EPTthat lost mining time usually WAY exceeds the cost terran puts in. so even if you THINK it didn't do damage it actually did a lot of damage.
Designated Balance Discussion Thread - Page 517
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
willstertben
427 Posts
that lost mining time usually WAY exceeds the cost terran puts in. so even if you THINK it didn't do damage it actually did a lot of damage. | ||
|
Magbane
Finland95 Posts
| ||
|
RaFox17
Finland4581 Posts
On June 09 2013 19:07 Magbane wrote: One tank kill two hellbats fast/forces them away from workers. Can you please stop posting in this thread? | ||
|
willstertben
427 Posts
On June 09 2013 19:04 plogamer wrote: Core or not, Terrans have no equivalent response to mass chargelots without hellbats. it's not like hellbats wouldn't still be a good unit if they were weaker. (a lot weaker please, they're hilariously broken.) | ||
|
Melliflue
United Kingdom1389 Posts
On June 09 2013 18:09 Snowbear wrote: Protoss looks inferior in PvT? And on what do you base that? On innovation, the best player in the world, crushing other players? Does that make protoss inferior? Meanwhile the stats show that it's a pretty balanced matchup (http://i.imgur.com/9orDwMj.png). - But but but.... 50% doesn't mean it's imbalanced! Okay, then let's look around. Talk to GM players. 90% of my gm - high master terran friends have problems against protoss. - But but but... 50% doesn't mean the matchup is fun! True. For terran it's very fun (multitasking, micro, macro). I can understand that it's not fun for protoss tough (turtle style). But that's a design problem, not a balance problem. Where did you get those winrates from? The WCS finals went 4-7, GSL was 9-14, WCS EU was 14-23 (0-0 in Korean only and 5-11 in foreigner only), WCS AM was 16-14 (3-5 Korean only, 2-1 foreigner only). In Pro League? Round 4 PvT was 14-13 and Round 5 was 16-20. Total (only considering Korean vs Korean): 46-59 for a win % of 43.81. The PvT winrates don't actually look that good for Protoss right now. All that said, I occasionally look at this thread and I see it is obsessed with winrates (which is why I decided to look at PvT winrates for the WCS (and Pro League since it is seemingly Protoss heavy)). I think winrates are fairly inaccurate unless you have a league structure where everyone plays everyone else once and only once (or twice and only twice perhaps). Otherwise the winrates get skewed by the people who do well. For example, TvZ in the GSL finished 18-17, but Innovation alone went 15-5. Does one player dominating a match-up make up for the rest of the race struggling in the match-up? (I would point to Parting in PvZ at the end of WoL as another example of this.) | ||
|
scypio
Poland2127 Posts
On June 09 2013 19:07 willstertben wrote: it's not like hellbats wouldn't still be a good unit if they were weaker. (a lot weaker please, they're hilariously broken.) The game is balanced, therefore the hellbats are not broken. You don't like them and want them nerfed - ok, but how should terran deal with P or Z then? Terran representation is at an all-time low for the Code-S already, so that's not like there is a lot of them to spare. | ||
|
Magbane
Finland95 Posts
Hellbat drops are zero issue in TvT | ||
|
Acritter
Syria7637 Posts
On June 09 2013 19:12 Magbane wrote: For cost to cost: sending medivac and two hellbats costs more than having one tank at your base. Reactive costs are a big deal. By forcing that tank to remain behind, you weaken your front lines and limit your own potential for aggression. Also, consider that this requires you have one tank remain for each expansion. 3 bases=3 tanks. Your opponent still only needs the one Medivac. I mean, this isn't conclusive proof that Hellbat drops are broken or anything. I'm just trying to say that there's more to consider in offensive/defensive situations than just sunk cost. | ||
|
Chaggi
Korea (South)1936 Posts
On June 09 2013 19:08 Melliflue wrote: Where did you get those winrates from? The WCS finals went 4-7, GSL was 9-14, WCS EU was 14-23 (0-0 in Korean only and 5-11 in foreigner only), WCS AM was 16-14 (3-5 Korean only, 2-1 foreigner only). In Pro League? Round 4 PvT was 14-13 and Round 5 was 16-20. Total (only considering Korean vs Korean): 46-59 for a win % of 43.81. The PvT winrates don't actually look that good for Protoss right now. All that said, I occasionally look at this thread and I see it is obsessed with winrates (which is why I decided to look at PvT winrates for the WCS (and Pro League since it is seemingly Protoss heavy)). I think winrates are fairly inaccurate unless you have a league structure where everyone plays everyone else once and only once (or twice and only twice perhaps). Otherwise the winrates get skewed by the people who do well. For example, TvZ in the GSL finished 18-17, but Innovation alone went 15-5. Does one player dominating a match-up make up for the rest of the race struggling in the match-up? (I would point to Parting in PvZ at the end of WoL as another example of this.) I'm not disagreeing with any win % be ause I don't always watch pro league and i don't have the energy to check the numbers but whoever pulls out win rates, and only win rates without any additional evidence for how the win was gotten is stupid. You can't have a discussion about balance without going much further in depth a d seeing how each game was lost. An extreme example is if hellbats were thought of as OP and someone pulled out a 60% win rate in TvZ, you can't say that unless its shown that hellbats were used in a vast majority of the wins to get those wins. It's why it took forever to nerf infester Broodlord cause even though it passes the eye test of being op (which Stephanos 12 min roach felt op at the time too), you need a lot of data Not directed at you but in general it's p dumb to use win rates, especially across different tournaments in different formats | ||
|
Magbane
Finland95 Posts
| ||
|
willstertben
427 Posts
On June 09 2013 19:10 scypio wrote: The game is balanced, therefore the hellbats are not broken. You don't like them and want them nerfed - ok, but how should terran deal with P or Z then? Terran representation is at an all-time low for the Code-S already, so that's not like there is a lot of them to spare. i don't think there should be this efficient of a counter for core army units...? there are really strong counters to marine/marauder but those 1) cost gas 2) are expensive and high tech 3) you can do something about them 1) hellbats cost is only minerals and just 100 of them. that's just ridiculous for how strong they counter lings especially 2) colossus ultras storm fungal banelings. all expensive (1 baneling is 75/25 and you need a lot + constantly replace cause they die) 3) you can kill colossus with vikings and spread out in a good arc while kiting back to kill chargelots you can kite ultras you can spread out, run out of storm or just dodge it altogether or snipe/emp the ht you can spread out, dodge fungal or snipe/emp the ht you can kite banelings and spread out on the other hand you can't spread out melee units against hellbats because melee units have to run in and get close to attack. you can't quickly kill or disable hellbats with something from far away during or before a fight. they are ALWAYS getting their damage of and just a couple of them are going to seriously FUCK UP all zerglings in like a 2 seconds. | ||
|
Snowbear
Korea (South)1925 Posts
On June 09 2013 19:19 Magbane wrote: 1 tank at your base doesnt have any real effect on your army strenght, its incredibly unrealistic to assume that 1 tank at your base would cost you the game because it wasnt with your main army. On the contrary, if you dont have sufficient defence at home you WILL lose. Dude really, stop with your "1 tank at each base" madness. In the early-midgame you go hellion tank viking, so you just defend with vikings, turrets, and fast hellions. Then you make 3 - 6 turrets and you move out and kill him, because you defended so easy against his hellbat drops. | ||
|
Chaggi
Korea (South)1936 Posts
On June 09 2013 19:19 Magbane wrote: 1 tank at your base doesnt have any real effect on your army strenght, its incredibly unrealistic to assume that 1 tank at your base would cost you the game because it wasnt with your main army. On the contrary, if you dont have sufficient defence at home you WILL lose. If you don't react in time. Having tanks at home is huge especially early or mid game when a tank could be 20% of your tank count. You can react, split better or set up better defense like e bunker + turret to deter hellbat drops | ||
|
Magbane
Finland95 Posts
| ||
|
CR1PPLeR
Greece14 Posts
| ||
|
Magbane
Finland95 Posts
On June 09 2013 19:23 Chaggi wrote: If you don't react in time. Having tanks at home is huge especially early or mid game when a tank could be 20% of your tank count. You can react, split better or set up better defense like e bunker + turret to deter hellbat drops If you want to attack very early then its not as good option, but later stages of the game it is very good way to defend. But even if you were to attack early, one less tank is not neccesarily going to affect much depending of the engagement. | ||
|
Snowbear
Korea (South)1925 Posts
On June 09 2013 19:20 willstertben wrote: + Show Spoiler + On June 09 2013 19:10 scypio wrote: The game is balanced, therefore the hellbats are not broken. You don't like them and want them nerfed - ok, but how should terran deal with P or Z then? Terran representation is at an all-time low for the Code-S already, so that's not like there is a lot of them to spare. i don't think there should be this efficient of a counter for core army units...? there are really strong counters to marine/marauder but those 1) cost gas 2) are expensive and high tech 3) you can do something about them 1) hellbats cost is only minerals and just 100 of them. that's just ridiculous for how strong they counter lings especially 2) colossus ultras storm fungal banelings. all expensive (1 baneling is 75/25 and you need a lot + constantly replace cause they die) 3) you can kill colossus with vikings and spread out in a good arc while kiting back to kill chargelots you can kite ultras you can spread out, run out of storm or just dodge it altogether or snipe/emp the ht you can spread out, dodge fungal or snipe/emp the ht you can kite banelings and spread out on the other hand you can't spread out melee units against hellbats because melee units have to run in and get close to attack. you can't quickly kill or disable hellbats with something from far away during or before a fight. they are ALWAYS getting their damage of and just a couple of them are going to seriously FUCK UP all zerglings in like a 2 seconds. If hellbats were as OP as you say, then we would see way more terrans dominate in tournaments, and then we would see way more terrans in GM. Neither of these 2 happened. | ||
|
Melliflue
United Kingdom1389 Posts
On June 09 2013 19:10 scypio wrote: The game is balanced, therefore the hellbats are not broken. You don't like them and want them nerfed - ok, but how should terran deal with P or Z then? Terran representation is at an all-time low for the Code-S already, so that's not like there is a lot of them to spare. It's 10P 8T 14Z in WCS KR next season. Season 1 was 7P 11T 14Z. It's only an all-time low for Terran because Terran have almost always been over-represented (by which I mean >=1/3 people were Terran). By the way, the last season of WoL was 5P 13T 14Z (would have been 14T and 13Z but Polt pulled out). I think Terran in WCS KR was most affected by Koreans leaving for other regions; TaeJa, Ryung, Mvp could all make Code S (I'm not saying that they would be guaranteed to be in Code S but they could qualify). They also have ForGG, MMA, TheSTC gone. Protoss only really lost HerO and MC, in terms of people who could make Code S, and maybe Oz besides. | ||
|
Chaggi
Korea (South)1936 Posts
On June 09 2013 19:25 Magbane wrote: If you want to attack very early then its not as good option, but later stages of the game it is very good way to defend. But even if you were to attack early, one less tank is not neccesarily going to affect much depending of the engagement. Or I could react better and pull my SCVs sooner aka play better | ||
|
Snowbear
Korea (South)1925 Posts
On June 09 2013 19:25 Magbane wrote: If you want to attack very early then its not as good option, but later stages of the game it is very good way to defend. But even if you were to attack early, one less tank is not neccesarily going to affect much depending of the engagement. In the later stages you have turrets and reinforcements man .. | ||
| ||
