|
On January 10 2014 00:44 SC2Toastie wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2014 00:40 Wingblade wrote:On January 09 2014 23:25 Ghanburighan wrote:
Actually, GomTvT was generally not won by terrans. It was only after T became weaker that Mvp started his reign. So I don't know if tournament wins are that important. Anyway, P did win all top tournaments at the end of 2013.
The winrates are in favour of P at the moment in PvT (even with the ridiculous streak in proleague). (this is where we should discuss the lack of sizeable data sets, trends and more, but I'd like to point out that you cannot just claim that it's not in P favour atm).
And their representation is massive everywhere. Except Dreamhack Winter... And ASUS ROG... As I said, this is all november, which you can say nothing about. Tadam, random Protoss falling to Scarlett and JD. DHW, again, The very best of the best Terrans and really good Zergs vs subtop Protoss. November is a terrible month to draw conclusions from.
Lol ok your argument got trashed and now your backtracking. You said ALL tournaments. Not some, or "the ones I cherry picked" ALL. That isn't true. You're wrong. End of story.
|
go tlpd boys hots database look back last 50 pages, quote david kim: game is balanced.
|
On January 10 2014 02:05 Wingblade wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2014 00:44 SC2Toastie wrote:On January 10 2014 00:40 Wingblade wrote:On January 09 2014 23:25 Ghanburighan wrote:
Actually, GomTvT was generally not won by terrans. It was only after T became weaker that Mvp started his reign. So I don't know if tournament wins are that important. Anyway, P did win all top tournaments at the end of 2013.
The winrates are in favour of P at the moment in PvT (even with the ridiculous streak in proleague). (this is where we should discuss the lack of sizeable data sets, trends and more, but I'd like to point out that you cannot just claim that it's not in P favour atm).
And their representation is massive everywhere. Except Dreamhack Winter... And ASUS ROG... As I said, this is all november, which you can say nothing about. Tadam, random Protoss falling to Scarlett and JD. DHW, again, The very best of the best Terrans and really good Zergs vs subtop Protoss. November is a terrible month to draw conclusions from. Lol ok your argument got trashed and now your backtracking. You said ALL tournaments. Not some, or "the ones I cherry picked" ALL. That isn't true. You're wrong. End of story.
Is this how you really want to argue? OOP YOU DIDN'T SAY ONE ADJECTIVE, YOUR ENTIRE ARGUMENT IS NOW INVALID. LALALALALALALA
|
On January 10 2014 02:05 Wingblade wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2014 00:44 SC2Toastie wrote:On January 10 2014 00:40 Wingblade wrote:On January 09 2014 23:25 Ghanburighan wrote:
Actually, GomTvT was generally not won by terrans. It was only after T became weaker that Mvp started his reign. So I don't know if tournament wins are that important. Anyway, P did win all top tournaments at the end of 2013.
The winrates are in favour of P at the moment in PvT (even with the ridiculous streak in proleague). (this is where we should discuss the lack of sizeable data sets, trends and more, but I'd like to point out that you cannot just claim that it's not in P favour atm).
And their representation is massive everywhere. Except Dreamhack Winter... And ASUS ROG... As I said, this is all november, which you can say nothing about. Tadam, random Protoss falling to Scarlett and JD. DHW, again, The very best of the best Terrans and really good Zergs vs subtop Protoss. November is a terrible month to draw conclusions from. Lol ok your argument got trashed and now your backtracking. You said ALL tournaments. Not some, or "the ones I cherry picked" ALL. That isn't true. You're wrong. End of story.
Ì don't even understand what you are attempting to say.
I said November has terrible material, give an explanation on why it is weird and winrates are unimportant, and you come in with some random comment? Haters gonna hate I guess
|
Code A qualifiers in Korea - not bad
PvT 32–30 (51.61%)
PvZ 47–43 (52.22%)
TvZ 35–37 (48.61%)
|
I have no idea who started this trend of using a variant of "stick fingers and ears and go lalala" as a mean to debate. Tilts me to no end. Dumbest recurring sentence I've read in a while (and that's including Moffat's "Doctor WHO???").
Adding something in order for my post to have some content:
I think the nerf to msc should be slight, but double: adressing both offense and defense. That way you're opening the terran's option to attack, but you're also making protoss attack a little weaker, so that PvP isn't destroyed by the diminution of defensive possibilities. Sight range reduced by a lot, 25s timewarp, 50s overcharge (I'm pulling numbers out of my ass, I have no idea if these work better than other suggestions, it's just to give an idea of what type of stuff I'd do).
|
Maybe buf ultralisk in lategae zvz/Nerf roachdamage vs bio-massive-armored units
|
|
|
I'm disappoint to see no 100+ Protoss GM league :'(
|
The more I watch alternatives like Starbow, the more I think a lot of problems that people have with SC2 can never be solved unless something drastic is done.
|
Northern Ireland23896 Posts
It's more an instinctual 'feel' for how Protoss functions and the sheer amount of timing attacks they have. I wasn't really talking about really high level ladder though, but everything below Masters especially. In another manner of speaking, it's also shown by some of the runs Naniwa had where he would go off radar, come up with some new build and do extremely well with it, and then have to come up with something else after the reveal. It's always been a race that has to mix things up a lot more build wise to profit, more so at certain times than others ofc.
Protoss had pretty high ladder representation in GM even when they weren't really doing much in tournaments, if memory serves. I may be entirely wrong in that. It was also posited that they were a race really suited to Bo1s when Proleague saw tons and tons of Protoss even when they weren't tearing up the individual leagues.
This isn't so much the case in GM though, where players (well non-barcodes) will have familiarity with their opponents as their MMRs restrict the number of different people they can play.
|
|
|
I don't know about Starbow. Aside from the hotfix to clumping and different mining speeds, I don't think it adds much. Sure, Starbow's creators had fun with adding back BW's units and fiddling around with spells and abilities, but in the end it would eventually have the same feel as HotS. A good feel probably (HotS is pretty good already), but nothing revolutionary.
I like however how the modders are willing to try new shit, which Blizzard should be too. Starbow should be helped greatly with the 2.1 "Extension maps" or whatever they're called, so we will be able to actually play Starbow on all existing 1v1 maps.
|
once money is involved, with more pros and talents start playing, problems will arise up.
Starcraft early WoL days was pretty interesting, unoptimised play with strange tactics (but doesn't mean horrible play).
Then once people starts to explore the game more, some problems show up when people found the best optimal way to play.
Then everyone copy the best optimal play and leads to more problematic games in their own game experience.
so the best way is just let starbow become the niche game and sort of like red alert 2, small pro scene, quite a bit of imbalanceness, but fun
|
On December 31 2013 09:43 Ana_ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2013 09:35 TheDwf wrote:On December 31 2013 09:28 plogamer wrote:
Warp tech needs to change. This has been asked countless times since the dawn of SC2, but for some reason Blizzard is very happy with this terrible concept. I doubt they will even try to tweak it in LotV. Propably because of the work. Imagine you remove warpgate and sentries. Making Protoss be able to survive, for example 11minute roach max by zerg, you would need like Immortals comming out of gateways or something equally ridicilous. How the fuck you gona balance that out in reasonable time for your next game/expansion?
If the production rate is made equal, why would warpgates be any better defensively than regular gateways? Not to mention sentries are not the issue.
|
On January 14 2014 06:10 plogamer wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2013 09:43 Ana_ wrote:On December 31 2013 09:35 TheDwf wrote:On December 31 2013 09:28 plogamer wrote:
Warp tech needs to change. This has been asked countless times since the dawn of SC2, but for some reason Blizzard is very happy with this terrible concept. I doubt they will even try to tweak it in LotV. Propably because of the work. Imagine you remove warpgate and sentries. Making Protoss be able to survive, for example 11minute roach max by zerg, you would need like Immortals comming out of gateways or something equally ridicilous. How the fuck you gona balance that out in reasonable time for your next game/expansion? If the production rate is made equal, why would warpgates be any better defensively than regular gateways? Front-loading the investment into a short build time allows you to make units responsively, in addition to placing them at a location of your (powered) choice on the map. Even with a faster build time warpgates would be preferable to gateways. Starbow has an extremely long warp-in time for warpgate units which greatly limits their utility and increases their vulnerability, but even there the main thing keeping 100% of gateways from being in warpgate mode is that you can't warp in Dragoons.
|
On January 14 2014 06:20 RampancyTW wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2014 06:10 plogamer wrote:On December 31 2013 09:43 Ana_ wrote:On December 31 2013 09:35 TheDwf wrote:On December 31 2013 09:28 plogamer wrote:
Warp tech needs to change. This has been asked countless times since the dawn of SC2, but for some reason Blizzard is very happy with this terrible concept. I doubt they will even try to tweak it in LotV. Propably because of the work. Imagine you remove warpgate and sentries. Making Protoss be able to survive, for example 11minute roach max by zerg, you would need like Immortals comming out of gateways or something equally ridicilous. How the fuck you gona balance that out in reasonable time for your next game/expansion? If the production rate is made equal, why would warpgates be any better defensively than regular gateways? Front-loading the investment into a short build time allows you to make units responsively, in addition to placing them at a location of your (powered) choice on the map. Even with a faster build time warpgates would be preferable to gateways. Starbow has an extremely long warp-in time for warpgate units which greatly limits their utility and increases their vulnerability, but even there the main thing keeping 100% of gateways from being in warpgate mode is that you can't warp in Dragoons.
Then perhaps making sentries build quicker, with a similar cooldown (pretty much warpgate, but without being able to send units across the map) would solve the issue of surviving roach rushes.
The drawbacks/side-effects of warptech are too severe and destablizing. Everyone agrees that mothership core is required to stablize PvP.
|
On January 14 2014 06:30 plogamer wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2014 06:20 RampancyTW wrote:On January 14 2014 06:10 plogamer wrote:On December 31 2013 09:43 Ana_ wrote:On December 31 2013 09:35 TheDwf wrote:On December 31 2013 09:28 plogamer wrote:
Warp tech needs to change. This has been asked countless times since the dawn of SC2, but for some reason Blizzard is very happy with this terrible concept. I doubt they will even try to tweak it in LotV. Propably because of the work. Imagine you remove warpgate and sentries. Making Protoss be able to survive, for example 11minute roach max by zerg, you would need like Immortals comming out of gateways or something equally ridicilous. How the fuck you gona balance that out in reasonable time for your next game/expansion? If the production rate is made equal, why would warpgates be any better defensively than regular gateways? Front-loading the investment into a short build time allows you to make units responsively, in addition to placing them at a location of your (powered) choice on the map. Even with a faster build time warpgates would be preferable to gateways. Starbow has an extremely long warp-in time for warpgate units which greatly limits their utility and increases their vulnerability, but even there the main thing keeping 100% of gateways from being in warpgate mode is that you can't warp in Dragoons. Then perhaps making sentries build quicker, with a similar cooldown (pretty much warpgate, but without being able to send units across the map) would solve the issue of surviving roach rushes. The drawbacks/side-effects of warptech are too severe and destablizing. Everyone agrees that mothership core is required to stablize PvP. I think slightly faster Sentry build time and moving Warpgate to the Twilight Council might make it playable, but that really opens up Protoss to a lot of abuse from early drop and air play.
|
Another side effect of delaying warp tech: it allows Z to play a lottt greedier if you know there's no real risk of early attacks. So you might buff gateway units... but then super early pokes with 2-3 units get a lot stronger, etc. You'd have to completely rework all 3 races to mitigate the effects of later warpgate.
|
Northern Ireland23896 Posts
It might be work, but short term pain for long term gain. I don't really think if the kinks are worked out that a really revised Warpgate would be anything but a positive for the game of SC2 going forwards
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
