|
On January 30 2014 15:43 Bagi wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2014 06:45 Ben... wrote:
@DWF: Yeah I thought of that after but didn't have a chance to change my post. My bad. But my point remains. Adding more stupid all-ins from either side does not fix the matchup, it just makes it worse. I have to somewhat disagree with this, not because I enjoy all-innish plays but because it keeps both sides honest. A large problem right now in TvP is that terran has to account for all the possible all-ins in their builds (or risk an early loss) while protoss is free to cut corners because theres nothing really threatening terran can do between 2rax and medivac timings. Its the biggest change from WoL really, terran builds have become less efficient while protoss builds have become moreso. Now I dont think marauder rushes are something to bring back but for example 1-1-1 being viable again would go a long towards fixing inequalities like this, it can seep into standard builds and maybe force protoss build more sentries and defensive units early on.
Oh I think you may have misinterpreted what I said (I eluded to it in my post about PvP). All-ins are fine as long as both sides have a reasonable chance of handling them if they play right and if held, the defender has an advantage (As I said in my post about PvP. The same issues we see in PvT exist there too. You can safely defend an all-in and not be ahead because any chance of a counterattack is shut down by photon overcharge). Obviously, as you said, that is not the case right now, because one side has a huge advantage. What I meant is that simply adding more coinflippy early game all-ins to PvT while not addressing the major issues of the matchup will not solve any of the most important issues, just bring more instability to it in the short term.
Trust me, I don't want the game to continue like this either. It isn't healthy for the game to have a matchup in a state like this.
|
On January 30 2014 03:00 LSN wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2014 02:57 FranticRock wrote:
SC1 had a very long run, and people still play it. So can SC2 just be scaled back to SC1 pace?
Compare the length of an SC1 fight vs a SC2 fight. In SC2, everything just instantly blows up, and it's all over. I believe to get the game back under control, it would need to be "scaled back" first to SC1 pace. Everything probably needs to do less damage. Then, after this scaling back is complete, we start looking at what's too strong. Things are too fast, and do too much damage. A lot of things. So David Kim wants to make other things faster to compensate for things which are too fast. He should go work for Nascar. The only things which should be allowed to 1 shot stuff should have poor mobility. (example: yamato, seeker missile, reaver, siege tank, guardian, etc) .
There should not be a unit which you proxy off of 1 base, that one shots everything. To make the game more controllable, they need to make us rely more on compositions, and less on: Do you have a turret? YES = you survive, NO = you lose. exactly this. They should begin with nerfing the economy (base saturation = 16 is too fast). Directly after this they shoulda nerf bio and then remove colossi and maybe banelings (maybe nerf is enaugh tho). Then go on from this :p
Its not even "bio" honestly. At the risk of repeating myself for about the hundredth time the problem is the Marine and only the Marine. Its an absurdly strong and cost-effective unit at the expense of the entire rest of the Terran armoury. A huge focus of the the way Zerg and Protoss play against Terran is about surviving and then killing the massive ball of Marines.
|
On January 30 2014 23:08 -Celestial- wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2014 03:00 LSN wrote:On January 30 2014 02:57 FranticRock wrote:
SC1 had a very long run, and people still play it. So can SC2 just be scaled back to SC1 pace?
Compare the length of an SC1 fight vs a SC2 fight. In SC2, everything just instantly blows up, and it's all over. I believe to get the game back under control, it would need to be "scaled back" first to SC1 pace. Everything probably needs to do less damage. Then, after this scaling back is complete, we start looking at what's too strong. Things are too fast, and do too much damage. A lot of things. So David Kim wants to make other things faster to compensate for things which are too fast. He should go work for Nascar. The only things which should be allowed to 1 shot stuff should have poor mobility. (example: yamato, seeker missile, reaver, siege tank, guardian, etc) .
There should not be a unit which you proxy off of 1 base, that one shots everything. To make the game more controllable, they need to make us rely more on compositions, and less on: Do you have a turret? YES = you survive, NO = you lose. exactly this. They should begin with nerfing the economy (base saturation = 16 is too fast). Directly after this they shoulda nerf bio and then remove colossi and maybe banelings (maybe nerf is enaugh tho). Then go on from this :p Its not even "bio" honestly. At the risk of repeating myself for about the hundredth time the problem is the Marine and only the Marine. Its an absurdly strong and cost-effective unit at the expense of the entire rest of the Terran armoury. A huge focus of the the way Zerg and Protoss play against Terran is about surviving and then killing the massive ball of Marines.
Well, it is more of marine with stim, Cs and enough medivacs healing. Gateway units actually shit on bio in the early game, that is why blink all-ins are so strong. Problem with marines is their size is so small that once you get a group of 25 bunch together, their DPS is insane with stim.
|
On January 30 2014 23:08 -Celestial- wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2014 03:00 LSN wrote:On January 30 2014 02:57 FranticRock wrote:
SC1 had a very long run, and people still play it. So can SC2 just be scaled back to SC1 pace?
Compare the length of an SC1 fight vs a SC2 fight. In SC2, everything just instantly blows up, and it's all over. I believe to get the game back under control, it would need to be "scaled back" first to SC1 pace. Everything probably needs to do less damage. Then, after this scaling back is complete, we start looking at what's too strong. Things are too fast, and do too much damage. A lot of things. So David Kim wants to make other things faster to compensate for things which are too fast. He should go work for Nascar. The only things which should be allowed to 1 shot stuff should have poor mobility. (example: yamato, seeker missile, reaver, siege tank, guardian, etc) .
There should not be a unit which you proxy off of 1 base, that one shots everything. To make the game more controllable, they need to make us rely more on compositions, and less on: Do you have a turret? YES = you survive, NO = you lose. exactly this. They should begin with nerfing the economy (base saturation = 16 is too fast). Directly after this they shoulda nerf bio and then remove colossi and maybe banelings (maybe nerf is enaugh tho). Then go on from this :p Its not even "bio" honestly. At the risk of repeating myself for about the hundredth time the problem is the Marine and only the Marine. Its an absurdly strong and cost-effective unit at the expense of the entire rest of the Terran armoury. A huge focus of the the way Zerg and Protoss play against Terran is about surviving and then killing the massive ball of Marines.
I don't agree with you. Protoss t1 units need to be weaker than terran t1 units because of warpgates which only makes it natural that they have stronger t3 units. Zergs play ling bling muta because it is the only unit comp that it mobile enough to catch turbovacs.
So in my opinion it is warpgates (!!!!!!) and turbovacs that should be looked upon.
|
4713 Posts
On January 30 2014 23:08 -Celestial- wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2014 03:00 LSN wrote:On January 30 2014 02:57 FranticRock wrote:
SC1 had a very long run, and people still play it. So can SC2 just be scaled back to SC1 pace?
Compare the length of an SC1 fight vs a SC2 fight. In SC2, everything just instantly blows up, and it's all over. I believe to get the game back under control, it would need to be "scaled back" first to SC1 pace. Everything probably needs to do less damage. Then, after this scaling back is complete, we start looking at what's too strong. Things are too fast, and do too much damage. A lot of things. So David Kim wants to make other things faster to compensate for things which are too fast. He should go work for Nascar. The only things which should be allowed to 1 shot stuff should have poor mobility. (example: yamato, seeker missile, reaver, siege tank, guardian, etc) .
There should not be a unit which you proxy off of 1 base, that one shots everything. To make the game more controllable, they need to make us rely more on compositions, and less on: Do you have a turret? YES = you survive, NO = you lose. exactly this. They should begin with nerfing the economy (base saturation = 16 is too fast). Directly after this they shoulda nerf bio and then remove colossi and maybe banelings (maybe nerf is enaugh tho). Then go on from this :p Its not even "bio" honestly. At the risk of repeating myself for about the hundredth time the problem is the Marine and only the Marine. Its an absurdly strong and cost-effective unit at the expense of the entire rest of the Terran armoury. A huge focus of the the way Zerg and Protoss play against Terran is about surviving and then killing the massive ball of Marines.
And again you are wrong. The problem isn't the marine, the marine is the gold standard of RTS design, all units should be as responsive, microable and cost efficient if used like that.
The problem is the overarching design of the other races, the larva mechanic and the repercussions of having to nerf the individual units because zergs can produce in bulk, also introducing the need for super cost efficient units just to combat the swarm.
And then there is FF and WG, both mechanics pidgeon holing GW units into being garbage early game, individually weak unless massed and quite useless if they aren't supporting other relevant units like Colossus, Void Rays or HT.
You can nerf the marine all you like and buff the rest of the terran arsenal, but that will not fix the real problems the game has, it will just make the game more boring by killing the most exciting play style while also keeping intact the broken micro limiting mechanics like FF, the idiotic defender's advantage killing Warp Gate and the other stalemate inducing styles like Swarm Hosts and Mech.
Just look at starbow, the only "nerf" marine got is just the removal of combat shields, the core of the unit there is intact though, its still fast, its still fragile but has extremely good DPS, its still extremely responsive, its still extremely rewarding to micro, hell, what I wouldn't give to see Zealots and Stalkers and Hydras work that efficiently.
I suggest you abandon this fully crusade you have against the marine and open your eyes to the real many problems this game has.
|
On January 30 2014 21:33 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2014 21:05 Ghanburighan wrote:On January 30 2014 20:53 TheDwf wrote:On January 30 2014 20:43 bo1b wrote:On January 30 2014 20:17 TheDwf wrote:On January 30 2014 09:43 bo1b wrote:
Also fuck playing mech vs zerg, turtle on three bases then move out with an unstoppable army is a god awful way to play imo. If that gets perfected (and I strongly feel it will), I can't see it not becoming the new broodlord infestor vs zerg, unstoppable outside of a few timings ? Mech vs Zerg is not at all unstoppable. Defending the 3-bases first timing is trivial, and even the mass Ravens phase afterwards can be handled fine by Swarm hosts, Spores and casters (Queens/infests/Vipers). And Zergs are the one who are strategically behind when it comes to mech TvZ, so the room for improvement lies in their side (i. e. you will see the strength of mech play in TvZ decrease over time rather than the contrary). Sky terran is beatable on zergs side once it hits a critical point? I'm willing to accept that I'm playing it wrong, but once a certain amount of ravens are hit it feels almost impossible to win. In any event I think the improvement on zergs end will simply be ending the game before that status is reached. I guess we'll see, and I hope you're right, because its horribly boring to play against/watch KingKong won a game in which Happy had 31 Ravens, I suppose it falls under your notion of critical count? (; If you want to shorten your ZvMech ladder games, I suggest Soulkey's mutas/roaches/swarm host agression (see his games against Maru on Outboxer in Proleague and against Cure on Frost in IEM Qualifier). I main terran and dabble in zerg, but Soulkey's strategy seems way beyond lower level execution. I guess part of the problem is that the onus to out-control is on the Z. While the meching played has a relatively easy time (at least compared to MMMM) execution-wise. The requirements of TvP are way beyond low level Terrans since years and Blizzard has never acknowledged this; at least Zergs have the choice against mech since they can play the "camping" game as well. Hellions/Banshees is also very demanding if you're active with your units (and you're supposed to be); the initial opening is harder to play than Hellions + triple OC into bio. Defending multi-pronged agression with mech is not that easy; it's not Protoss, you have neither PO nor warp-ins or FFs to fix positioning or composition mistakes.
I'm absolutely on board with that, I don't think Blizz is being reasonable with regards to TvP onuses, for example. But I don't think it will help the people here to tell them to play like Soulkey. Hell, I don't think the next best zerg in the world could pull off the execution that Soulkey had against Maru.
A more likely winning strategy is something that incorporates vipers, infestors and a ton of spores. What was that game against Lucifron again...
|
Northern Ireland23845 Posts
Well, agreed mostly Destructicon, but in Starbow there is a bit less clumping so Marine's DPS isn't quite what it is in SC2. In SC2 marines clumped DPS is untouchable, especially with Medivacs, which necessitates AoE.
Marines are a good, dynamic, skill-rewarding unit though, I agree that the issues actually stem more from how the eco works and how warpgate and Z macro mechanics work.
|
So when you nerf marine you would still keep oracles at 100% strength? LOL how do Terran defend early aggresion its our only unit to build to defend..... The fact that you think Marines are OP shows you have no idea what this game is actually like past Plat.... LOL Marines die so fast to storm and Colo that you actualy have to be marauder heavy to even survive so your idea that marines are to strong is so asinine to the level of Bieber... Yea I said it LOL.
TvP is heavy micro on Terran side and is an up hill battle of attrition from Point 1 to end of game.... Most of options to be aggressor comes from Protoss which actually puts Protoss heavy in favor in this match up...... Take The Maru game vs Trap for instance. He used DTs to completely ransack Maru because what? he used mules instead of saving scans because he didnt scower the entire map on Frost? lol Such ridiculous claims made by a mentally challenged protoss player......
|
Northern Ireland23845 Posts
Who's saying nerf the marine in the current state of the game? Just pointing out why the game's balance is as it is. Protoss and Zerg (esp in the BL/Infestor era) have absurd AoE spells to counter the superior microability and DPS of Bio. Their own stock units don't have similar levels of microability and cannot because of Warpgate rushes, and the larva mechanic.
|
@Destructicon:
Saying that every unit should be as microable and responsive as the marine is nice but doesn't touch on the subject Celestial brought up, which is that the marine performs better than (certain, many) other units. There is really no difference between nerfing the oneside or buffing the other side since balance is about relations, and there is really no difference between a thing doing 1damage to a 10life opponent or 100damage to a 1000life opponent. Yet there is a big difference between saying the marine is good against X or the marine is not so good against buffed X.
(though I also disagree on every unit being thaaat responsive and microable... e.g. instasieging tanks, longrange units without any damage point are questionable to begin with; and the reason why the marine is microable is that its stats are chosen in a way that you can keep them out of range while shooting the opponent against many opponents. It's impossible that two units do this against each other, that's why marinewars come down to blobfights as well)
For Starbow, that's exactly what they did. The Zergling has like 35% more dps, Protoss has the Reaver and zealots with +10health. Stalkers are pretty costefficient against marines there, since they cost 50minerals less but have more dps and come with blink. Terran doesn't have medivacs to force the Protoss into embryo position with bio from 10mins onwards.
Also they tweaked the responiveness of marines a little bit as far as I know, and yeah, 10less health is huge.
|
On January 30 2014 23:39 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2014 21:33 TheDwf wrote:On January 30 2014 21:05 Ghanburighan wrote:On January 30 2014 20:53 TheDwf wrote:On January 30 2014 20:43 bo1b wrote:On January 30 2014 20:17 TheDwf wrote:On January 30 2014 09:43 bo1b wrote:
Also fuck playing mech vs zerg, turtle on three bases then move out with an unstoppable army is a god awful way to play imo. If that gets perfected (and I strongly feel it will), I can't see it not becoming the new broodlord infestor vs zerg, unstoppable outside of a few timings ? Mech vs Zerg is not at all unstoppable. Defending the 3-bases first timing is trivial, and even the mass Ravens phase afterwards can be handled fine by Swarm hosts, Spores and casters (Queens/infests/Vipers). And Zergs are the one who are strategically behind when it comes to mech TvZ, so the room for improvement lies in their side (i. e. you will see the strength of mech play in TvZ decrease over time rather than the contrary). Sky terran is beatable on zergs side once it hits a critical point? I'm willing to accept that I'm playing it wrong, but once a certain amount of ravens are hit it feels almost impossible to win. In any event I think the improvement on zergs end will simply be ending the game before that status is reached. I guess we'll see, and I hope you're right, because its horribly boring to play against/watch KingKong won a game in which Happy had 31 Ravens, I suppose it falls under your notion of critical count? (; If you want to shorten your ZvMech ladder games, I suggest Soulkey's mutas/roaches/swarm host agression (see his games against Maru on Outboxer in Proleague and against Cure on Frost in IEM Qualifier). I main terran and dabble in zerg, but Soulkey's strategy seems way beyond lower level execution. I guess part of the problem is that the onus to out-control is on the Z. While the meching played has a relatively easy time (at least compared to MMMM) execution-wise. The requirements of TvP are way beyond low level Terrans since years and Blizzard has never acknowledged this; at least Zergs have the choice against mech since they can play the "camping" game as well. Hellions/Banshees is also very demanding if you're active with your units (and you're supposed to be); the initial opening is harder to play than Hellions + triple OC into bio. Defending multi-pronged agression with mech is not that easy; it's not Protoss, you have neither PO nor warp-ins or FFs to fix positioning or composition mistakes. I'm absolutely on board with that, I don't think Blizz is being reasonable with regards to TvP onuses, for example. But I don't think it will help the people here to tell them to play like Soulkey. Hell, I don't think the next best zerg in the world could pull off the execution that Soulkey had against Maru. A more likely winning strategy is something that incorporates vipers, infestors and a ton of spores. What was that game against Lucifron again...
I was not telling him to "play like Soulkey" as in "play with Soulkey's skill" but "use his game plan if you want a dynamic game against mech". Unless he's high GM in Korea, he won't need Soulkey's level of execution against his Terran opponents anyway.
|
On January 30 2014 20:17 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2014 09:43 bo1b wrote:
Also fuck playing mech vs zerg, turtle on three bases then move out with an unstoppable army is a god awful way to play imo. If that gets perfected (and I strongly feel it will), I can't see it not becoming the new broodlord infestor vs zerg, unstoppable outside of a few timings ? Mech vs Zerg is not at all unstoppable. Defending the 3-bases first timing is trivial, and even the mass Ravens phase afterwards can be handled fine by Swarm hosts, Spores and casters (Queens/infests/Vipers). And Zergs are the one who are strategically behind when it comes to mech TvZ, so the room for improvement lies in their side (i. e. you will see the strength of mech play in TvZ decrease over time rather than the contrary).
I've seen Curious repeatedly lose to Mvp's 3 base mech timings in different tournaments. I saw Soulkey lose to a later 3 base timing (whilst taking a fourth) twice vs Cure a week ago. Trivial to defend? Please. They're very, very strong and simple to execute.
|
On January 31 2014 05:46 Ovni wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2014 20:17 TheDwf wrote:On January 30 2014 09:43 bo1b wrote:
Also fuck playing mech vs zerg, turtle on three bases then move out with an unstoppable army is a god awful way to play imo. If that gets perfected (and I strongly feel it will), I can't see it not becoming the new broodlord infestor vs zerg, unstoppable outside of a few timings ? Mech vs Zerg is not at all unstoppable. Defending the 3-bases first timing is trivial, and even the mass Ravens phase afterwards can be handled fine by Swarm hosts, Spores and casters (Queens/infests/Vipers). And Zergs are the one who are strategically behind when it comes to mech TvZ, so the room for improvement lies in their side (i. e. you will see the strength of mech play in TvZ decrease over time rather than the contrary). I've seen Curious repeatedly lose to Mvp's 3 base mech timings in different tournaments. I saw Soulkey lose to a later 3 base timing (whilst taking a fourth) twice vs Cure a week ago. Trivial to defend? Please. They're very, very strong and simple to execute.
Yes, they're trivial to defend in an even game. Zerg was behind from damage sustained in early game in all the games you mentioned. And no, they're not simple to execute; you need to get the right composition with limited information, you need to hit the right timing, you have to avoid getting caught unsieged (which is difficult with the speed of Zerg ground units on creep), and if Vipers are on the field, you have to spread Tanks while advancing which requires a lot of attention and time.
|
I have lost hope for 1v1 ages ago, I usually play teamgames anymore. My only hope is that they nerf oracle back to the way it was before... or make it even worse.
Now u need to be retard to lose ur oracle.
And u r always guaranteed some kills with it.
T.T
|
I dunno how anyone can enjoy this game as terran right now
|
Northern Ireland23845 Posts
Sado-masochists are finding Terran the most fun to play it has ever been man
|
I don't understand people still claiming the marine is the core of design problems for SC2.
The marine was core in BW TvZ and even forced ridiculously "imba" stuff to counter it (lurkers + dswarm). Yet, the matchup was 5-10x more rich.
Forest from the trees.
|
|
|
On January 31 2014 11:22 Talack wrote:
I dunno how anyone can enjoy this game as terran right now
I switched to melee lol. I can't stand tvp, and mech is boring imo while biomine is straight up not good enough vs muta/ling/bane. If only I got tvt more then once every 10 games or so lol.
|
On January 30 2014 23:54 Big J wrote:
[...]
For Starbow, that's exactly what they did. The Zergling has like 35% more dps, Protoss has the Reaver and zealots with +10health. Stalkers are pretty costefficient against marines there, since they cost 50minerals less but have more dps and come with blink. Terran doesn't have medivacs to force the Protoss into embryo position with bio from 10mins onwards.
Also they tweaked the responiveness of marines a little bit as far as I know, and yeah, 10less health is huge.
Well, yeah, but afaik isn't bio-play nigh unplayable in TvP in Starbow? Sounds like the same problem HotS has with mech, but in reverse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
