote:On July 27 2012 06:09 Bagi wrote:On July 27 2012 05:47 Shiori wrote:On July 27 2012 05:25 avilo wrote:
I'll be making a post on TL later as well as a video giving urgent feedback on HOTS because earlier today with my stream I just figured out that Blizzard is actually nerfing lategame TvP with HOTS because of how they say they are going to change the ghost.
So, yes, Terran is being nerfed again. If you do not know what i'm talking about, i'm speaking of the ghost cooldown change with cloak. It's a nerf to lategame Terran nuke harrass and the ghost in general. lategame TvP is fine. ..said the protoss. Seriously now, even Blizzard says protoss has an advantage in the lategame. Blizzard said that many months ago, and was as wrong then as they are now. Lategame TvP has been figured out by the top level players. Just because Avilo is notoriously awful at it doesn't mean anything. I guess you have a ton of recent endgame winrates to base this or even high level examples of this occuring? You know, anything other than "because I said so"? Because as far as I can tell, terrans are still winning their games in the midgame. That doesn't mean Terran is getting smashed in the lategame. Very few PvTs in general even progress to the lategame. Hell, the few notable ones we do get tend to be marred by a huge disparity in skill (say, Squirtle vs a foreigner). Those excellent games way back when between Parting and MKP still remain the benchmark for how lategame PVT can and should work, and although the metagame has shifted slightly since then, I'd say it's actually shifted more toward Terran as they've become more comfortable with lategame control and using Planetaries to take advantage of the map. Also, recent Protoss success? I wouldn't say there's been a whole lot of it. Just because Protoss will win a GSL for the first time in over a year doesn't exactly mean there's a huge slew of Protoss wins. A Terran won MLG Summer Arena. A Zerg won NASL. A Zerg won HSC. Where is this wealth of Protoss success? If you are losing to Zerg as Terran, it is because Zerg is at a point right now where no amount of control will put you in a good position against certain strategies/compositions. If you are losing to Protoss as Terran in the lategame,it is because you do not understand how to engage. Why do I know this? Because there are defined ways of engaging that high level Terrans do on a regular basis with fairly reliable success (i.e. around 50%). Until every Terran starts dropping against scrub level Protosses (which is what's happened variously with TvZ) there's no evidence of a problem.
Just to put this out there:
I play Skyterran as my TvP standard. I have REALLY hammered this build out to the point that i OFTEN get to a 5 base versus 3 base situation with even upgrades and a intimidating mass banshee tank marine army with macro orbitals. This is quite literally common for me. However, even in spite of doing constant air harass, having reasonably fast upgrades and a MUCH better economy it is not uncommon for me to lose in this 3 base vs 5 base scenario because protoss units are simply more efficient then terran tech. In my experience I have to be extremely cautious in all scenarios because as few as 3+ Hts and a dozen+ stalkers can kill 15 or so banshees. As long as the protoss knows what he's doing you can have your handsful.
Just today i was going 5 bases versus 3, i pushed ahead and lost most of my army to kill his 3rd and some of his army. The result was basically me on 5 bases (the 3rd + all being pfs) and with about 120 supply (with scv advantage) versus 150 supply. Despite getting to 3/3 and battlecruisers the protoss bashed through two planetaries using immortals, zealots and stalkers, in spite of taking tank and banshee shots throughout he had enough energy to get all the way to my natural before being killed. Terran tech against protoss can not be the solution except in VERY rare circumstances. Hightemplar are simply to strong of a counter to really leave many tech options viable.
That's not to say i think the MU is imbalanced, just that resorting to teching to get an edge will leave you next to no where because that's exactly the style I go, until recently it has worked FANTASTIC, but once you get to a decent level high masters protosses respond extraordinarily well and can go toe to toe easily.
|
On July 27 2012 08:24 Schlendrian wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 06:32 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 06:25 Thrombozyt wrote:
The late game warp-in problem could be avoided partly, if pylons only power warp-ins if not under fire.
Only if shields could possibly regenerate, the warp-in continues and is paused the instance the pylon comes under fire.
Oh.. and refund only 75% of the resources, if a warp-in gets canceled. I don't think there's any way to meaningfully nerf lategame warpins without a major overhaul of the mechanic itself. Not even making warp-ins only possible next to Nexi or a warp prism would make a difference lategame. It'd have to be something really drastic, like maybe warped-in units costing 25 more minerals? In any case, there's no way to fix it without an expansion, and Browder doesn't even seem aware of the problem. Wouldn't it be an easy solution, if the warpgate stays on cooldown, as soon as you're maxed out? So basically, you warp in units and if you have warp-ins left, you can use them for remax. But the Gates you used stay on cooldown, until supply is there for the unit of your desire.
Any and all measures which rely on the Protoss maxing out can be worked around by stopping at 199/200.
On July 27 2012 08:13 Dalavita wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 07:50 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 07:00 Tao367 wrote:On July 27 2012 06:32 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 06:25 Thrombozyt wrote:
The late game warp-in problem could be avoided partly, if pylons only power warp-ins if not under fire.
Only if shields could possibly regenerate, the warp-in continues and is paused the instance the pylon comes under fire.
Oh.. and refund only 75% of the resources, if a warp-in gets canceled. I don't think there's any way to meaningfully nerf lategame warpins without a major overhaul of the mechanic itself. Not even making warp-ins only possible next to Nexi or a warp prism would make a difference lategame. It'd have to be something really drastic, like maybe warped-in units costing 25 more minerals? In any case, there's no way to fix it without an expansion, and Browder doesn't even seem aware of the problem. There is literally nothing wrong with protoss warpins, if you're losing when the protoss is warping in next to your base, you went wrong before that moment. You are not losing because of warpins. FYI, Protoss is my main race, and I don't think WG is imbalanced. Why would anyone be surprised about that?
The guy I was replying to, presumably. Which is why I was replying to him...
|
Oh. One other thing that has been bothering me, the infestors versatility.
The infestor:
- Burrows/Cloaks
- Harasses
- Reveals cloaked units
- Stunlocks units
- Provides strong anti-air (same dps as auto-turret 1/2 the energy)
- Takes control of powerful tier 3 units.
What this adds up to for me is a complete inability to use mech tvz.
Not only does fungal growth get a bonus against armored but it utterly destroys the fragile but important hellion buffer and can shut down banshee harassment in things such as banshee/thor/hellion compositions. Moreover, infested terrans ALSO get a bonus to armored, the abuse mech's immobility, can deal with an air/tech transition, soak up tank damage before a swarm and can snipe tanks using friendly fire. To top if all off, neural parasite can take control of thors to make going a thor heavy composition impossible due to the threat of mass neural. I found found myself in situations where 13+ 3/3 thors and mass hellions are thwarted easily from a dozen or so roaches and infestors.
I'm sorry if this comes off too complaint heavy, I think it's based on fact however. I'm just at a loss at what to do. Could someone PM or link me a bio build by demuslim maybe? Mech is what i did in all matchups for so long but i cant continue in TvZ... 
|
The wholse thing seems to be a matter of the performance vs skill slope.
For different races the performancee of units scales different with the skill. Marines at the hands of a Code S terran are much stronger than marines at the hands of a diamond terran. For Collosy this is different. In order to balance the game at all levels, the protoss/zerg need units that scale well with skill (oracle), while terran needs a move units.(warhound).
If the races performance depends differently on the skill then balance through all levels can never be achieved, and currently the game is balanced for Code S. In HOTS all races might have two different styles, a passive style (mech for terran) that scales bad with skill and is well suited for weaker players and an active/mutitasking playstyle that allows a lot of harrasment and is good for strong players.
|
On July 27 2012 08:42 Toadvine wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 08:24 Schlendrian wrote:On July 27 2012 06:32 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 06:25 Thrombozyt wrote:
The late game warp-in problem could be avoided partly, if pylons only power warp-ins if not under fire.
Only if shields could possibly regenerate, the warp-in continues and is paused the instance the pylon comes under fire.
Oh.. and refund only 75% of the resources, if a warp-in gets canceled. I don't think there's any way to meaningfully nerf lategame warpins without a major overhaul of the mechanic itself. Not even making warp-ins only possible next to Nexi or a warp prism would make a difference lategame. It'd have to be something really drastic, like maybe warped-in units costing 25 more minerals? In any case, there's no way to fix it without an expansion, and Browder doesn't even seem aware of the problem. Wouldn't it be an easy solution, if the warpgate stays on cooldown, as soon as you're maxed out? So basically, you warp in units and if you have warp-ins left, you can use them for remax. But the Gates you used stay on cooldown, until supply is there for the unit of your desire. Any and all measures which rely on the Protoss maxing out can be worked around by stopping at 199/200.
Ok, then let's say you need the supply left over for the specific unit, like Terran basically. CD for the first Warpgate starts at 198/200, for the second at 196/200 and so on.
|
On July 27 2012 09:13 Schlendrian wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 08:42 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 08:24 Schlendrian wrote:On July 27 2012 06:32 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 06:25 Thrombozyt wrote:
The late game warp-in problem could be avoided partly, if pylons only power warp-ins if not under fire.
Only if shields could possibly regenerate, the warp-in continues and is paused the instance the pylon comes under fire.
Oh.. and refund only 75% of the resources, if a warp-in gets canceled. I don't think there's any way to meaningfully nerf lategame warpins without a major overhaul of the mechanic itself. Not even making warp-ins only possible next to Nexi or a warp prism would make a difference lategame. It'd have to be something really drastic, like maybe warped-in units costing 25 more minerals? In any case, there's no way to fix it without an expansion, and Browder doesn't even seem aware of the problem. Wouldn't it be an easy solution, if the warpgate stays on cooldown, as soon as you're maxed out? So basically, you warp in units and if you have warp-ins left, you can use them for remax. But the Gates you used stay on cooldown, until supply is there for the unit of your desire. Any and all measures which rely on the Protoss maxing out can be worked around by stopping at 199/200. Ok, then let's say you need the supply left over for the specific unit, like Terran basically. CD for the first Warpgate starts at 198/200, for the second at 196/200 and so on.
Having warpgates off cooldown at max has literally never been a problem balance wise in a pro game. Show me a single broadcast game that has these balance implications. Just because protoss gateways units can reinforce in 5 seconds instead of 25 doesn't mean it's imbalanced... Blizzard already took this fact into account by making gateway units terribly inefficient compared to tier one units of other races. They also took away KA so HTs can't be useful right away, and if you morph them into archons, that's 2 gateways worth of units and takes 15 secs. Definitely not a problem. We don't want every race to play the same way... If you would rather have weak units that reinforce quickly, choose zerg or toss rather than terran. Terran has to wait a bit longer, but the wait is worth it because their units are much more cost effective.
|
On July 27 2012 10:44 Fig wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 09:13 Schlendrian wrote:On July 27 2012 08:42 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 08:24 Schlendrian wrote:On July 27 2012 06:32 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 06:25 Thrombozyt wrote:
The late game warp-in problem could be avoided partly, if pylons only power warp-ins if not under fire.
Only if shields could possibly regenerate, the warp-in continues and is paused the instance the pylon comes under fire.
Oh.. and refund only 75% of the resources, if a warp-in gets canceled. I don't think there's any way to meaningfully nerf lategame warpins without a major overhaul of the mechanic itself. Not even making warp-ins only possible next to Nexi or a warp prism would make a difference lategame. It'd have to be something really drastic, like maybe warped-in units costing 25 more minerals? In any case, there's no way to fix it without an expansion, and Browder doesn't even seem aware of the problem. Wouldn't it be an easy solution, if the warpgate stays on cooldown, as soon as you're maxed out? So basically, you warp in units and if you have warp-ins left, you can use them for remax. But the Gates you used stay on cooldown, until supply is there for the unit of your desire. Any and all measures which rely on the Protoss maxing out can be worked around by stopping at 199/200. Ok, then let's say you need the supply left over for the specific unit, like Terran basically. CD for the first Warpgate starts at 198/200, for the second at 196/200 and so on. Having warpgates off cooldown at max has literally never been a problem balance wise in a pro game. Show me a single broadcast game that has these balance implications. Just because protoss gateways units can reinforce in 5 seconds instead of 25 doesn't mean it's imbalanced... Blizzard already took this fact into account by making gateway units terribly inefficient compared to tier one units of other races. They also took away KA so HTs can't be useful right away, and if you morph them into archons, that's 2 gateways worth of units and takes 15 secs. Definitely not a problem. We don't want every race to play the same way... If you would rather have weak units that reinforce quickly, choose zerg or toss rather than terran. Terran has to wait a bit longer, but the wait is worth it because their units are much more cost effective.
Have you never seen how good a zealot warpin does after a major battle in TvP?
|
On July 27 2012 10:48 Shasta37 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 10:44 Fig wrote:On July 27 2012 09:13 Schlendrian wrote:On July 27 2012 08:42 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 08:24 Schlendrian wrote:On July 27 2012 06:32 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 06:25 Thrombozyt wrote:
The late game warp-in problem could be avoided partly, if pylons only power warp-ins if not under fire.
Only if shields could possibly regenerate, the warp-in continues and is paused the instance the pylon comes under fire.
Oh.. and refund only 75% of the resources, if a warp-in gets canceled. I don't think there's any way to meaningfully nerf lategame warpins without a major overhaul of the mechanic itself. Not even making warp-ins only possible next to Nexi or a warp prism would make a difference lategame. It'd have to be something really drastic, like maybe warped-in units costing 25 more minerals? In any case, there's no way to fix it without an expansion, and Browder doesn't even seem aware of the problem. Wouldn't it be an easy solution, if the warpgate stays on cooldown, as soon as you're maxed out? So basically, you warp in units and if you have warp-ins left, you can use them for remax. But the Gates you used stay on cooldown, until supply is there for the unit of your desire. Any and all measures which rely on the Protoss maxing out can be worked around by stopping at 199/200. Ok, then let's say you need the supply left over for the specific unit, like Terran basically. CD for the first Warpgate starts at 198/200, for the second at 196/200 and so on. Having warpgates off cooldown at max has literally never been a problem balance wise in a pro game. Show me a single broadcast game that has these balance implications. Just because protoss gateways units can reinforce in 5 seconds instead of 25 doesn't mean it's imbalanced... Blizzard already took this fact into account by making gateway units terribly inefficient compared to tier one units of other races. They also took away KA so HTs can't be useful right away, and if you morph them into archons, that's 2 gateways worth of units and takes 15 secs. Definitely not a problem. We don't want every race to play the same way... If you would rather have weak units that reinforce quickly, choose zerg or toss rather than terran. Terran has to wait a bit longer, but the wait is worth it because their units are much more cost effective. Have you never seen how good a zealot warpin does after a major battle in TvP?
I would expect a warpin of zealots to do some damage to a damaged terran force... Otherwise toss wouldn't do it. And sometimes they don't do it because they know it won't be effective enough. It all depends on how the battle turns out.
Your question is like asking, "Have you never seen a cloaked banshee get 20 kills in TvP because toss didn't go robo? Of course those kinds of things happen, because the game is about winning, not letting your opponents off the hook
|
On July 27 2012 10:52 Fig wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 10:48 Shasta37 wrote:On July 27 2012 10:44 Fig wrote:On July 27 2012 09:13 Schlendrian wrote:On July 27 2012 08:42 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 08:24 Schlendrian wrote:On July 27 2012 06:32 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 06:25 Thrombozyt wrote:
The late game warp-in problem could be avoided partly, if pylons only power warp-ins if not under fire.
Only if shields could possibly regenerate, the warp-in continues and is paused the instance the pylon comes under fire.
Oh.. and refund only 75% of the resources, if a warp-in gets canceled. I don't think there's any way to meaningfully nerf lategame warpins without a major overhaul of the mechanic itself. Not even making warp-ins only possible next to Nexi or a warp prism would make a difference lategame. It'd have to be something really drastic, like maybe warped-in units costing 25 more minerals? In any case, there's no way to fix it without an expansion, and Browder doesn't even seem aware of the problem. Wouldn't it be an easy solution, if the warpgate stays on cooldown, as soon as you're maxed out? So basically, you warp in units and if you have warp-ins left, you can use them for remax. But the Gates you used stay on cooldown, until supply is there for the unit of your desire. Any and all measures which rely on the Protoss maxing out can be worked around by stopping at 199/200. Ok, then let's say you need the supply left over for the specific unit, like Terran basically. CD for the first Warpgate starts at 198/200, for the second at 196/200 and so on. Having warpgates off cooldown at max has literally never been a problem balance wise in a pro game. Show me a single broadcast game that has these balance implications. Just because protoss gateways units can reinforce in 5 seconds instead of 25 doesn't mean it's imbalanced... Blizzard already took this fact into account by making gateway units terribly inefficient compared to tier one units of other races. They also took away KA so HTs can't be useful right away, and if you morph them into archons, that's 2 gateways worth of units and takes 15 secs. Definitely not a problem. We don't want every race to play the same way... If you would rather have weak units that reinforce quickly, choose zerg or toss rather than terran. Terran has to wait a bit longer, but the wait is worth it because their units are much more cost effective. Have you never seen how good a zealot warpin does after a major battle in TvP? I would expect a warpin of zealots to do some damage to a damaged terran force... Otherwise toss wouldn't do it. And sometimes they don't do it because they know it won't be effective enough. It all depends on how the battle turns out. Your question is like asking, "Have you never seen a cloaked banshee get 20 kills in TvP because toss didn't go robo? Of course those kinds of things happen, because the game is about winning, not letting your opponents off the hook
Sure, everything can do a lot of damage. My question isn't like asking that because cloaked banshees and having detection are an issue with scouting and reacting properly. Your situation just outlines a bad protoss player making mistakes in play. I'm addressing "Is it fair for a protoss to trade with Terran evenly and win the game simply because their race dictates they are one production cycle ahead?". This is a situation where both players don't make strategic mistakes and just trade evenly with the same caliber of control. I also don't know how you figure Protoss gateway units are not as cost effective as Terran in the "lategame" seeing as how we are considering armies near the 200 food mark.
|
On July 27 2012 10:48 Shasta37 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 10:44 Fig wrote:On July 27 2012 09:13 Schlendrian wrote:On July 27 2012 08:42 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 08:24 Schlendrian wrote:On July 27 2012 06:32 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 06:25 Thrombozyt wrote:
The late game warp-in problem could be avoided partly, if pylons only power warp-ins if not under fire.
Only if shields could possibly regenerate, the warp-in continues and is paused the instance the pylon comes under fire.
Oh.. and refund only 75% of the resources, if a warp-in gets canceled. I don't think there's any way to meaningfully nerf lategame warpins without a major overhaul of the mechanic itself. Not even making warp-ins only possible next to Nexi or a warp prism would make a difference lategame. It'd have to be something really drastic, like maybe warped-in units costing 25 more minerals? In any case, there's no way to fix it without an expansion, and Browder doesn't even seem aware of the problem. Wouldn't it be an easy solution, if the warpgate stays on cooldown, as soon as you're maxed out? So basically, you warp in units and if you have warp-ins left, you can use them for remax. But the Gates you used stay on cooldown, until supply is there for the unit of your desire. Any and all measures which rely on the Protoss maxing out can be worked around by stopping at 199/200. Ok, then let's say you need the supply left over for the specific unit, like Terran basically. CD for the first Warpgate starts at 198/200, for the second at 196/200 and so on. Having warpgates off cooldown at max has literally never been a problem balance wise in a pro game. Show me a single broadcast game that has these balance implications. Just because protoss gateways units can reinforce in 5 seconds instead of 25 doesn't mean it's imbalanced... Blizzard already took this fact into account by making gateway units terribly inefficient compared to tier one units of other races. They also took away KA so HTs can't be useful right away, and if you morph them into archons, that's 2 gateways worth of units and takes 15 secs. Definitely not a problem. We don't want every race to play the same way... If you would rather have weak units that reinforce quickly, choose zerg or toss rather than terran. Terran has to wait a bit longer, but the wait is worth it because their units are much more cost effective. Have you never seen how good a zealot warpin does after a major battle in TvP?
The way I see it is that protoss can have a fast reinforce, so they can effectively have a +20 supply army (assuming 10 warpgates). However, terran can have a +20 supply army from throwing away SCVs and using MULES. Both terran and protoss are able to increase their army size the later the game goes on with their macro mechanic.
|
On July 27 2012 11:09 convention wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 10:48 Shasta37 wrote:On July 27 2012 10:44 Fig wrote:On July 27 2012 09:13 Schlendrian wrote:On July 27 2012 08:42 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 08:24 Schlendrian wrote:On July 27 2012 06:32 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 06:25 Thrombozyt wrote:
The late game warp-in problem could be avoided partly, if pylons only power warp-ins if not under fire.
Only if shields could possibly regenerate, the warp-in continues and is paused the instance the pylon comes under fire.
Oh.. and refund only 75% of the resources, if a warp-in gets canceled. I don't think there's any way to meaningfully nerf lategame warpins without a major overhaul of the mechanic itself. Not even making warp-ins only possible next to Nexi or a warp prism would make a difference lategame. It'd have to be something really drastic, like maybe warped-in units costing 25 more minerals? In any case, there's no way to fix it without an expansion, and Browder doesn't even seem aware of the problem. Wouldn't it be an easy solution, if the warpgate stays on cooldown, as soon as you're maxed out? So basically, you warp in units and if you have warp-ins left, you can use them for remax. But the Gates you used stay on cooldown, until supply is there for the unit of your desire. Any and all measures which rely on the Protoss maxing out can be worked around by stopping at 199/200. Ok, then let's say you need the supply left over for the specific unit, like Terran basically. CD for the first Warpgate starts at 198/200, for the second at 196/200 and so on. Having warpgates off cooldown at max has literally never been a problem balance wise in a pro game. Show me a single broadcast game that has these balance implications. Just because protoss gateways units can reinforce in 5 seconds instead of 25 doesn't mean it's imbalanced... Blizzard already took this fact into account by making gateway units terribly inefficient compared to tier one units of other races. They also took away KA so HTs can't be useful right away, and if you morph them into archons, that's 2 gateways worth of units and takes 15 secs. Definitely not a problem. We don't want every race to play the same way... If you would rather have weak units that reinforce quickly, choose zerg or toss rather than terran. Terran has to wait a bit longer, but the wait is worth it because their units are much more cost effective. Have you never seen how good a zealot warpin does after a major battle in TvP? The way I see it is that protoss can have a fast reinforce, so they can effectively have a +20 supply army (assuming 10 warpgates). However, terran can have a +20 supply army from throwing away SCVs and using MULES. Both terran and protoss are able to increase their army size the later the game goes on with their macro mechanic.
This is a pretty good argument. It also might help explain why Protoss seems to win most of the time against Terran in lategame engagements where the Terran's army supply is similar.
|
On July 27 2012 11:02 Shasta37 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 10:52 Fig wrote:On July 27 2012 10:48 Shasta37 wrote:On July 27 2012 10:44 Fig wrote:On July 27 2012 09:13 Schlendrian wrote:On July 27 2012 08:42 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 08:24 Schlendrian wrote:On July 27 2012 06:32 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 06:25 Thrombozyt wrote:
The late game warp-in problem could be avoided partly, if pylons only power warp-ins if not under fire.
Only if shields could possibly regenerate, the warp-in continues and is paused the instance the pylon comes under fire.
Oh.. and refund only 75% of the resources, if a warp-in gets canceled. I don't think there's any way to meaningfully nerf lategame warpins without a major overhaul of the mechanic itself. Not even making warp-ins only possible next to Nexi or a warp prism would make a difference lategame. It'd have to be something really drastic, like maybe warped-in units costing 25 more minerals? In any case, there's no way to fix it without an expansion, and Browder doesn't even seem aware of the problem. Wouldn't it be an easy solution, if the warpgate stays on cooldown, as soon as you're maxed out? So basically, you warp in units and if you have warp-ins left, you can use them for remax. But the Gates you used stay on cooldown, until supply is there for the unit of your desire. Any and all measures which rely on the Protoss maxing out can be worked around by stopping at 199/200. Ok, then let's say you need the supply left over for the specific unit, like Terran basically. CD for the first Warpgate starts at 198/200, for the second at 196/200 and so on. Having warpgates off cooldown at max has literally never been a problem balance wise in a pro game. Show me a single broadcast game that has these balance implications. Just because protoss gateways units can reinforce in 5 seconds instead of 25 doesn't mean it's imbalanced... Blizzard already took this fact into account by making gateway units terribly inefficient compared to tier one units of other races. They also took away KA so HTs can't be useful right away, and if you morph them into archons, that's 2 gateways worth of units and takes 15 secs. Definitely not a problem. We don't want every race to play the same way... If you would rather have weak units that reinforce quickly, choose zerg or toss rather than terran. Terran has to wait a bit longer, but the wait is worth it because their units are much more cost effective. Have you never seen how good a zealot warpin does after a major battle in TvP? I would expect a warpin of zealots to do some damage to a damaged terran force... Otherwise toss wouldn't do it. And sometimes they don't do it because they know it won't be effective enough. It all depends on how the battle turns out. Your question is like asking, "Have you never seen a cloaked banshee get 20 kills in TvP because toss didn't go robo? Of course those kinds of things happen, because the game is about winning, not letting your opponents off the hook Sure, everything can do a lot of damage. My question isn't like asking that because cloaked banshees and having detection are an issue with scouting and reacting properly. Your situation just outlines a bad protoss player making mistakes in play. I'm addressing "Is it fair for a protoss to trade with Terran evenly and win the game simply because their race dictates they are one production cycle ahead?". This is a situation where both players don't make strategic mistakes and just trade evenly with the same caliber of control. I also don't know how you figure Protoss gateway units are not as cost effective as Terran in the "lategame" seeing as how we are considering armies near the 200 food mark.
So how do you suppose toss scouts this cloaked banshee without a robo?
Main point: Just because we are talking about maxed armies, it doesn't change the fact that certain units are more cost effective than others. Sure, if there is an even trade then some warped in zealots would be nice, but as I said, that just means the terran didn't have a cost effective enough engagement. Unfortunately Blizzard decided to give Protoss a bunch of units that cannot be microed to increase their effectiveness nearly as much as terran units. That means it is up to the terran player to make their own units more effective so that they can not only trade evenly, but be ahead so those warpins don't turn the tide.
Now it's true that if they don't do a good job, then the battle can turn out even or in toss favor. But if the armies cost the same, then by default terran has the advantage, because cost effectiveness does indeed play a role. I could talk for hours about cost effectiveness comparisons between toss and terran units, but it's been done many times before.
I see you would rather be facing off against toss units that have better stats across the board, and no warpin. But that would be equivalent to what we have now. If you are losing to that warpin of zealots, you would lose to a slower timing of super zealots. Protoss just trades that power for reinforcement speed.
|
Last night I was thinking that they should create a balance discussion forum, since I always see people being warned or banned for commenting on it. But then I realized that even accepting the conversation on i t just sets the stage for that kind of mindset which will inevitably permeate the conversations elsewhere on the site. Then I found this thread. And I just see a bunch of people trying to justify why they suck at match-ups. People who aren't even good enough to be a GM on NA, weighing in confidently on balance. Referencing statistics based off of sm all pools, as if, even with a larger pool to draw on, it would be definitively representative of imbalance, in a game played by very imperfect humans - even at the highest levels.
I like to talk about balance, but I'll stick to doing it with my friends who, like me, know better than to label anything as imba with any real conviction. Some of us who have watched the evolution of games like SC1 and WC3 know quite well the way things work themselves out as players learn to play in new ways. Blizzard seems to get that, and that's enough. Now to just leave this thread and never return XD
|
On July 27 2012 10:52 Fig wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 10:48 Shasta37 wrote:On July 27 2012 10:44 Fig wrote:On July 27 2012 09:13 Schlendrian wrote:On July 27 2012 08:42 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 08:24 Schlendrian wrote:On July 27 2012 06:32 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 06:25 Thrombozyt wrote:
The late game warp-in problem could be avoided partly, if pylons only power warp-ins if not under fire.
Only if shields could possibly regenerate, the warp-in continues and is paused the instance the pylon comes under fire.
Oh.. and refund only 75% of the resources, if a warp-in gets canceled. I don't think there's any way to meaningfully nerf lategame warpins without a major overhaul of the mechanic itself. Not even making warp-ins only possible next to Nexi or a warp prism would make a difference lategame. It'd have to be something really drastic, like maybe warped-in units costing 25 more minerals? In any case, there's no way to fix it without an expansion, and Browder doesn't even seem aware of the problem. Wouldn't it be an easy solution, if the warpgate stays on cooldown, as soon as you're maxed out? So basically, you warp in units and if you have warp-ins left, you can use them for remax. But the Gates you used stay on cooldown, until supply is there for the unit of your desire. Any and all measures which rely on the Protoss maxing out can be worked around by stopping at 199/200. Ok, then let's say you need the supply left over for the specific unit, like Terran basically. CD for the first Warpgate starts at 198/200, for the second at 196/200 and so on. Having warpgates off cooldown at max has literally never been a problem balance wise in a pro game. Show me a single broadcast game that has these balance implications. Just because protoss gateways units can reinforce in 5 seconds instead of 25 doesn't mean it's imbalanced... Blizzard already took this fact into account by making gateway units terribly inefficient compared to tier one units of other races. They also took away KA so HTs can't be useful right away, and if you morph them into archons, that's 2 gateways worth of units and takes 15 secs. Definitely not a problem. We don't want every race to play the same way... If you would rather have weak units that reinforce quickly, choose zerg or toss rather than terran. Terran has to wait a bit longer, but the wait is worth it because their units are much more cost effective. Have you never seen how good a zealot warpin does after a major battle in TvP? I would expect a warpin of zealots to do some damage to a damaged terran force... Otherwise toss wouldn't do it. And sometimes they don't do it because they know it won't be effective enough. It all depends on how the battle turns out. Your question is like asking, "Have you never seen a cloaked banshee get 20 kills in TvP because toss didn't go robo? Of course those kinds of things happen, because the game is about winning, not letting your opponents off the hook
That is a massive deflection and not even close to what he is talking about. If Terran barely wins a maxed battle in TvP it doesn't create some slippery slope like it does the other way around when you warp in 30 supply of zealots.
Also, Protoss units aren't even that weak. When the Protoss army gets 2/0/2 it is incredibly efficient because zealots tank so much damage and AoE negates any upgrade advantage Terran has anyway.
|
On July 27 2012 12:00 shockaslim wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 10:52 Fig wrote:On July 27 2012 10:48 Shasta37 wrote:On July 27 2012 10:44 Fig wrote:On July 27 2012 09:13 Schlendrian wrote:On July 27 2012 08:42 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 08:24 Schlendrian wrote:On July 27 2012 06:32 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 06:25 Thrombozyt wrote:
The late game warp-in problem could be avoided partly, if pylons only power warp-ins if not under fire.
Only if shields could possibly regenerate, the warp-in continues and is paused the instance the pylon comes under fire.
Oh.. and refund only 75% of the resources, if a warp-in gets canceled. I don't think there's any way to meaningfully nerf lategame warpins without a major overhaul of the mechanic itself. Not even making warp-ins only possible next to Nexi or a warp prism would make a difference lategame. It'd have to be something really drastic, like maybe warped-in units costing 25 more minerals? In any case, there's no way to fix it without an expansion, and Browder doesn't even seem aware of the problem. Wouldn't it be an easy solution, if the warpgate stays on cooldown, as soon as you're maxed out? So basically, you warp in units and if you have warp-ins left, you can use them for remax. But the Gates you used stay on cooldown, until supply is there for the unit of your desire. Any and all measures which rely on the Protoss maxing out can be worked around by stopping at 199/200. Ok, then let's say you need the supply left over for the specific unit, like Terran basically. CD for the first Warpgate starts at 198/200, for the second at 196/200 and so on. Having warpgates off cooldown at max has literally never been a problem balance wise in a pro game. Show me a single broadcast game that has these balance implications. Just because protoss gateways units can reinforce in 5 seconds instead of 25 doesn't mean it's imbalanced... Blizzard already took this fact into account by making gateway units terribly inefficient compared to tier one units of other races. They also took away KA so HTs can't be useful right away, and if you morph them into archons, that's 2 gateways worth of units and takes 15 secs. Definitely not a problem. We don't want every race to play the same way... If you would rather have weak units that reinforce quickly, choose zerg or toss rather than terran. Terran has to wait a bit longer, but the wait is worth it because their units are much more cost effective. Have you never seen how good a zealot warpin does after a major battle in TvP? I would expect a warpin of zealots to do some damage to a damaged terran force... Otherwise toss wouldn't do it. And sometimes they don't do it because they know it won't be effective enough. It all depends on how the battle turns out. Your question is like asking, "Have you never seen a cloaked banshee get 20 kills in TvP because toss didn't go robo? Of course those kinds of things happen, because the game is about winning, not letting your opponents off the hook That is a massive deflection and not even close to what he is talking about. If Terran barely wins a maxed battle in TvP it doesn't create some slippery slope like it does the other way around when you warp in 30 supply of zealots. Also, Protoss units aren't even that weak. When the Protoss army gets 2/0/2 it is incredibly efficient because zealots tank so much damage and AoE negates any upgrade advantage Terran has anyway.
Ya, I'm not sure what the miscommunication was. Perhaps I haven't articulated it well, but you basically said exactly what I was getting at.
|
On July 27 2012 06:36 Bagi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 06:14 Shiori wrote:On July 27 2012 06:09 Bagi wrote:On July 27 2012 05:47 Shiori wrote:On July 27 2012 05:25 avilo wrote:
I'll be making a post on TL later as well as a video giving urgent feedback on HOTS because earlier today with my stream I just figured out that Blizzard is actually nerfing lategame TvP with HOTS because of how they say they are going to change the ghost.
So, yes, Terran is being nerfed again. If you do not know what i'm talking about, i'm speaking of the ghost cooldown change with cloak. It's a nerf to lategame Terran nuke harrass and the ghost in general. lategame TvP is fine. ..said the protoss. Seriously now, even Blizzard says protoss has an advantage in the lategame. Blizzard said that many months ago, and was as wrong then as they are now. Lategame TvP has been figured out by the top level players. Just because Avilo is notoriously awful at it doesn't mean anything. I guess you have a ton of recent endgame winrates to base this or even high level examples of this occuring? You know, anything other than "because I said so"? Because as far as I can tell, terrans are still winning their games in the midgame.
Could you show me this? Maybe at gomtv?
I don't know anything about TvP, the last set I really watched was naniwa vs thorzain at tsl, and even that i found boring.
But recently I've been trying to understand it, I'll face forward them because I hear so many terrans complain about TvP. And, as the complaints say, I have never seen a Terran beat a Toss once Toss got his third *secured* (not taken, but secured) and no huuuge deficit in the early game (although they can't really secure their third if they were in a deficit).
Not trying to say anything about the balance, but from an outsiders pov, i have just never seen terran win when toss gets 3 bases secured (not taken, but secured). 4 base toss? forget it, I mean maybe once a terran has won but surely never against 4 base toss...
am i wrong here? I only watch gom so...
|
On July 27 2012 11:13 Shasta37 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 11:09 convention wrote:On July 27 2012 10:48 Shasta37 wrote:On July 27 2012 10:44 Fig wrote:On July 27 2012 09:13 Schlendrian wrote:On July 27 2012 08:42 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 08:24 Schlendrian wrote:On July 27 2012 06:32 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 06:25 Thrombozyt wrote:
The late game warp-in problem could be avoided partly, if pylons only power warp-ins if not under fire.
Only if shields could possibly regenerate, the warp-in continues and is paused the instance the pylon comes under fire.
Oh.. and refund only 75% of the resources, if a warp-in gets canceled. I don't think there's any way to meaningfully nerf lategame warpins without a major overhaul of the mechanic itself. Not even making warp-ins only possible next to Nexi or a warp prism would make a difference lategame. It'd have to be something really drastic, like maybe warped-in units costing 25 more minerals? In any case, there's no way to fix it without an expansion, and Browder doesn't even seem aware of the problem. Wouldn't it be an easy solution, if the warpgate stays on cooldown, as soon as you're maxed out? So basically, you warp in units and if you have warp-ins left, you can use them for remax. But the Gates you used stay on cooldown, until supply is there for the unit of your desire. Any and all measures which rely on the Protoss maxing out can be worked around by stopping at 199/200. Ok, then let's say you need the supply left over for the specific unit, like Terran basically. CD for the first Warpgate starts at 198/200, for the second at 196/200 and so on. Having warpgates off cooldown at max has literally never been a problem balance wise in a pro game. Show me a single broadcast game that has these balance implications. Just because protoss gateways units can reinforce in 5 seconds instead of 25 doesn't mean it's imbalanced... Blizzard already took this fact into account by making gateway units terribly inefficient compared to tier one units of other races. They also took away KA so HTs can't be useful right away, and if you morph them into archons, that's 2 gateways worth of units and takes 15 secs. Definitely not a problem. We don't want every race to play the same way... If you would rather have weak units that reinforce quickly, choose zerg or toss rather than terran. Terran has to wait a bit longer, but the wait is worth it because their units are much more cost effective. Have you never seen how good a zealot warpin does after a major battle in TvP? The way I see it is that protoss can have a fast reinforce, so they can effectively have a +20 supply army (assuming 10 warpgates). However, terran can have a +20 supply army from throwing away SCVs and using MULES. Both terran and protoss are able to increase their army size the later the game goes on with their macro mechanic. This is a pretty good argument. It also might help explain why Protoss seems to win most of the time against Terran in lategame engagements where the Terran's army supply is similar.
I'd argue that at 200/200, a protoss army value is far superior than a maxed bio army. If you open up the army tab of late game TvP where both players are maxed, you'd almost always see that despite being even army supply, the Protoss has 1-2k more overall army resource value, especially in gas.
|
On July 27 2012 15:31 RavenLoud wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 11:13 Shasta37 wrote:On July 27 2012 11:09 convention wrote:On July 27 2012 10:48 Shasta37 wrote:On July 27 2012 10:44 Fig wrote:On July 27 2012 09:13 Schlendrian wrote:On July 27 2012 08:42 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 08:24 Schlendrian wrote:On July 27 2012 06:32 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 06:25 Thrombozyt wrote:
The late game warp-in problem could be avoided partly, if pylons only power warp-ins if not under fire.
Only if shields could possibly regenerate, the warp-in continues and is paused the instance the pylon comes under fire.
Oh.. and refund only 75% of the resources, if a warp-in gets canceled. I don't think there's any way to meaningfully nerf lategame warpins without a major overhaul of the mechanic itself. Not even making warp-ins only possible next to Nexi or a warp prism would make a difference lategame. It'd have to be something really drastic, like maybe warped-in units costing 25 more minerals? In any case, there's no way to fix it without an expansion, and Browder doesn't even seem aware of the problem. Wouldn't it be an easy solution, if the warpgate stays on cooldown, as soon as you're maxed out? So basically, you warp in units and if you have warp-ins left, you can use them for remax. But the Gates you used stay on cooldown, until supply is there for the unit of your desire. Any and all measures which rely on the Protoss maxing out can be worked around by stopping at 199/200. Ok, then let's say you need the supply left over for the specific unit, like Terran basically. CD for the first Warpgate starts at 198/200, for the second at 196/200 and so on. Having warpgates off cooldown at max has literally never been a problem balance wise in a pro game. Show me a single broadcast game that has these balance implications. Just because protoss gateways units can reinforce in 5 seconds instead of 25 doesn't mean it's imbalanced... Blizzard already took this fact into account by making gateway units terribly inefficient compared to tier one units of other races. They also took away KA so HTs can't be useful right away, and if you morph them into archons, that's 2 gateways worth of units and takes 15 secs. Definitely not a problem. We don't want every race to play the same way... If you would rather have weak units that reinforce quickly, choose zerg or toss rather than terran. Terran has to wait a bit longer, but the wait is worth it because their units are much more cost effective. Have you never seen how good a zealot warpin does after a major battle in TvP? The way I see it is that protoss can have a fast reinforce, so they can effectively have a +20 supply army (assuming 10 warpgates). However, terran can have a +20 supply army from throwing away SCVs and using MULES. Both terran and protoss are able to increase their army size the later the game goes on with their macro mechanic. This is a pretty good argument. It also might help explain why Protoss seems to win most of the time against Terran in lategame engagements where the Terran's army supply is similar. I'd argue that at 200/200, a protoss army value is far superior than a maxed bio army. If you open up the army tab of late game TvP where both players are maxed, you'd almost always see that despite being even army supply, the Protoss has 1-2k more overall army resource value, especially in gas.
Go ahead an test that in the unit tester. It is just not true. With a healthy Medivac, Viking and Ghost count, it is quite common that the terran army is more expensive. On top of that: Terran production buildings far more expensive, take more space and are less flexible. Macro Orbitals are also not free.
|
On July 27 2012 15:31 RavenLoud wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 11:13 Shasta37 wrote:On July 27 2012 11:09 convention wrote:On July 27 2012 10:48 Shasta37 wrote:On July 27 2012 10:44 Fig wrote:On July 27 2012 09:13 Schlendrian wrote:On July 27 2012 08:42 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 08:24 Schlendrian wrote:On July 27 2012 06:32 Toadvine wrote:On July 27 2012 06:25 Thrombozyt wrote:
The late game warp-in problem could be avoided partly, if pylons only power warp-ins if not under fire.
Only if shields could possibly regenerate, the warp-in continues and is paused the instance the pylon comes under fire.
Oh.. and refund only 75% of the resources, if a warp-in gets canceled. I don't think there's any way to meaningfully nerf lategame warpins without a major overhaul of the mechanic itself. Not even making warp-ins only possible next to Nexi or a warp prism would make a difference lategame. It'd have to be something really drastic, like maybe warped-in units costing 25 more minerals? In any case, there's no way to fix it without an expansion, and Browder doesn't even seem aware of the problem. Wouldn't it be an easy solution, if the warpgate stays on cooldown, as soon as you're maxed out? So basically, you warp in units and if you have warp-ins left, you can use them for remax. But the Gates you used stay on cooldown, until supply is there for the unit of your desire. Any and all measures which rely on the Protoss maxing out can be worked around by stopping at 199/200. Ok, then let's say you need the supply left over for the specific unit, like Terran basically. CD for the first Warpgate starts at 198/200, for the second at 196/200 and so on. Having warpgates off cooldown at max has literally never been a problem balance wise in a pro game. Show me a single broadcast game that has these balance implications. Just because protoss gateways units can reinforce in 5 seconds instead of 25 doesn't mean it's imbalanced... Blizzard already took this fact into account by making gateway units terribly inefficient compared to tier one units of other races. They also took away KA so HTs can't be useful right away, and if you morph them into archons, that's 2 gateways worth of units and takes 15 secs. Definitely not a problem. We don't want every race to play the same way... If you would rather have weak units that reinforce quickly, choose zerg or toss rather than terran. Terran has to wait a bit longer, but the wait is worth it because their units are much more cost effective. Have you never seen how good a zealot warpin does after a major battle in TvP? The way I see it is that protoss can have a fast reinforce, so they can effectively have a +20 supply army (assuming 10 warpgates). However, terran can have a +20 supply army from throwing away SCVs and using MULES. Both terran and protoss are able to increase their army size the later the game goes on with their macro mechanic. This is a pretty good argument. It also might help explain why Protoss seems to win most of the time against Terran in lategame engagements where the Terran's army supply is similar. I'd argue that at 200/200, a protoss army value is far superior than a maxed bio army. If you open up the army tab of late game TvP where both players are maxed, you'd almost always see that despite being even army supply, the Protoss has 1-2k more overall army resource value, especially in gas.
I agree. Marines are way too cost efficient. They should cost gas too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
