|
On May 27 2013 02:03 Prog455 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2013 01:36 Emzeeshady wrote:On May 27 2013 01:35 saddaromma wrote:On May 26 2013 23:27 sibs wrote:On May 26 2013 23:08 Prog455 wrote:On May 26 2013 22:45 Coffee Zombie wrote:
This is as much bad Terran design as it is bad Protoss design. Terran has extremely few late game threats - they just shore up their basic composition with narrow counters against the opponent's late game threats (barring super late game Skyterran, I guess). This using the most clunky lategame infrastructure in the game, which just feels wtf. The sane design for Terran would be having very upgrade-reliant units so they are viable late game threats without messing up the early game where Terran can get small amounts of anything out very quickly.
I think quite the opposite. The genius of Terran design is how versatile it is. Versalite units with soft counters rather than hard counters produces far more exciting games than the other way around. This is why TvT is by far the best mirror match up, simply because Terran has very few hard counters to their own units. Tanks are obviously very strong against Marines, but on the flip side the mobility of bio units makes it viable anyway. I think there is very few PvZ games that are even close to TvT in terms of entertainment value. This is some terran bias speaking, TvT can and is completely boring a lot of times. e.g. Endless siege lines on WoL 30 minutes of absolutely nothing happening. Granted that on HotS tvt is usually more stupid than boring, a lot of games just come down to mass doom drops, or nonstop hellbat dropping. I've never seen a single boring TvT match.I can go as far to say, watching Goody vs T is much more entertaining than watching any of Stephano or ret playing vs any protoss. Right, and I have never seen a PvZ where the Zerg makes roaches. While i have seen boring TvT matches, it has always been because of the map. Siege lines only happens when the map allows it. On big maps like Wirlwind it is never going to happen, because the map is simply too big for Siege tanks to deal with drops.
This is the same way right now in Hots PvZ. You can't do split map swarm hosts versus Skytoss on most maps it's only really
Viable on Newkirk and Daybreak when it is still used.
I find TvT extremely boring quite a lot of the time as well, I find myself turning off the stream or laddering when there aren't any Protoss left
|
On May 26 2013 23:46 Emzeeshady wrote:
I am sorry but I have no clue what you guys mean by 50% doesn't equal a balanced game. For me 50% means that both players have an equal chance to win which is the epitome of balance. Yes, Protoss is forced to all in and Zerg is forced to play defensive but they will both still win about the same amount of games considering both players are equally good.
For what ever reason you are ignoring how imbalanced Protoss was in the mid game vs Zerg and just look at late game imbalance. Yes, PvZ in WOL sucked but it sucked for both races...
Saying Protoss was "imbalanced in the midgame" is misleading. They had an imbalanced 2 base all-in. In a standard game, Zerg basically had initiative at every point in the game, while the Protoss just sat back and tried to take a third base with his tech of choice, and then attempt a 3 base timing before Broodlords. After that, the silliness began.
In general, I'd say that since the Infestor buff in 2011, playing standard was always harder for the Protoss in PvZ than it was for the Zerg.
|
|
|
On May 27 2013 02:53 Toadvine wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2013 23:46 Emzeeshady wrote:
I am sorry but I have no clue what you guys mean by 50% doesn't equal a balanced game. For me 50% means that both players have an equal chance to win which is the epitome of balance. Yes, Protoss is forced to all in and Zerg is forced to play defensive but they will both still win about the same amount of games considering both players are equally good.
For what ever reason you are ignoring how imbalanced Protoss was in the mid game vs Zerg and just look at late game imbalance. Yes, PvZ in WOL sucked but it sucked for both races... Saying Protoss was "imbalanced in the midgame" is misleading. They had an imbalanced 2 base all-in. In a standard game, Zerg basically had initiative at every point in the game, while the Protoss just sat back and tried to take a third base with his tech of choice, and then attempt a 3 base timing before Broodlords. After that, the silliness began. In general, I'd say that since the Infestor buff in 2011, playing standard was always harder for the Protoss in PvZ than it was for the Zerg.
It wasnt so much the infestorbuff. It was the metagame shift of zergs getting 3bases up quickly that enabled zergs to figure out 2base colossus macroplay. Maps also had a lot to do with that.
|
On May 27 2013 02:14 Wingblade wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2013 02:03 Prog455 wrote:On May 27 2013 01:36 Emzeeshady wrote:On May 27 2013 01:35 saddaromma wrote:On May 26 2013 23:27 sibs wrote:On May 26 2013 23:08 Prog455 wrote:On May 26 2013 22:45 Coffee Zombie wrote:
This is as much bad Terran design as it is bad Protoss design. Terran has extremely few late game threats - they just shore up their basic composition with narrow counters against the opponent's late game threats (barring super late game Skyterran, I guess). This using the most clunky lategame infrastructure in the game, which just feels wtf. The sane design for Terran would be having very upgrade-reliant units so they are viable late game threats without messing up the early game where Terran can get small amounts of anything out very quickly.
I think quite the opposite. The genius of Terran design is how versatile it is. Versalite units with soft counters rather than hard counters produces far more exciting games than the other way around. This is why TvT is by far the best mirror match up, simply because Terran has very few hard counters to their own units. Tanks are obviously very strong against Marines, but on the flip side the mobility of bio units makes it viable anyway. I think there is very few PvZ games that are even close to TvT in terms of entertainment value. This is some terran bias speaking, TvT can and is completely boring a lot of times. e.g. Endless siege lines on WoL 30 minutes of absolutely nothing happening. Granted that on HotS tvt is usually more stupid than boring, a lot of games just come down to mass doom drops, or nonstop hellbat dropping. I've never seen a single boring TvT match.I can go as far to say, watching Goody vs T is much more entertaining than watching any of Stephano or ret playing vs any protoss. Right, and I have never seen a PvZ where the Zerg makes roaches. While i have seen boring TvT matches, it has always been because of the map. Siege lines only happens when the map allows it. On big maps like Wirlwind it is never going to happen, because the map is simply too big for Siege tanks to deal with drops. This is the same way right now in Hots PvZ. You can't do split map swarm hosts versus Skytoss on most maps it's only really Viable on Newkirk and Daybreak when it is still used. I find TvT extremely boring quite a lot of the time as well, I find myself turning off the stream or laddering when there aren't any Protoss left
but that's when actual skill decides the games. it seems you just don't like starcraft.. ?
|
On May 27 2013 04:00 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2013 02:53 Toadvine wrote:On May 26 2013 23:46 Emzeeshady wrote:
I am sorry but I have no clue what you guys mean by 50% doesn't equal a balanced game. For me 50% means that both players have an equal chance to win which is the epitome of balance. Yes, Protoss is forced to all in and Zerg is forced to play defensive but they will both still win about the same amount of games considering both players are equally good.
For what ever reason you are ignoring how imbalanced Protoss was in the mid game vs Zerg and just look at late game imbalance. Yes, PvZ in WOL sucked but it sucked for both races... Saying Protoss was "imbalanced in the midgame" is misleading. They had an imbalanced 2 base all-in. In a standard game, Zerg basically had initiative at every point in the game, while the Protoss just sat back and tried to take a third base with his tech of choice, and then attempt a 3 base timing before Broodlords. After that, the silliness began. In general, I'd say that since the Infestor buff in 2011, playing standard was always harder for the Protoss in PvZ than it was for the Zerg. It wasnt so much the infestorbuff. It was the metagame shift of zergs getting 3bases up quickly that enabled zergs to figure out 2base colossus macroplay. Maps also had a lot to do with that.
It was the infestor buff mate.
Yes, maps allowing FFE/fast thirds did change, but this gives equal advantage to toss as to zerg.
The problem at the heart of WOL pvz was the infestor. Too easy to use, hence
|
On May 27 2013 04:34 PeggyHill wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2013 04:00 Big J wrote:On May 27 2013 02:53 Toadvine wrote:On May 26 2013 23:46 Emzeeshady wrote:
I am sorry but I have no clue what you guys mean by 50% doesn't equal a balanced game. For me 50% means that both players have an equal chance to win which is the epitome of balance. Yes, Protoss is forced to all in and Zerg is forced to play defensive but they will both still win about the same amount of games considering both players are equally good.
For what ever reason you are ignoring how imbalanced Protoss was in the mid game vs Zerg and just look at late game imbalance. Yes, PvZ in WOL sucked but it sucked for both races... Saying Protoss was "imbalanced in the midgame" is misleading. They had an imbalanced 2 base all-in. In a standard game, Zerg basically had initiative at every point in the game, while the Protoss just sat back and tried to take a third base with his tech of choice, and then attempt a 3 base timing before Broodlords. After that, the silliness began. In general, I'd say that since the Infestor buff in 2011, playing standard was always harder for the Protoss in PvZ than it was for the Zerg. It wasnt so much the infestorbuff. It was the metagame shift of zergs getting 3bases up quickly that enabled zergs to figure out 2base colossus macroplay. Maps also had a lot to do with that. It was the infestor buff mate. Yes, maps allowing FFE/fast thirds did change, but this gives equal advantage to toss as to zerg. The problem at the heart of WOL pvz was the infestor. Too easy to use, hence
the so called "infestorbuff" was a redesign of fungal to make it mainly a damage spell, instead of a rooting spell and had ups (dps) and downs (half the rooting/revealing time).
And it was very soon followed up with multiple infestor nerfs - neural parasite nerf, infestor speed nerf, fungal damage nerf.
The Infestor after those changes was probably even weaker than before the fungal buff.
And 2012 gameplay reflects what I'm saying: roach and roach/ling maxes without infestors were the goto strategies at holding anything Protoss could do from 2bases. And 2base play is what's relevant for preInfestorchange balance.
|
Am I the only one that thinks that when it comes to the macro economy of the game protoss gets the short end of the stick.
Terran has mules
Zerg has inject
protoss has chrono boost but i think protoss hurts the most when they get their workers kill.
|
On May 27 2013 05:18 nichan wrote:
Am I the only one that thinks that when it comes to the macro economy of the game protoss gets the short end of the stick.
Terran has mules
Zerg has inject
protoss has chrono boost but i think protoss hurts the most when they get their workers kill.
Sucks I guess? Not very much a balance concern.
|
|
|
On May 27 2013 05:22 RoieTRS wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2013 05:18 nichan wrote:
Am I the only one that thinks that when it comes to the macro economy of the game protoss gets the short end of the stick.
Terran has mules
Zerg has inject
protoss has chrono boost but i think protoss hurts the most when they get their workers kill. Sucks I guess? Not very much a balance concern.
I think it is a balance concern and it has always been I think they should start with the macro mechanics of each race to make this game as close to balanced as possible
|
A great series between Stephano Vs MVP. I couldnt really point to any particular place where something was imbalanced and the responsibility fell solely on the shoulders of each player. Hopefully Blizz goes easy on any changes (perhaps exluding the spore crawler buff, something in which Blizz staff feels universal about) and wait at least a year for the game to develop before making any other significant changes.
|
Wasn't sure were to post this but I have an idea for the Widow Mine, what if whatever was being targeted by the Widow Mine turned red or another color like HSM currently does? It would make it so better players could attempt to split before the occurrence raising the skill cap, also like what we saw with Stephano versus ForGG you could even try and send the afflicted unit into friendly fire range to have it backfire on the Terran.
|
On May 27 2013 04:00 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2013 02:53 Toadvine wrote:On May 26 2013 23:46 Emzeeshady wrote:
I am sorry but I have no clue what you guys mean by 50% doesn't equal a balanced game. For me 50% means that both players have an equal chance to win which is the epitome of balance. Yes, Protoss is forced to all in and Zerg is forced to play defensive but they will both still win about the same amount of games considering both players are equally good.
For what ever reason you are ignoring how imbalanced Protoss was in the mid game vs Zerg and just look at late game imbalance. Yes, PvZ in WOL sucked but it sucked for both races... Saying Protoss was "imbalanced in the midgame" is misleading. They had an imbalanced 2 base all-in. In a standard game, Zerg basically had initiative at every point in the game, while the Protoss just sat back and tried to take a third base with his tech of choice, and then attempt a 3 base timing before Broodlords. After that, the silliness began. In general, I'd say that since the Infestor buff in 2011, playing standard was always harder for the Protoss in PvZ than it was for the Zerg. It wasnt so much the infestorbuff. It was the metagame shift of zergs getting 3bases up quickly that enabled zergs to figure out 2base colossus macroplay. Maps also had a lot to do with that.
Em, no. At the time, standard Protoss play involved getting a third around 10:00 off Robo or Blink, and proceeding with a huge 3 base Stalker/Colossus push with +3. Nobody really bothered with 2 base Colossus. The primary whine vector for Zergs was how that maxed "deathball" would roll over their roach/hydra/corruptor for an easy win. If anything, "innovation" in the matchup at the time consisted of Nestea making Mutas a lot and Losira all-ining.
|
On May 27 2013 04:00 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2013 02:53 Toadvine wrote:On May 26 2013 23:46 Emzeeshady wrote:
I am sorry but I have no clue what you guys mean by 50% doesn't equal a balanced game. For me 50% means that both players have an equal chance to win which is the epitome of balance. Yes, Protoss is forced to all in and Zerg is forced to play defensive but they will both still win about the same amount of games considering both players are equally good.
For what ever reason you are ignoring how imbalanced Protoss was in the mid game vs Zerg and just look at late game imbalance. Yes, PvZ in WOL sucked but it sucked for both races... Saying Protoss was "imbalanced in the midgame" is misleading. They had an imbalanced 2 base all-in. In a standard game, Zerg basically had initiative at every point in the game, while the Protoss just sat back and tried to take a third base with his tech of choice, and then attempt a 3 base timing before Broodlords. After that, the silliness began. In general, I'd say that since the Infestor buff in 2011, playing standard was always harder for the Protoss in PvZ than it was for the Zerg. It wasnt so much the infestorbuff. It was the metagame shift of zergs getting 3bases up quickly that enabled zergs to figure out 2base colossus macroplay. Maps also had a lot to do with that.
Spore change.
Spore change killed super safe stargate openings and made 3 bases free.
TvZ had the same problems when zergs could take absurdly greedy 3rd bases. Greed didn't exist at that point even.
edit: We should add in toss' gas dependence and tech need into the race's horrible fragility.
|
On May 27 2013 07:28 AstroPegnuin wrote:
Wasn't sure were to post this but I have an idea for the Widow Mine, what if whatever was being targeted by the Widow Mine turned red or another color like HSM currently does? It would make it so better players could attempt to split before the occurrence raising the skill cap, also like what we saw with Stephano versus ForGG you could even try and send the afflicted unit into friendly fire range to have it backfire on the Terran.
This idea is plausible, but in my opinion it doesn't target the largest problem created by mines atm. Mines tend to prevent zerg from accessing their expansions when under attack by terran because they cannot run their army over them.so Terrans endlessly snipe expos by simply laying down the mine field in between. Regardless of whether the zerg is aware of the mine's target, this slows progress.
I had an idea for a change today that I think would introduce some interesting new dynamics into the TvZ matchup. What if mines couldn't burrow on creep? All defensive uses remain intact, and now creep spread and denial become a central object of focus. Offensive overlord creep spread could even be used to prevent burrowing. I like this conceptually because it does not diminish the mine in other matchups. Please let me know what you guys think!
|
On May 27 2013 06:20 Fat_Elephant wrote:
A great series between Stephano Vs MVP. I couldnt really point to any particular place where something was imbalanced and the responsibility fell solely on the shoulders of each player. Hopefully Blizz goes easy on any changes (perhaps exluding the spore crawler buff, something in which Blizz staff feels universal about) and wait at least a year for the game to develop before making any other significant changes.
I wouldn't call 4-1 a great series, God willing Blizzard will reconsider the ramifications of a free movement upgrade for Medivacs, a 100 mineral unit that hard counters all other mineral units and re-balance Terran, because I think Blizzard's push to make Mech viable in TvP has destroyed TvZ early game right now. Hellbats were a bastardization of a unit in HOTS Beta, I'm surprised it took them this long to appear in the tournament scene.
|
Once again, we have a tournament where Protoss is barely represented at the top, only having one player in the top 8.
Whenever its players complain about the virtual neglect of one race in the game, the rationalization squad kicks in and we get told to shut up and wait another tournament. And realistically, this has been going on since late 2011 (save for one nice period which the other 2 races never shut up about, even though the current GSL count is 7 for Terran, 8 for Zerg, and 3 for Protoss).
Hilariously enough, Protoss players are playing WoL style with the mothership core thrown in (but there's no such thing as a free lunch for Protoss, and the unit is fragile and gives the Protoss strategy an even smaller margin for minor slips in micro). Our "harassment" unit can be shut down by a single missle turret (and this happens in pro games despite all the nonsense about "skilled" oracle use) and is not even as good as hellbats for harassing, let alone tanking and incorporation in army compositions. We make do with what we have...even though we're given essentially not a single new tool in PvT except photon overcharge (which is typical of Protoss balance design, i.e. give them an ability which is handy if they use it right, but make sure it's not super powerful for all-around use like marines, medivacs, widow mines, hellbats...)
Remember NesTea's playing style. It was written off as "series play" that NesTea was forced into from the weakness of his race in macro games. Isn't that what Protoss have been forced to do from late 2011? The balance team hasn't consciously made Protoss the race of all-ins. It emerged from the desperation of Protoss players to find a solution to the meta-problem.
It seems we're facing a problem of different demographics, or at least the Protoss community has been cowed into passivity after uncomplainingly playing a fragile, frustrating race for so long that has to depend on all-ins. Short of the most egregious of balance violations -- as they planned at the start of the beta -- Protoss players tend to take their lickings and leave "balance whining" to the spoilt.
I know that nothing will change about these things. I might even be banned for this post due to the balance taboo (even in a thread about balance) that stifles discussion and keeps the game lopsided. Short of the most radical steps which will never occur to David Kim, there's hardly even room for change until the next expansion. The MSc will always have to be a unique unit that's fragile; oracles will always have to be units that can be stopped with missle turrets; tempests will always have to be units that only sometimes appear, and when they do it's the late game in small numbers.
It's utterly ridiculous that after Terran and Zerg split WoL between them like Hitler and Stalin partitioned Poland, we get more of the same in HotS. David Kim isn't up to the task that's being asked of him, and the immature community feedback to legitimate issues about balance (using it as an excuse to start pounding one's own chest, calling people noobs, etc.) prevents the game from ever going much further. So yes, I'm done with this game. When a game makes you more outraged than contented, it's time to move on.
User was banned for this post.
|
On May 27 2013 01:00 Emzeeshady wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2013 23:56 Rabiator wrote:On May 26 2013 23:46 Emzeeshady wrote:
I am sorry but I have no clue what you guys mean by 50% doesn't equal a balanced game. For me 50% means that both players have an equal chance to win which is the epitome of balance. Yes, Protoss is forced to all in and Zerg is forced to play defensive but they will both still win about the same amount of games considering both players are equally good.
For what ever reason you are ignoring how imbalanced Protoss was in the mid game vs Zerg and just look at late game imbalance. Yes, PvZ in WOL sucked but it sucked for both races... Yeah ... 50% win rate means the matchup seems to be balanced, BUT the game autocorrects the ladder positions to achieve that in the lower ranks and at the top the skills of the players can have some extreme peaks across the matchups so the "statistics" dont really work that well. Balance is a term which is too dominant in peoples mindset IMO and "fun" gets totally bulldozed by it. Not everything is a good thing ... even if it brings the matchups closer to a 50/50 ratio. Hellbats are boring to watch, because they are too efficient as a drop unit OR you are too constricted in your choices to prepare for them. Additionally they are too slow as a unit (no one really uses the transformation mechanic because it takes too long) and easily avoided as an "army unit". This is the balance discussion thread, people are going to debate about balance. For the record I do think PvZ was boring in WOL even if it was balanced. I do think Hellbats are badly designed and I really hate watching swarm hosts and mass air in PvZ.
I didnt know there was only one way to achieve balance and that it was the "balance shitty units at all cost for pro level without regard for them being interesting or balanced for lower levels as well" one. The point of my remark was an attempt to try and "wake up" people from ranting on so much about rather meaningless statistics and to think about the units in the general context again instead of the narrow-minded "this brings the matchup to 50% win rate and thus it is a good choice" one.
There is a problem with several units and the Hellbat is an easy example to explain it with. The Hellbat is far too efficient when it comes to harrassment and thus it forces defensive measures; if you dont defend well against them you usually lose. Even though some pros might be able to defend against them it is going to be much harder for lower league players. Thus FUN (for the lower level players) is affected by BALANCE (for pros). That is the whole point I am trying to make ...
tl;dr
Statistics are worthless as a main criterion to judge the state of balance; you need to look at ALL levels of play to choose the correct changes.
+ Show Spoiler +Sadly Blizzard only looks at the top pros, but that doesnt mean we have to be just as bad ...
|
On May 27 2013 07:58 Toadvine wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2013 04:00 Big J wrote:On May 27 2013 02:53 Toadvine wrote:On May 26 2013 23:46 Emzeeshady wrote:
I am sorry but I have no clue what you guys mean by 50% doesn't equal a balanced game. For me 50% means that both players have an equal chance to win which is the epitome of balance. Yes, Protoss is forced to all in and Zerg is forced to play defensive but they will both still win about the same amount of games considering both players are equally good.
For what ever reason you are ignoring how imbalanced Protoss was in the mid game vs Zerg and just look at late game imbalance. Yes, PvZ in WOL sucked but it sucked for both races... Saying Protoss was "imbalanced in the midgame" is misleading. They had an imbalanced 2 base all-in. In a standard game, Zerg basically had initiative at every point in the game, while the Protoss just sat back and tried to take a third base with his tech of choice, and then attempt a 3 base timing before Broodlords. After that, the silliness began. In general, I'd say that since the Infestor buff in 2011, playing standard was always harder for the Protoss in PvZ than it was for the Zerg. It wasnt so much the infestorbuff. It was the metagame shift of zergs getting 3bases up quickly that enabled zergs to figure out 2base colossus macroplay. Maps also had a lot to do with that. Em, no. At the time, standard Protoss play involved getting a third around 10:00 off Robo or Blink, and proceeding with a huge 3 base Stalker/Colossus push with +3. Nobody really bothered with 2 base Colossus. The primary whine vector for Zergs was how that maxed "deathball" would roll over their roach/hydra/corruptor for an easy win. If anything, "innovation" in the matchup at the time consisted of Nestea making Mutas a lot and Losira all-ining.
No, you mix up the timeframe. The Fungal change (22.3.2011) was done because of 2base Voidray/Colossus as described in Artosis "IMBALANCED!" show (episode from 15.2.2011).
That roach/ling build you are talking about popped up a month later and Nestea going mutas vs Protoss was done way later after FFE vs 3base was established, afaik.
The fungal buff happened to fix an issue in a metagame (with according maps) that was speedling expands into two base tech for zerg vs 3gate sentry expands into 2base tech for Protoss. In retrospect it may have been an unnecessary fix. In retrospect, it also sounds like a gift from the heavens that BL/Infestor never was able to siege down units for 8seconds for a single fungal.
Edit: hm, reading again, I guess you weren't commenting on the infestorbuff part, but rather which kind of metagame zergs started to figure out. So, in 2011 I believe that Protoss didn't take their thirds at 10:00, as I discussed this a lot in the "Mutas are imbalanced"-thread and suggested (inspired by some WhiteRa games) that Protoss players should take their third at 10:00 or earlier. And Protoss players kept on telling me that this it is impossible to do so.
In particular, I think that after FFE vs 3base happened, we got a lot of innovation in the matchup. Zergs not going pure roach or roach/ling in the midgame, faster infestors, the return of the mutalisks,going into broodlords instead of corruptors as Colossus counter in the lategame... And Protoss changes into a variety of more crisp timing attacks, fast voidray builds to hold 1-2base roach rushes, stargate harass. But also a lot of Protoss were still "just" playing 2base colossus builds, though admittetly less in Korea (while I think European Protoss did that stuff even in 2012 to beat 200roach). I don't think that we had a lot of roach/hydra/corruptor anymore at that point (though surely right after FFE vs 3base it was still a possibility)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
