If widowmines were no projectile it could probably help out vs protoss. I rather terran get buffed than protoss nerfed. Nerfing blink directly nerfs blink vs zerg and there have been no talk about blink vs zerg is op or anything so dunno if its wise to nerf blink(?) Blizzard wanted first to set a 5sec longer cooldown but what for? Appaerantly maybe they think blink is to much vs zerg to but no words about that.
Persoanlly i hate blink so fine by me. But no projectile vs zerg with the widowmines would probably be to much so a simple solution to that is to only have it instant vs mechanical units.
And another thing i would like to really see is scan have seperate energy. Everytime terran use scan in the early game/early midgame he gets behind economy wise. Not fun imo, and i wanna see less RNG. I want it to be more HOW the player reacts and not WILL HE react
On March 16 2014 12:40 Waise wrote: protoss became powerful because pro protoss players started learning the depth and strength of units like the msc, oracle, etc and explored the huge range of options their tech gives them
i think there's a problem in the game, but i don't think the answer is nerfs. i think the answer is giving zerg and terran more tools and more functionality they can explore and exploit just like how protoss got new toys
the problem is that blizz gave toss mobility tools (oracle, msc, warp prism speed buff, etc) hoping it would offset their defensive style and encourage new more dynamic styles like what SOS showed at blizzcon. but instead of making protoss more aggressive and less defensive, it just made them equally defensive with more ability TO be safely aggressive/cheesy/sneaky
bad design or no, protoss players EARNED their OP era by figuring out how to optimally use their tools. give more tools to all races! more skill ceiling! that's why i'm in favor of things like the roach burrow buff, because why not? throw little things like that at the wall and see if they stick. if they don't change the meta, at least it's still a little better, more skill rewarding and more likely to be used. if it adds something to the game, great. in theory i think blizz's idea of "small, safe changes to avoid wrecking the meta" is good, but if you're going to use small changes, why not try more of them and more often? put the prerogative on the players to take a small patch and make new builds and new styles out of it
Well, Terrans were OP at the beginning of HoTS but then Blizzard nerfed hellbats...
No that's now how you interpret the statistics. What's most likely happened was that there was an adjustment proces where at lot "patch"-zergs had to get demoted into the league where they deserverd to be and a lot of terrans were going advance in leagues. What happens in that proces is that terran win/rates > 50. Zerg win rates <50.
So the only thing you can take away from early HOTS w/r is that HOTS buffed terran relative to WOL. You can'y say anytihng about absolute balance (only a change in balance).
There was definitely an element of that, but zerg pretty much never beat terran for a good few months without some form of roach/bane all in, until there were several nerfs. Even now terran arguably has an advantage vs zerg.
On March 16 2014 21:21 Foxxan wrote: If widowmines were no projectile it could probably help out vs protoss. I rather terran get buffed than protoss nerfed. Nerfing blink directly nerfs blink vs zerg and there have been no talk about blink vs zerg is op or anything so dunno if its wise to nerf blink(?) Blizzard wanted first to set a 5sec longer cooldown but what for? Appaerantly maybe they think blink is to much vs zerg to but no words about that.
Persoanlly i hate blink so fine by me. But no projectile vs zerg with the widowmines would probably be to much so a simple solution to that is to only have it instant vs mechanical units.
And another thing i would like to really see is scan have seperate energy. Everytime terran use scan in the early game/early midgame he gets behind economy wise. Not fun imo, and i wanna see less RNG. I want it to be more HOW the player reacts and not WILL HE react
Just replace timewarp with something else. This spell is far to similar to forcefields anyway. It makes blink stalkers far too cost effective, and removes micro options from the terran. Bio just gets kited and pulled scvs won't ever reach stalkers. Used on a ramp it gets even more disgusting. This spell should not be in the game. Forcefields are enough space control for one race, and then some.
On March 16 2014 21:21 Foxxan wrote: If widowmines were no projectile it could probably help out vs protoss. I rather terran get buffed than protoss nerfed. Nerfing blink directly nerfs blink vs zerg and there have been no talk about blink vs zerg is op or anything so dunno if its wise to nerf blink(?) Blizzard wanted first to set a 5sec longer cooldown but what for? Appaerantly maybe they think blink is to much vs zerg to but no words about that.
Persoanlly i hate blink so fine by me. But no projectile vs zerg with the widowmines would probably be to much so a simple solution to that is to only have it instant vs mechanical units.
And another thing i would like to really see is scan have seperate energy. Everytime terran use scan in the early game/early midgame he gets behind economy wise. Not fun imo, and i wanna see less RNG. I want it to be more HOW the player reacts and not WILL HE react
Just replace timewarp with something else. This spell is far to similar to forcefields anyway. It makes blink stalkers far too cost effective, and removes micro options from the terran. Bio just gets kited and pulled scvs won't ever reach stalkers. Used on a ramp it gets even more disgusting. This spell should not be in the game. Forcefields are enough space control for one race, and then some.
I agree. Hate that spell, but blizzard are blizzard so instead of hoping it gets removed i try to come up with other solutions
On March 16 2014 12:40 Waise wrote: protoss became powerful because pro protoss players started learning the depth and strength of units like the msc, oracle, etc and explored the huge range of options their tech gives them
i think there's a problem in the game, but i don't think the answer is nerfs. i think the answer is giving zerg and terran more tools and more functionality they can explore and exploit just like how protoss got new toys
the problem is that blizz gave toss mobility tools (oracle, msc, warp prism speed buff, etc) hoping it would offset their defensive style and encourage new more dynamic styles like what SOS showed at blizzcon. but instead of making protoss more aggressive and less defensive, it just made them equally defensive with more ability TO be safely aggressive/cheesy/sneaky
bad design or no, protoss players EARNED their OP era by figuring out how to optimally use their tools. give more tools to all races! more skill ceiling! that's why i'm in favor of things like the roach burrow buff, because why not? throw little things like that at the wall and see if they stick. if they don't change the meta, at least it's still a little better, more skill rewarding and more likely to be used. if it adds something to the game, great. in theory i think blizz's idea of "small, safe changes to avoid wrecking the meta" is good, but if you're going to use small changes, why not try more of them and more often? put the prerogative on the players to take a small patch and make new builds and new styles out of it
Well, Terrans were OP at the beginning of HoTS but then Blizzard nerfed hellbats...
No that's now how you interpret the statistics. What's most likely happened was that there was an adjustment proces where at lot "patch"-zergs had to get demoted into the league where they deserverd to be and a lot of terrans were going advance in leagues. What happens in that proces is that terran win/rates > 50. Zerg win rates <50.
So the only thing you can take away from early HOTS w/r is that HOTS buffed terran relative to WOL. You can'y say anytihng about absolute balance (only a change in balance).
There was definitely an element of that, but zerg pretty much never beat terran for a good few months without some form of roach/bane all in, until there were several nerfs. Even now terran arguably has an advantage vs zerg.
First of, it is pretty natural that Zerg has to allin when Terran plays as greedy as they did back then. F.e. INnoVation even skipped hellions in some of his 3CC builds, either for a fast mine drop or just to go 3CC without gas. Those are simply very, very greedy builds. The patches you are talking about are also not the most influencial thing in the world. It took out hellbat drop openings. But the situation was pretty stable before the minepatch already. And those were the only 2nerfs I can think about.
In conclusion, it had much more to do with the metagame. Terrans were a little too greedy at that time and Zergs didn't really know what to do in the lategame. Compare it to know, back in early HotS Zergs would usually go for a fast Hive and Ultralisks or sometimes Broodlords... and just die in the transition or with those units out. These days we know that lategame Zerg is a lot about mass, mass mutalisks in ZvT, not about higher tech transitions. Which are nice tools to have, but not your ultimate goal to reach.
The matchup is in a very good and entertaining state currently, in my opinion at least.
On March 16 2014 12:40 Waise wrote: protoss became powerful because pro protoss players started learning the depth and strength of units like the msc, oracle, etc and explored the huge range of options their tech gives them
i think there's a problem in the game, but i don't think the answer is nerfs. i think the answer is giving zerg and terran more tools and more functionality they can explore and exploit just like how protoss got new toys
the problem is that blizz gave toss mobility tools (oracle, msc, warp prism speed buff, etc) hoping it would offset their defensive style and encourage new more dynamic styles like what SOS showed at blizzcon. but instead of making protoss more aggressive and less defensive, it just made them equally defensive with more ability TO be safely aggressive/cheesy/sneaky
bad design or no, protoss players EARNED their OP era by figuring out how to optimally use their tools. give more tools to all races! more skill ceiling! that's why i'm in favor of things like the roach burrow buff, because why not? throw little things like that at the wall and see if they stick. if they don't change the meta, at least it's still a little better, more skill rewarding and more likely to be used. if it adds something to the game, great. in theory i think blizz's idea of "small, safe changes to avoid wrecking the meta" is good, but if you're going to use small changes, why not try more of them and more often? put the prerogative on the players to take a small patch and make new builds and new styles out of it
Well, Terrans were OP at the beginning of HoTS but then Blizzard nerfed hellbats...
No that's now how you interpret the statistics. What's most likely happened was that there was an adjustment proces where at lot "patch"-zergs had to get demoted into the league where they deserverd to be and a lot of terrans were going advance in leagues. What happens in that proces is that terran win/rates > 50. Zerg win rates <50.
So the only thing you can take away from early HOTS w/r is that HOTS buffed terran relative to WOL. You can'y say anytihng about absolute balance (only a change in balance).
There was definitely an element of that, but zerg pretty much never beat terran for a good few months without some form of roach/bane all in, until there were several nerfs. Even now terran arguably has an advantage vs zerg.
First of, it is pretty natural that Zerg has to allin when Terran plays as greedy as they did back then. F.e. INnoVation even skipped hellions in some of his 3CC builds, either for a fast mine drop or just to go 3CC without gas. Those are simply very, very greedy builds. The patches you are talking about are also not the most influencial thing in the world. It took out hellbat drop openings. But the situation was pretty stable before the minepatch already. And those were the only 2nerfs I can think about.
In conclusion, it had much more to do with the metagame. Terrans were a little too greedy at that time and Zergs didn't really know what to do in the lategame. Compare it to know, back in early HotS Zergs would usually go for a fast Hive and Ultralisks or sometimes Broodlords... and just die in the transition or with those units out. These days we know that lategame Zerg is a lot about mass, mass mutalisks in ZvT, not about higher tech transitions. Which are nice tools to have, but not your ultimate goal to reach.
The matchup is in a very good and entertaining state currently, in my opinion at least.
ZvT is great because you rarely get the feeling that the better player lost. This is something that i often feel is missing in PvZ and PvT.
On March 16 2014 12:40 Waise wrote: protoss became powerful because pro protoss players started learning the depth and strength of units like the msc, oracle, etc and explored the huge range of options their tech gives them
i think there's a problem in the game, but i don't think the answer is nerfs. i think the answer is giving zerg and terran more tools and more functionality they can explore and exploit just like how protoss got new toys
the problem is that blizz gave toss mobility tools (oracle, msc, warp prism speed buff, etc) hoping it would offset their defensive style and encourage new more dynamic styles like what SOS showed at blizzcon. but instead of making protoss more aggressive and less defensive, it just made them equally defensive with more ability TO be safely aggressive/cheesy/sneaky
bad design or no, protoss players EARNED their OP era by figuring out how to optimally use their tools. give more tools to all races! more skill ceiling! that's why i'm in favor of things like the roach burrow buff, because why not? throw little things like that at the wall and see if they stick. if they don't change the meta, at least it's still a little better, more skill rewarding and more likely to be used. if it adds something to the game, great. in theory i think blizz's idea of "small, safe changes to avoid wrecking the meta" is good, but if you're going to use small changes, why not try more of them and more often? put the prerogative on the players to take a small patch and make new builds and new styles out of it
Well, Terrans were OP at the beginning of HoTS but then Blizzard nerfed hellbats...
No that's now how you interpret the statistics. What's most likely happened was that there was an adjustment proces where at lot "patch"-zergs had to get demoted into the league where they deserverd to be and a lot of terrans were going advance in leagues. What happens in that proces is that terran win/rates > 50. Zerg win rates <50.
So the only thing you can take away from early HOTS w/r is that HOTS buffed terran relative to WOL. You can'y say anytihng about absolute balance (only a change in balance).
There was definitely an element of that, but zerg pretty much never beat terran for a good few months without some form of roach/bane all in, until there were several nerfs. Even now terran arguably has an advantage vs zerg.
First of, it is pretty natural that Zerg has to allin when Terran plays as greedy as they did back then. F.e. INnoVation even skipped hellions in some of his 3CC builds, either for a fast mine drop or just to go 3CC without gas. Those are simply very, very greedy builds. The patches you are talking about are also not the most influencial thing in the world. It took out hellbat drop openings. But the situation was pretty stable before the minepatch already. And those were the only 2nerfs I can think about.
In conclusion, it had much more to do with the metagame. Terrans were a little too greedy at that time and Zergs didn't really know what to do in the lategame. Compare it to know, back in early HotS Zergs would usually go for a fast Hive and Ultralisks or sometimes Broodlords... and just die in the transition or with those units out. These days we know that lategame Zerg is a lot about mass, mass mutalisks in ZvT, not about higher tech transitions. Which are nice tools to have, but not your ultimate goal to reach.
The matchup is in a very good and entertaining state currently, in my opinion at least.
I don't remember Bogus going a lot of CC rax CC (I remember 2 cases vs Symbol and Soulkey, on Red City in the GSL, and on Whirlwind for a Proleague match) or Mines drops after CC first (which is actually a safer variant against Roaches pushes and a slower build than triple OC + dual EB). The builds were not particularly "greedy" (whatever means that word actually); for a long time it was even standard to get 2 safety Mines after the first 6 Hellions, which is never done today. And those triple OC dual EB builds are still there, and they can still defend Roach/Bane busts even with the weaker Mines.
On March 16 2014 12:40 Waise wrote: protoss became powerful because pro protoss players started learning the depth and strength of units like the msc, oracle, etc and explored the huge range of options their tech gives them
i think there's a problem in the game, but i don't think the answer is nerfs. i think the answer is giving zerg and terran more tools and more functionality they can explore and exploit just like how protoss got new toys
the problem is that blizz gave toss mobility tools (oracle, msc, warp prism speed buff, etc) hoping it would offset their defensive style and encourage new more dynamic styles like what SOS showed at blizzcon. but instead of making protoss more aggressive and less defensive, it just made them equally defensive with more ability TO be safely aggressive/cheesy/sneaky
bad design or no, protoss players EARNED their OP era by figuring out how to optimally use their tools. give more tools to all races! more skill ceiling! that's why i'm in favor of things like the roach burrow buff, because why not? throw little things like that at the wall and see if they stick. if they don't change the meta, at least it's still a little better, more skill rewarding and more likely to be used. if it adds something to the game, great. in theory i think blizz's idea of "small, safe changes to avoid wrecking the meta" is good, but if you're going to use small changes, why not try more of them and more often? put the prerogative on the players to take a small patch and make new builds and new styles out of it
Well, Terrans were OP at the beginning of HoTS but then Blizzard nerfed hellbats...
No that's now how you interpret the statistics. What's most likely happened was that there was an adjustment proces where at lot "patch"-zergs had to get demoted into the league where they deserverd to be and a lot of terrans were going advance in leagues. What happens in that proces is that terran win/rates > 50. Zerg win rates <50.
So the only thing you can take away from early HOTS w/r is that HOTS buffed terran relative to WOL. You can'y say anytihng about absolute balance (only a change in balance).
There was definitely an element of that, but zerg pretty much never beat terran for a good few months without some form of roach/bane all in, until there were several nerfs. Even now terran arguably has an advantage vs zerg.
First of, it is pretty natural that Zerg has to allin when Terran plays as greedy as they did back then. F.e. INnoVation even skipped hellions in some of his 3CC builds, either for a fast mine drop or just to go 3CC without gas. Those are simply very, very greedy builds. The patches you are talking about are also not the most influencial thing in the world. It took out hellbat drop openings. But the situation was pretty stable before the minepatch already. And those were the only 2nerfs I can think about.
In conclusion, it had much more to do with the metagame. Terrans were a little too greedy at that time and Zergs didn't really know what to do in the lategame. Compare it to know, back in early HotS Zergs would usually go for a fast Hive and Ultralisks or sometimes Broodlords... and just die in the transition or with those units out. These days we know that lategame Zerg is a lot about mass, mass mutalisks in ZvT, not about higher tech transitions. Which are nice tools to have, but not your ultimate goal to reach.
The matchup is in a very good and entertaining state currently, in my opinion at least.
I'm not saying it's imba, I'm saying that zerg used to have a pretty difficult time vs terran lol. To be frank, terran was still winning against roach bane all ins while going 21 3cc if they built a tank out of the factory before swapping it with the barracks. If you cast your eyes back, there were an incredibly small handful of games that zergs actually won against the very few terrans who could play that parade pushing style after the overseer buff. Before it there were arguably none.
In any event I actually think they went too far with the widowmine nerf, but that is just me I'm beginning to feel lol.
On March 16 2014 12:40 Waise wrote: protoss became powerful because pro protoss players started learning the depth and strength of units like the msc, oracle, etc and explored the huge range of options their tech gives them
i think there's a problem in the game, but i don't think the answer is nerfs. i think the answer is giving zerg and terran more tools and more functionality they can explore and exploit just like how protoss got new toys
the problem is that blizz gave toss mobility tools (oracle, msc, warp prism speed buff, etc) hoping it would offset their defensive style and encourage new more dynamic styles like what SOS showed at blizzcon. but instead of making protoss more aggressive and less defensive, it just made them equally defensive with more ability TO be safely aggressive/cheesy/sneaky
bad design or no, protoss players EARNED their OP era by figuring out how to optimally use their tools. give more tools to all races! more skill ceiling! that's why i'm in favor of things like the roach burrow buff, because why not? throw little things like that at the wall and see if they stick. if they don't change the meta, at least it's still a little better, more skill rewarding and more likely to be used. if it adds something to the game, great. in theory i think blizz's idea of "small, safe changes to avoid wrecking the meta" is good, but if you're going to use small changes, why not try more of them and more often? put the prerogative on the players to take a small patch and make new builds and new styles out of it
Well, Terrans were OP at the beginning of HoTS but then Blizzard nerfed hellbats...
No that's now how you interpret the statistics. What's most likely happened was that there was an adjustment proces where at lot "patch"-zergs had to get demoted into the league where they deserverd to be and a lot of terrans were going advance in leagues. What happens in that proces is that terran win/rates > 50. Zerg win rates <50.
So the only thing you can take away from early HOTS w/r is that HOTS buffed terran relative to WOL. You can'y say anytihng about absolute balance (only a change in balance).
There was definitely an element of that, but zerg pretty much never beat terran for a good few months without some form of roach/bane all in, until there were several nerfs. Even now terran arguably has an advantage vs zerg.
First of, it is pretty natural that Zerg has to allin when Terran plays as greedy as they did back then. F.e. INnoVation even skipped hellions in some of his 3CC builds, either for a fast mine drop or just to go 3CC without gas. Those are simply very, very greedy builds. The patches you are talking about are also not the most influencial thing in the world. It took out hellbat drop openings. But the situation was pretty stable before the minepatch already. And those were the only 2nerfs I can think about.
In conclusion, it had much more to do with the metagame. Terrans were a little too greedy at that time and Zergs didn't really know what to do in the lategame. Compare it to know, back in early HotS Zergs would usually go for a fast Hive and Ultralisks or sometimes Broodlords... and just die in the transition or with those units out. These days we know that lategame Zerg is a lot about mass, mass mutalisks in ZvT, not about higher tech transitions. Which are nice tools to have, but not your ultimate goal to reach.
The matchup is in a very good and entertaining state currently, in my opinion at least.
I don't remember Bogus going a lot of CC rax CC (I remember 2 cases vs Symbol and Soulkey, on Red City in the GSL, and on Whirlwind for a Proleague match) or Mines drops after CC first (which is actually a safer variant against Roaches pushes and a slower build than triple OC + dual EB). The builds were not particularly "greedy" (whatever means that word actually); for a long time it was even standard to get 2 safety Mines after the first 6 Hellions, which is never done today. And those triple OC dual EB builds are still there, and they can still defend Roach/Bane busts even with the weaker Mines.
I just realised I've been saying 21 3cc instead of 27 3cc for so long now lmao
I think people complained about it so much because it seemed pretty ludicrous that a 3rd cc that quickly could defend against roach/bane all ins by either making a few mines immediately after the hellions, or by making a tank before swapping the fact and rax. ~65 scvs at the 11 min mark with mules didn't hurt, and then a push out at 11:30 which had the potential to end games, and another at 13 or so before and endless stream of terran units.
It was pretty rough to play against and then watch later on.
On March 16 2014 12:40 Waise wrote: protoss became powerful because pro protoss players started learning the depth and strength of units like the msc, oracle, etc and explored the huge range of options their tech gives them
i think there's a problem in the game, but i don't think the answer is nerfs. i think the answer is giving zerg and terran more tools and more functionality they can explore and exploit just like how protoss got new toys
the problem is that blizz gave toss mobility tools (oracle, msc, warp prism speed buff, etc) hoping it would offset their defensive style and encourage new more dynamic styles like what SOS showed at blizzcon. but instead of making protoss more aggressive and less defensive, it just made them equally defensive with more ability TO be safely aggressive/cheesy/sneaky
bad design or no, protoss players EARNED their OP era by figuring out how to optimally use their tools. give more tools to all races! more skill ceiling! that's why i'm in favor of things like the roach burrow buff, because why not? throw little things like that at the wall and see if they stick. if they don't change the meta, at least it's still a little better, more skill rewarding and more likely to be used. if it adds something to the game, great. in theory i think blizz's idea of "small, safe changes to avoid wrecking the meta" is good, but if you're going to use small changes, why not try more of them and more often? put the prerogative on the players to take a small patch and make new builds and new styles out of it
Well, Terrans were OP at the beginning of HoTS but then Blizzard nerfed hellbats...
No that's now how you interpret the statistics. What's most likely happened was that there was an adjustment proces where at lot "patch"-zergs had to get demoted into the league where they deserverd to be and a lot of terrans were going advance in leagues. What happens in that proces is that terran win/rates > 50. Zerg win rates <50.
So the only thing you can take away from early HOTS w/r is that HOTS buffed terran relative to WOL. You can'y say anytihng about absolute balance (only a change in balance).
There was definitely an element of that, but zerg pretty much never beat terran for a good few months without some form of roach/bane all in, until there were several nerfs. Even now terran arguably has an advantage vs zerg.
First of, it is pretty natural that Zerg has to allin when Terran plays as greedy as they did back then. F.e. INnoVation even skipped hellions in some of his 3CC builds, either for a fast mine drop or just to go 3CC without gas. Those are simply very, very greedy builds. The patches you are talking about are also not the most influencial thing in the world. It took out hellbat drop openings. But the situation was pretty stable before the minepatch already. And those were the only 2nerfs I can think about.
In conclusion, it had much more to do with the metagame. Terrans were a little too greedy at that time and Zergs didn't really know what to do in the lategame. Compare it to know, back in early HotS Zergs would usually go for a fast Hive and Ultralisks or sometimes Broodlords... and just die in the transition or with those units out. These days we know that lategame Zerg is a lot about mass, mass mutalisks in ZvT, not about higher tech transitions. Which are nice tools to have, but not your ultimate goal to reach.
The matchup is in a very good and entertaining state currently, in my opinion at least.
ZvT is great because you rarely get the feeling that the better player lost. This is something that i often feel is missing in PvZ and PvT.
yep i also agree with that, hellbats got nerfed, rightfully so, mines got nerfed, well, tvz was very balanced back then, but i feel its fine now aswell
tvp and pvz are somehow broken because there is no early game agression vs protoss thus limiting every opener that is not economy based. protoss can chose if they want to go super aggressive or eco based or even worse, the new meta of strong aggression while maintaining a decent economy aswell no wonder protoss has higher win rates when your opponent can die or suffers heavy loses to bo or "strategy" wins that involve little to no penalty when failing
On March 16 2014 12:40 Waise wrote: protoss became powerful because pro protoss players started learning the depth and strength of units like the msc, oracle, etc and explored the huge range of options their tech gives them
i think there's a problem in the game, but i don't think the answer is nerfs. i think the answer is giving zerg and terran more tools and more functionality they can explore and exploit just like how protoss got new toys
the problem is that blizz gave toss mobility tools (oracle, msc, warp prism speed buff, etc) hoping it would offset their defensive style and encourage new more dynamic styles like what SOS showed at blizzcon. but instead of making protoss more aggressive and less defensive, it just made them equally defensive with more ability TO be safely aggressive/cheesy/sneaky
bad design or no, protoss players EARNED their OP era by figuring out how to optimally use their tools. give more tools to all races! more skill ceiling! that's why i'm in favor of things like the roach burrow buff, because why not? throw little things like that at the wall and see if they stick. if they don't change the meta, at least it's still a little better, more skill rewarding and more likely to be used. if it adds something to the game, great. in theory i think blizz's idea of "small, safe changes to avoid wrecking the meta" is good, but if you're going to use small changes, why not try more of them and more often? put the prerogative on the players to take a small patch and make new builds and new styles out of it
Well, Terrans were OP at the beginning of HoTS but then Blizzard nerfed hellbats...
No that's now how you interpret the statistics. What's most likely happened was that there was an adjustment proces where at lot "patch"-zergs had to get demoted into the league where they deserverd to be and a lot of terrans were going advance in leagues. What happens in that proces is that terran win/rates > 50. Zerg win rates <50.
So the only thing you can take away from early HOTS w/r is that HOTS buffed terran relative to WOL. You can'y say anytihng about absolute balance (only a change in balance).
There was definitely an element of that, but zerg pretty much never beat terran for a good few months without some form of roach/bane all in, until there were several nerfs. Even now terran arguably has an advantage vs zerg.
First of, it is pretty natural that Zerg has to allin when Terran plays as greedy as they did back then. F.e. INnoVation even skipped hellions in some of his 3CC builds, either for a fast mine drop or just to go 3CC without gas. Those are simply very, very greedy builds. The patches you are talking about are also not the most influencial thing in the world. It took out hellbat drop openings. But the situation was pretty stable before the minepatch already. And those were the only 2nerfs I can think about.
In conclusion, it had much more to do with the metagame. Terrans were a little too greedy at that time and Zergs didn't really know what to do in the lategame. Compare it to know, back in early HotS Zergs would usually go for a fast Hive and Ultralisks or sometimes Broodlords... and just die in the transition or with those units out. These days we know that lategame Zerg is a lot about mass, mass mutalisks in ZvT, not about higher tech transitions. Which are nice tools to have, but not your ultimate goal to reach.
The matchup is in a very good and entertaining state currently, in my opinion at least.
I'm not saying it's imba, I'm saying that zerg used to have a pretty difficult time vs terran lol. To be frank, terran was still winning against roach bane all ins while going 21 3cc if they built a tank out of the factory before swapping it with the barracks. If you cast your eyes back, there were an incredibly small handful of games that zergs actually won against the very few terrans who could play that parade pushing style after the overseer buff. Before it there were arguably none.
In any event I actually think they went too far with the widowmine nerf, but that is just me I'm beginning to feel lol.
I feel that to with the widowmine. Personally i found zerg have it alittle to "easy" vs terran marine/widow/medivac. Would like to see the widowmine reverted or atleast get some strength back and instead have the infestor root block it.
As for 2-bases Blink in PvT, the problem is not maps (Frost isn't a particularly Blink-favored map, yet we saw Protoss easily win Terran there with 2-bases Blink) but the lack of a major cloaked threat for Terran. Protoss would not gamble with a blind, no detection build if a Mine landing in their mineral line meant instant gg (as it did with the Mine 1.0). Unfortunately, even the Mine 3.0 isn't particularly hot in mineral lines (you need a particular positioning of the Mine + a certain mineral line configuration to get the possibility of a money shot), and Cloak Banshees are completely useless against standard play, so Protoss are still free to play with zero precaution regarding this. I have faced 2-bases Blink + robo builds in the few days after the patch in which Protoss were still scared of Mine drops, and the simple fact they were getting this robo made the attack so much weaker it was no longer a game-ending threat.
On March 16 2014 12:40 Waise wrote: protoss became powerful because pro protoss players started learning the depth and strength of units like the msc, oracle, etc and explored the huge range of options their tech gives them
i think there's a problem in the game, but i don't think the answer is nerfs. i think the answer is giving zerg and terran more tools and more functionality they can explore and exploit just like how protoss got new toys
the problem is that blizz gave toss mobility tools (oracle, msc, warp prism speed buff, etc) hoping it would offset their defensive style and encourage new more dynamic styles like what SOS showed at blizzcon. but instead of making protoss more aggressive and less defensive, it just made them equally defensive with more ability TO be safely aggressive/cheesy/sneaky
bad design or no, protoss players EARNED their OP era by figuring out how to optimally use their tools. give more tools to all races! more skill ceiling! that's why i'm in favor of things like the roach burrow buff, because why not? throw little things like that at the wall and see if they stick. if they don't change the meta, at least it's still a little better, more skill rewarding and more likely to be used. if it adds something to the game, great. in theory i think blizz's idea of "small, safe changes to avoid wrecking the meta" is good, but if you're going to use small changes, why not try more of them and more often? put the prerogative on the players to take a small patch and make new builds and new styles out of it
Well, Terrans were OP at the beginning of HoTS but then Blizzard nerfed hellbats...
No that's now how you interpret the statistics. What's most likely happened was that there was an adjustment proces where at lot "patch"-zergs had to get demoted into the league where they deserverd to be and a lot of terrans were going advance in leagues. What happens in that proces is that terran win/rates > 50. Zerg win rates <50.
So the only thing you can take away from early HOTS w/r is that HOTS buffed terran relative to WOL. You can'y say anytihng about absolute balance (only a change in balance).
There was definitely an element of that, but zerg pretty much never beat terran for a good few months without some form of roach/bane all in, until there were several nerfs. Even now terran arguably has an advantage vs zerg.
First of, it is pretty natural that Zerg has to allin when Terran plays as greedy as they did back then. F.e. INnoVation even skipped hellions in some of his 3CC builds, either for a fast mine drop or just to go 3CC without gas. Those are simply very, very greedy builds. The patches you are talking about are also not the most influencial thing in the world. It took out hellbat drop openings. But the situation was pretty stable before the minepatch already. And those were the only 2nerfs I can think about.
In conclusion, it had much more to do with the metagame. Terrans were a little too greedy at that time and Zergs didn't really know what to do in the lategame. Compare it to know, back in early HotS Zergs would usually go for a fast Hive and Ultralisks or sometimes Broodlords... and just die in the transition or with those units out. These days we know that lategame Zerg is a lot about mass, mass mutalisks in ZvT, not about higher tech transitions. Which are nice tools to have, but not your ultimate goal to reach.
The matchup is in a very good and entertaining state currently, in my opinion at least.
I'm not saying it's imba, I'm saying that zerg used to have a pretty difficult time vs terran lol. To be frank, terran was still winning against roach bane all ins while going 21 3cc if they built a tank out of the factory before swapping it with the barracks. If you cast your eyes back, there were an incredibly small handful of games that zergs actually won against the very few terrans who could play that parade pushing style after the overseer buff. Before it there were arguably none.
In any event I actually think they went too far with the widowmine nerf, but that is just me I'm beginning to feel lol.
I feel that to with the widowmine. Personally i found zerg have it alittle to "easy" vs terran marine/widow/medivac. Would like to see the widowmine reverted or atleast get some strength back and instead have the infestor root block it.
They just need to make it like ~70% as strong as it was
On March 16 2014 22:32 TheDwf wrote: As for 2-bases Blink in PvT, the problem is not maps (Frost isn't a particularly Blink-favored map, yet we saw Protoss easily win Terran there with 2-bases Blink) but the lack of a major cloaked threat for Terran. Protoss would not gamble with a blind, no detection build if a Mine landing in their mineral line meant instant gg (as it did with the Mine 1.0). Unfortunately, even the Mine 3.0 isn't particularly hot in mineral lines (you need a particular positioning of the Mine + a certain mineral line configuration to get the possibility of a money shot), and Cloak Banshees are completely useless against standard play, so Protoss are still free to play with zero precaution regarding this. I have faced 2-bases Blink + robo builds in the few days after the patch in which Protoss were still scared of Mine drops, and the simple fact they were getting this robo made the attack so much weaker it was no longer a game-ending threat.
Do you not think one of the strongest strengths of the blink all in is that cheers through the soundproof booth don't actually reveal what all in you're going to face?
Like in pvt, if a protoss hears "Ohhhhhh" or something from the crowd quite early, then he knows he's up against some sort of proxy 2 rax, but cheers at the 5 minute mark vs protoss could be anything really.
So much QQ. The issue is that 3-4 of the current maps seem to have been designed to maximize the power of blink all ins. It "can' work on better maps like Frost if the Toss outplays the Terran. That's fair. But Heavy Rain, Yeonsu, Polar Night, and Deadalus are probably too blink-friendly. We need more maps like Daybreak, Ohana, Whirlwind, Akilon Wastes, Belshir Vestige, and Neo Planet S. Blink all ins would be viable on some of those maps, but it wouldn't be silly.
On March 16 2014 22:32 TheDwf wrote: As for 2-bases Blink in PvT, the problem is not maps (Frost isn't a particularly Blink-favored map, yet we saw Protoss easily win Terran there with 2-bases Blink) but the lack of a major cloaked threat for Terran. Protoss would not gamble with a blind, no detection build if a Mine landing in their mineral line meant instant gg (as it did with the Mine 1.0). Unfortunately, even the Mine 3.0 isn't particularly hot in mineral lines (you need a particular positioning of the Mine + a certain mineral line configuration to get the possibility of a money shot), and Cloak Banshees are completely useless against standard play, so Protoss are still free to play with zero precaution regarding this. I have faced 2-bases Blink + robo builds in the few days after the patch in which Protoss were still scared of Mine drops, and the simple fact they were getting this robo made the attack so much weaker it was no longer a game-ending threat.
Do you not think one of the strongest strengths of the blink all in is that cheers through the soundproof booth don't actually reveal what all in you're going to face?
Like in pvt, if a protoss hears "Ohhhhhh" or something from the crowd quite early, then he knows he's up against some sort of proxy 2 rax, but cheers at the 5 minute mark vs protoss could be anything really.
It does not have to do with the cheers, but the fact it is easy to recognise 'something is off' and incredibly hard to recognise what Protoss is doing (and each tech path forces a different very specific response) makes the MU weird.
On March 16 2014 12:40 Waise wrote: protoss became powerful because pro protoss players started learning the depth and strength of units like the msc, oracle, etc and explored the huge range of options their tech gives them
i think there's a problem in the game, but i don't think the answer is nerfs. i think the answer is giving zerg and terran more tools and more functionality they can explore and exploit just like how protoss got new toys
the problem is that blizz gave toss mobility tools (oracle, msc, warp prism speed buff, etc) hoping it would offset their defensive style and encourage new more dynamic styles like what SOS showed at blizzcon. but instead of making protoss more aggressive and less defensive, it just made them equally defensive with more ability TO be safely aggressive/cheesy/sneaky
bad design or no, protoss players EARNED their OP era by figuring out how to optimally use their tools. give more tools to all races! more skill ceiling! that's why i'm in favor of things like the roach burrow buff, because why not? throw little things like that at the wall and see if they stick. if they don't change the meta, at least it's still a little better, more skill rewarding and more likely to be used. if it adds something to the game, great. in theory i think blizz's idea of "small, safe changes to avoid wrecking the meta" is good, but if you're going to use small changes, why not try more of them and more often? put the prerogative on the players to take a small patch and make new builds and new styles out of it
Well, Terrans were OP at the beginning of HoTS but then Blizzard nerfed hellbats...
No that's now how you interpret the statistics. What's most likely happened was that there was an adjustment proces where at lot "patch"-zergs had to get demoted into the league where they deserverd to be and a lot of terrans were going advance in leagues. What happens in that proces is that terran win/rates > 50. Zerg win rates <50.
So the only thing you can take away from early HOTS w/r is that HOTS buffed terran relative to WOL. You can'y say anytihng about absolute balance (only a change in balance).
There was definitely an element of that, but zerg pretty much never beat terran for a good few months without some form of roach/bane all in, until there were several nerfs. Even now terran arguably has an advantage vs zerg.
First of, it is pretty natural that Zerg has to allin when Terran plays as greedy as they did back then. F.e. INnoVation even skipped hellions in some of his 3CC builds, either for a fast mine drop or just to go 3CC without gas. Those are simply very, very greedy builds. The patches you are talking about are also not the most influencial thing in the world. It took out hellbat drop openings. But the situation was pretty stable before the minepatch already. And those were the only 2nerfs I can think about.
In conclusion, it had much more to do with the metagame. Terrans were a little too greedy at that time and Zergs didn't really know what to do in the lategame. Compare it to know, back in early HotS Zergs would usually go for a fast Hive and Ultralisks or sometimes Broodlords... and just die in the transition or with those units out. These days we know that lategame Zerg is a lot about mass, mass mutalisks in ZvT, not about higher tech transitions. Which are nice tools to have, but not your ultimate goal to reach.
The matchup is in a very good and entertaining state currently, in my opinion at least.
I don't remember Bogus going a lot of CC rax CC (I remember 2 cases vs Symbol and Soulkey, on Red City in the GSL, and on Whirlwind for a Proleague match) or Mines drops after CC first (which is actually a safer variant against Roaches pushes and a slower build than triple OC + dual EB). The builds were not particularly "greedy" (whatever means that word actually); for a long time it was even standard to get 2 safety Mines after the first 6 Hellions, which is never done today. And those triple OC dual EB builds are still there, and they can still defend Roach/Bane busts even with the weaker Mines.
I was thinking of this build for example against Symbol on Atlas:
a rax first into CC into reactored factory and a third base, but instead of hellions INnoVation went for mines and a starport+medivac. That is quite unsafe in my opinion. (and it was not reactonary to the 6queen opening of Symbol, he didn't scout that or the lack of gases)
I didn't want to say that INnoVation (or other Terrans) was gambling or anything like that, just that for todays standards he (and other Terrans) did not do all the safety moves and it turned out that certain allins like roach/baneling were exactly what destroyed them.
On March 16 2014 22:40 Salient wrote: So much QQ. The issue is that 3-4 of the current maps seem to have been designed to maximize the power of blink all ins. It "can' work on better maps like Frost if the Toss outplays the Terran. That's fair. But Heavy Rain, Yeonsu, Polar Night, and Deadalus are probably too blink-friendly. We need more maps like Daybreak, Ohana, Whirlwind, Akilon Wastes, Belshir Vestige, and Neo Planet S. Blink all ins would be viable on some of those maps, but it wouldn't be silly.
We don't need ohana or vestige or akilon thats for sure, neo planet s I wouldn't mind so much if the gold was replaced, and we had like 10 seasons in a row of daybreak so I'm pretty glad it was subbed out.
Also, maps really aren't causing all the problems.
On March 16 2014 12:40 Waise wrote: protoss became powerful because pro protoss players started learning the depth and strength of units like the msc, oracle, etc and explored the huge range of options their tech gives them
i think there's a problem in the game, but i don't think the answer is nerfs. i think the answer is giving zerg and terran more tools and more functionality they can explore and exploit just like how protoss got new toys
the problem is that blizz gave toss mobility tools (oracle, msc, warp prism speed buff, etc) hoping it would offset their defensive style and encourage new more dynamic styles like what SOS showed at blizzcon. but instead of making protoss more aggressive and less defensive, it just made them equally defensive with more ability TO be safely aggressive/cheesy/sneaky
bad design or no, protoss players EARNED their OP era by figuring out how to optimally use their tools. give more tools to all races! more skill ceiling! that's why i'm in favor of things like the roach burrow buff, because why not? throw little things like that at the wall and see if they stick. if they don't change the meta, at least it's still a little better, more skill rewarding and more likely to be used. if it adds something to the game, great. in theory i think blizz's idea of "small, safe changes to avoid wrecking the meta" is good, but if you're going to use small changes, why not try more of them and more often? put the prerogative on the players to take a small patch and make new builds and new styles out of it
Well, Terrans were OP at the beginning of HoTS but then Blizzard nerfed hellbats...
No that's now how you interpret the statistics. What's most likely happened was that there was an adjustment proces where at lot "patch"-zergs had to get demoted into the league where they deserverd to be and a lot of terrans were going advance in leagues. What happens in that proces is that terran win/rates > 50. Zerg win rates <50.
So the only thing you can take away from early HOTS w/r is that HOTS buffed terran relative to WOL. You can'y say anytihng about absolute balance (only a change in balance).
There was definitely an element of that, but zerg pretty much never beat terran for a good few months without some form of roach/bane all in, until there were several nerfs. Even now terran arguably has an advantage vs zerg.
First of, it is pretty natural that Zerg has to allin when Terran plays as greedy as they did back then. F.e. INnoVation even skipped hellions in some of his 3CC builds, either for a fast mine drop or just to go 3CC without gas. Those are simply very, very greedy builds. The patches you are talking about are also not the most influencial thing in the world. It took out hellbat drop openings. But the situation was pretty stable before the minepatch already. And those were the only 2nerfs I can think about.
In conclusion, it had much more to do with the metagame. Terrans were a little too greedy at that time and Zergs didn't really know what to do in the lategame. Compare it to know, back in early HotS Zergs would usually go for a fast Hive and Ultralisks or sometimes Broodlords... and just die in the transition or with those units out. These days we know that lategame Zerg is a lot about mass, mass mutalisks in ZvT, not about higher tech transitions. Which are nice tools to have, but not your ultimate goal to reach.
The matchup is in a very good and entertaining state currently, in my opinion at least.
I don't remember Bogus going a lot of CC rax CC (I remember 2 cases vs Symbol and Soulkey, on Red City in the GSL, and on Whirlwind for a Proleague match) or Mines drops after CC first (which is actually a safer variant against Roaches pushes and a slower build than triple OC + dual EB). The builds were not particularly "greedy" (whatever means that word actually); for a long time it was even standard to get 2 safety Mines after the first 6 Hellions, which is never done today. And those triple OC dual EB builds are still there, and they can still defend Roach/Bane busts even with the weaker Mines.
I was thinking of this build for example against Symbol on Atlas: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qq4J6x_XBlE a rax first into CC into reactored factory and a third base, but instead of hellions INnoVation went for mines and a starport+medivac. That is quite unsafe in my opinion. (and it was not reactonary to the 6queen opening of Symbol, he didn't scout that or the lack of gases)
I don't want to say that INnoVation was gambling or anything like that, just that for todays standards he (and other Terrans) did not do all the safety moves and it turned out that certain allins like roach/baneling were exactly what destroyed them.
Innovation would defend almost anything even with a build like that a lot of the time. I cannot be bothered looking it up, but in proleague (I think) he went out against hyvaa (I think again) and won anyway with that exact build.
On March 16 2014 12:40 Waise wrote: protoss became powerful because pro protoss players started learning the depth and strength of units like the msc, oracle, etc and explored the huge range of options their tech gives them
i think there's a problem in the game, but i don't think the answer is nerfs. i think the answer is giving zerg and terran more tools and more functionality they can explore and exploit just like how protoss got new toys
the problem is that blizz gave toss mobility tools (oracle, msc, warp prism speed buff, etc) hoping it would offset their defensive style and encourage new more dynamic styles like what SOS showed at blizzcon. but instead of making protoss more aggressive and less defensive, it just made them equally defensive with more ability TO be safely aggressive/cheesy/sneaky
bad design or no, protoss players EARNED their OP era by figuring out how to optimally use their tools. give more tools to all races! more skill ceiling! that's why i'm in favor of things like the roach burrow buff, because why not? throw little things like that at the wall and see if they stick. if they don't change the meta, at least it's still a little better, more skill rewarding and more likely to be used. if it adds something to the game, great. in theory i think blizz's idea of "small, safe changes to avoid wrecking the meta" is good, but if you're going to use small changes, why not try more of them and more often? put the prerogative on the players to take a small patch and make new builds and new styles out of it
Well, Terrans were OP at the beginning of HoTS but then Blizzard nerfed hellbats...
No that's now how you interpret the statistics. What's most likely happened was that there was an adjustment proces where at lot "patch"-zergs had to get demoted into the league where they deserverd to be and a lot of terrans were going advance in leagues. What happens in that proces is that terran win/rates > 50. Zerg win rates <50.
So the only thing you can take away from early HOTS w/r is that HOTS buffed terran relative to WOL. You can'y say anytihng about absolute balance (only a change in balance).
There was definitely an element of that, but zerg pretty much never beat terran for a good few months without some form of roach/bane all in, until there were several nerfs. Even now terran arguably has an advantage vs zerg.
First of, it is pretty natural that Zerg has to allin when Terran plays as greedy as they did back then. F.e. INnoVation even skipped hellions in some of his 3CC builds, either for a fast mine drop or just to go 3CC without gas. Those are simply very, very greedy builds. The patches you are talking about are also not the most influencial thing in the world. It took out hellbat drop openings. But the situation was pretty stable before the minepatch already. And those were the only 2nerfs I can think about.
In conclusion, it had much more to do with the metagame. Terrans were a little too greedy at that time and Zergs didn't really know what to do in the lategame. Compare it to know, back in early HotS Zergs would usually go for a fast Hive and Ultralisks or sometimes Broodlords... and just die in the transition or with those units out. These days we know that lategame Zerg is a lot about mass, mass mutalisks in ZvT, not about higher tech transitions. Which are nice tools to have, but not your ultimate goal to reach.
The matchup is in a very good and entertaining state currently, in my opinion at least.
I don't remember Bogus going a lot of CC rax CC (I remember 2 cases vs Symbol and Soulkey, on Red City in the GSL, and on Whirlwind for a Proleague match) or Mines drops after CC first (which is actually a safer variant against Roaches pushes and a slower build than triple OC + dual EB). The builds were not particularly "greedy" (whatever means that word actually); for a long time it was even standard to get 2 safety Mines after the first 6 Hellions, which is never done today. And those triple OC dual EB builds are still there, and they can still defend Roach/Bane busts even with the weaker Mines.
I was thinking of this build for example against Symbol on Atlas: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qq4J6x_XBlE a rax first into CC into reactored factory and a third base, but instead of hellions INnoVation went for mines and a starport+medivac. That is quite unsafe in my opinion. (and it was not reactonary to the 6queen opening of Symbol, he didn't scout that or the lack of gases)
I don't want to say that INnoVation was gambling or anything like that, just that for todays standards he (and other Terrans) did not do all the safety moves and it turned out that certain allins like roach/baneling were exactly what destroyed them.
I had this in mind as well (but I had thought about his Neo Planet S game vs Revival at WCS finals; I think it was the same build). Basically it's only unsafe against bane busts. Considering Symbol is a Roach man, using this build made sense. It's definitely safer than CC rax gas fact reactor CC against Roaches pushes.
Bogus lost some Roach/Baneling busts because he was lifting his fact after 6 Hellions before confirming standard play. Thus when the Roaches started moving out towards his bases, his fact was busy building the Reactor and couldn't get the necessary Mines to defend. That's how he lost Soulkey on Red City, for example. Sometimes his Hellions were also out of position and the bust would come unseen; he lost soO like that in the RO16 of the third season of Code S 2013. Those oversights are still present in Terran's play nowadays; jjakji lost an unscouted Roach/Baneling bust vs LiveZerg in the exact same way this season, and Terrans still lift their fact before confirming something like dual evo at natural.
EPT
