|
On April 28 2014 18:01 TW wrote:The fact that the game is easier to play than BW does not relate to its balance. But: - it is more likely that potentially worse player can beat the better one (it is fine for me). - when we take 40 best of the best starcraft players, and make them play in a league format, I am pretty sure you will get totally different results each time the league ends. - more units and strategies would mean even more coin flip results at the highest level of play.
Yeah, we disagree in one important point here: I don't think it's fine that worse player are likely to win a better one in sc2. I think the game is funnier when the better play really and clearly appears like the better player. When we can clearly see the difference between a better player and a worse one. Everyone with the same level? What's the fun?
And didn't want too be specific about "more units" or "more strategies", my point is that it seems to me that sc2 lacks a little bit in micro and skill. Everyone thinks its great when we see huge micro/macro skills from some player. But, it seems like in sc2 everyone can play at the high level. Its relatively "easy".
For me, the game loose his magic. Everyone can be a "ronaldo", a "pelé", a "messi", in this game. The best players change a lot. There is no THE BEST (as BW jaedong, BW Flash, BW Boxer).
I think I was clear. That's my view. The game could be harder to play (more micro and macro options), so new "genius" would appear 
|
Prokofiev, In your opinion, it comes down to the game being too easy, which makes it hard for the 'best' players to be easily seen as way better than most of the opposition. There's no players that look invincible for prolonged periods of time.
Right?
|
About overall T problems:
- Bio in late game will continue to struggle against Z until Ghost snipe is reworked to do more damage against large/key Z units. Any suggestions for Reapers when T gets to late game?
- WM and Tanks need to have way more different roles: now tank´s main role is to do splash damage against Z (banelings) and WM against P (bonus vs shields) I think it´s better:
* Tanks need to be more fearsome while they are in siege mode (they already have lots of hard counters) and they need to be able to shoot while moving while unsieged (a bit more movility to mech and micro possibilites).
* WM don´t need to burrow so fast, they are for defense, increase burrow time, splash damage and make sure they have a little bit of delay to attack, so other players can dodge mines if they are fast enough.
- Helions/Vikings, their transformations are useless (almost never used), make then faster to allow "strike and retreat" harrasment.
This changes will make Mech a little better and will deal with some issues like "unkillable" flock of mutas, but they still are weak to P all-ins. Also I think these changes are not too game breaking and they are a starting point to try something new rather than nerf everithing, every race.
|
On April 29 2014 19:02 SC2Toastie wrote:
Prokofiev, I think your english is slightly too weak to properly explain what you mean exactly
? His post is perfectly understandable...
|
On April 29 2014 19:49 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2014 19:02 SC2Toastie wrote:
Prokofiev, I think your english is slightly too weak to properly explain what you mean exactly ? His post is perfectly understandable...
In hindsight, I'm stupid..... 
|
On April 29 2014 20:27 SC2Toastie wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2014 19:49 TheDwf wrote:On April 29 2014 19:02 SC2Toastie wrote:
Prokofiev, I think your english is slightly too weak to properly explain what you mean exactly ? His post is perfectly understandable... In hindsight, I'm stupid.....
No. I simply don't get why you made this remark considering his English is OK and you understood what he wrote. It can't be the first post you read stating "SC2's skill ceiling is too low".
|
On April 29 2014 14:05 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2014 17:43 prokofiev wrote:
(sorry bad english)
To me, the game is reasonable balanced. The problem is that a protoss player can be high GM with 150 apm, which is impossible to zerg and terran. So, it's easier to protoss.
But the biggest problem of sc2 is that it is easier than BroodWar. So, the difference between very skilled players and skilled ones is small than in BroodWar.
I think that sc2 should have more units, more magics, more micro and macro options, to compensate the decrease of difficulty. For example, the difference between crazy koreans who practice 12h daily everyday from foreigners who pratice 5h a day is not so big as it was in Broodwar. This is not fair and it is less funny.
The game lacks a little bit in skill, talent etc. So... I hope the new version of SC2 become harder to play at the very best level. So, the best will be the best (and there will be new "bonjwa's" etc.)
Obs.: the reason that there is no bonjwa in sc2 is because the game is so easy (easier than BW, at least) that everyone is so close and nobody can be a lot better. It sucks! This is not true. You can get GM with Z or T with 100 APM on NA, at least. It's all dependent on how efficient you are with your APM.
I really want to see some proof of this. Surely 6 pool and proxy 2 rax have been figured out enough to not get you into gm
|
On April 29 2014 20:41 bo1b wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2014 14:05 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 28 2014 17:43 prokofiev wrote:
(sorry bad english)
To me, the game is reasonable balanced. The problem is that a protoss player can be high GM with 150 apm, which is impossible to zerg and terran. So, it's easier to protoss.
But the biggest problem of sc2 is that it is easier than BroodWar. So, the difference between very skilled players and skilled ones is small than in BroodWar.
I think that sc2 should have more units, more magics, more micro and macro options, to compensate the decrease of difficulty. For example, the difference between crazy koreans who practice 12h daily everyday from foreigners who pratice 5h a day is not so big as it was in Broodwar. This is not fair and it is less funny.
The game lacks a little bit in skill, talent etc. So... I hope the new version of SC2 become harder to play at the very best level. So, the best will be the best (and there will be new "bonjwa's" etc.)
Obs.: the reason that there is no bonjwa in sc2 is because the game is so easy (easier than BW, at least) that everyone is so close and nobody can be a lot better. It sucks! This is not true. You can get GM with Z or T with 100 APM on NA, at least. It's all dependent on how efficient you are with your APM. I really want to see some proof of this. Surely 6 pool and proxy 2 rax have been figured out enough to not get you into gm
Turtle mech isn't demanding so you can play it with very low APM, but for Zerg the amount of macro tasks you have to do should carry you beyond this value.
|
On April 29 2014 20:45 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2014 20:41 bo1b wrote:On April 29 2014 14:05 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 28 2014 17:43 prokofiev wrote:
(sorry bad english)
To me, the game is reasonable balanced. The problem is that a protoss player can be high GM with 150 apm, which is impossible to zerg and terran. So, it's easier to protoss.
But the biggest problem of sc2 is that it is easier than BroodWar. So, the difference between very skilled players and skilled ones is small than in BroodWar.
I think that sc2 should have more units, more magics, more micro and macro options, to compensate the decrease of difficulty. For example, the difference between crazy koreans who practice 12h daily everyday from foreigners who pratice 5h a day is not so big as it was in Broodwar. This is not fair and it is less funny.
The game lacks a little bit in skill, talent etc. So... I hope the new version of SC2 become harder to play at the very best level. So, the best will be the best (and there will be new "bonjwa's" etc.)
Obs.: the reason that there is no bonjwa in sc2 is because the game is so easy (easier than BW, at least) that everyone is so close and nobody can be a lot better. It sucks! This is not true. You can get GM with Z or T with 100 APM on NA, at least. It's all dependent on how efficient you are with your APM. I really want to see some proof of this. Surely 6 pool and proxy 2 rax have been figured out enough to not get you into gm Turtle mech isn't demanding so you can play it with very low APM, but for Zerg the amount of macro tasks you have to do should carry you beyond this value.
Even the most efficient turtle mech player would surely have above 100 apm right?
18months ago in gold league when I was learning to play 90% terran and zerg had above 100 eapm according to sc2gears, surely with the general skill climb and the fact that gm is incredibly different to gold league everyone would have above 100 apm
|
On April 29 2014 20:56 bo1b wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2014 20:45 TheDwf wrote:On April 29 2014 20:41 bo1b wrote:On April 29 2014 14:05 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 28 2014 17:43 prokofiev wrote:
(sorry bad english)
To me, the game is reasonable balanced. The problem is that a protoss player can be high GM with 150 apm, which is impossible to zerg and terran. So, it's easier to protoss.
But the biggest problem of sc2 is that it is easier than BroodWar. So, the difference between very skilled players and skilled ones is small than in BroodWar.
I think that sc2 should have more units, more magics, more micro and macro options, to compensate the decrease of difficulty. For example, the difference between crazy koreans who practice 12h daily everyday from foreigners who pratice 5h a day is not so big as it was in Broodwar. This is not fair and it is less funny.
The game lacks a little bit in skill, talent etc. So... I hope the new version of SC2 become harder to play at the very best level. So, the best will be the best (and there will be new "bonjwa's" etc.)
Obs.: the reason that there is no bonjwa in sc2 is because the game is so easy (easier than BW, at least) that everyone is so close and nobody can be a lot better. It sucks! This is not true. You can get GM with Z or T with 100 APM on NA, at least. It's all dependent on how efficient you are with your APM. I really want to see some proof of this. Surely 6 pool and proxy 2 rax have been figured out enough to not get you into gm Turtle mech isn't demanding so you can play it with very low APM, but for Zerg the amount of macro tasks you have to do should carry you beyond this value. Even the most efficient turtle mech player would surely have above 100 apm right?
Yes, between say 120 and 150.
|
On April 29 2014 21:03 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2014 20:56 bo1b wrote:On April 29 2014 20:45 TheDwf wrote:On April 29 2014 20:41 bo1b wrote:On April 29 2014 14:05 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 28 2014 17:43 prokofiev wrote:
(sorry bad english)
To me, the game is reasonable balanced. The problem is that a protoss player can be high GM with 150 apm, which is impossible to zerg and terran. So, it's easier to protoss.
But the biggest problem of sc2 is that it is easier than BroodWar. So, the difference between very skilled players and skilled ones is small than in BroodWar.
I think that sc2 should have more units, more magics, more micro and macro options, to compensate the decrease of difficulty. For example, the difference between crazy koreans who practice 12h daily everyday from foreigners who pratice 5h a day is not so big as it was in Broodwar. This is not fair and it is less funny.
The game lacks a little bit in skill, talent etc. So... I hope the new version of SC2 become harder to play at the very best level. So, the best will be the best (and there will be new "bonjwa's" etc.)
Obs.: the reason that there is no bonjwa in sc2 is because the game is so easy (easier than BW, at least) that everyone is so close and nobody can be a lot better. It sucks! This is not true. You can get GM with Z or T with 100 APM on NA, at least. It's all dependent on how efficient you are with your APM. I really want to see some proof of this. Surely 6 pool and proxy 2 rax have been figured out enough to not get you into gm Turtle mech isn't demanding so you can play it with very low APM, but for Zerg the amount of macro tasks you have to do should carry you beyond this value. Even the most efficient turtle mech player would surely have above 100 apm right? Yes, between say 120 and 150.
Well I guess you can go below if you actually have a goal to have low APM - for regular play I think it would be extremly hard to reach those levels without +100 APM.
Not sure what this has to do with balance though 
|
I know a lot of people have been bitching about this thread siting things like "it can't work bc people are biased etc etc" but I just read a few pages and I have to say it is kind of refreshing to hear (at least some) intelligent discussion around this. My main is somewhere between mid and high masters on NA as a Terran but I actually watch more SC currently than I play due to work.
Current balance issues:
TvZ
Macro games- this one in my opinion is so easy to improve if not totally fix - it's already been tested and live with plenty of data to review. The match-up post overseer buff but pre mine nerf was approaching as close to balanced as it ever has been. You were just starting to see Zerg players crush Terrans with smart micro and execution (Dimaga / Flash - who we all know isn't BWflash but who is still a top proleague Terran losing to an EU zerg) - DRG/Innovation (who at the time was far and away the best TvZ player in the world got worked by DRG in GSL in incredible fashion - the games were so entertaining it was truly a gift to watch). Mines could seem OP at the time because they do wreak super damage on clumps of units a moved at them (just like banelings do) - but once Zerg started lining up lings vs bunching them up and disarming mines with mutas / lines of lings / overlords/overseers it got very interesting. Unfortunately - Zerg players who were gold pre queen buff in wol - and then high diamond or masters at the end incessant whining caused Blizz to nerf the mine under the guise of "stale metagame etc". I remember posting at the time how this was a ludicrous idea as mech will be exactly the same and bio/mine will be UP but players will still use bio/mine bc mech really isn't viable - voila you have the current metagame.
All in wise:
Timings including roaches are still too strong - it's not a necessary mechanism for the match-up anymore (it hasn't been since the queen buff). Terran can blind build a tank and hope a timing comes else he is behind vs a macrozerg or he can not build a tank and just accept taking tremendous damage from something that a gold level zerg player can execute. The entire idea of being able to decide on a whim whether or not you want to all in a player is a little broken as well (1 building allows u to spend say 20 larva on roaches or instead drones if you see a tank) this however is not going to be fixed without a full redesign.
Suggestions:
- Go back to the old widow mine - or for fear of tremendous zerg tears incoming - at least reduce the damage that you did with the nerf.
- Reduce roach damage to buildings.
TvP - the ghost upg and mine buff really were supremely helpful in the match-up. Some of the obnoxious all ins (chargelot/archon) are now easy to hold if scouted properly (as all ins should be). Unfortunately - there are still about 20 different options the Protoss player has that the Terran player must prepare for in order to not straight up lose build order wise. This forces an inefficient opening in a match-up that favors P as the game goes longer (and please spare me the canned response of - no late game T is favored because T can build 40 orbitals and sacrifice all their scvs - if this is actually the case let me know why you never see this happen in any Korean pro level game - the Protoss can force max engagements and instantly remax because of the warp-gate mechanic well before this mule adv kicks in unless the Terran some how got an incredible lead in the mid-game). Inefficient openings (economy wise) make mid game pressure (the only adv that T has in this matchup) much more difficult to be effective. I don't think the late game issues can be fixed without an entire race redesign but they can be mitigated by allowing the Terran more economic friendly openings via reducing the strength of certain all ins or the total number to scout for.
Suggestions:
Remove ebay req for turrets:
Increase blink cooldown
PS just wanted to bring up one other point - while I am of the opinion that Terran is on another level of difficulty to play in terms of micro/multitask required (bio specifically) - I really don't agree when people bring it up in balance discussions - The game is professionally played - players like Maru/Taeja/Innovation will always exist - you have to balance the game based on the assumption that players can fully utilize the potential of the units - this exact mentality is what caused the mine nerf via zerg lower level players not being able to micro the engagements - my micro in big engagements is what is holding my mmr back at present but I don't I would never call for a nerf to make the micro easier I just have to practice and get better at it - that's not balance related - you can't practice your way out of imbalance.
|
On April 29 2014 22:50 DomeGetta wrote:
I know a lot of people have been bitching about this thread siting things like "it can't work bc people are biased etc etc" but I just read a few pages and I have to say it is kind of refreshing to hear (at least some) intelligent discussion around this. My main is somewhere between mid and high masters on NA as a Terran but I actually watch more SC currently than I play due to work.
Current balance issues:
TvZ
Macro games- this one in my opinion is so easy to improve if not totally fix - it's already been tested and live with plenty of data to review. The match-up post overseer buff but pre mine nerf was approaching as close to balanced as it ever has been. You were just starting to see Zerg players crush Terrans with smart micro and execution (Dimaga / Flash - who we all know isn't BWflash but who is still a top proleague Terran losing to an EU zerg) - DRG/Innovation (who at the time was far and away the best TvZ player in the world got worked by DRG in GSL in incredible fashion - the games were so entertaining it was truly a gift to watch). Mines could seem OP at the time because they do wreak super damage on clumps of units a moved at them (just like banelings do) - but once Zerg started lining up lings vs bunching them up and disarming mines with mutas / lines of lings / overlords/overseers it got very interesting. Unfortunately - Zerg players who were gold pre queen buff in wol - and then high diamond or masters at the end incessant whining caused Blizz to nerf the mine under the guise of "stale metagame etc". I remember posting at the time how this was a ludicrous idea as mech will be exactly the same and bio/mine will be UP but players will still use bio/mine bc mech really isn't viable - voila you have the current metagame.
All in wise:
Timings including roaches are still too strong - it's not a necessary mechanism for the match-up anymore (it hasn't been since the queen buff). Terran can blind build a tank and hope a timing comes else he is behind vs a macrozerg or he can not build a tank and just accept taking tremendous damage from something that a gold level zerg player can execute. The entire idea of being able to decide on a whim whether or not you want to all in a player is a little broken as well (1 building allows u to spend say 20 larva on roaches or instead drones if you see a tank) this however is not going to be fixed without a full redesign.
Suggestions:
- Go back to the old widow mine - or for fear of tremendous zerg tears incoming - at least reduce the damage that you did with the nerf.
- Reduce roach damage to buildings.
TvP - the ghost upg and mine buff really were supremely helpful in the match-up. Some of the obnoxious all ins (chargelot/archon) are now easy to hold if scouted properly (as all ins should be). Unfortunately - there are still about 20 different options the Protoss player has that the Terran player must prepare for in order to not straight up lose build order wise. This forces an inefficient opening in a match-up that favors P as the game goes longer (and please spare me the canned response of - no late game T is favored because T can build 40 orbitals and sacrifice all their scvs - if this is actually the case let me know why you never see this happen in any Korean pro level game - the Protoss can force max engagements and instantly remax because of the warp-gate mechanic well before this mule adv kicks in unless the Terran some how got an incredible lead in the mid-game). Inefficient openings (economy wise) make mid game pressure (the only adv that T has in this matchup) much more difficult to be effective. I don't think the late game issues can be fixed without an entire race redesign but they can be mitigated by allowing the Terran more economic friendly openings via reducing the strength of certain all ins or the total number to scout for.
Suggestions:
Remove ebay req for turrets:
Increase blink cooldown
Reduce roach damage to buildings? Remove ebay requirement for turrets? Sounds like you just need to work on your scouting brah.
Every race has things they take critical damage from if they just play on autopilot mode without being really diligent about scouting. Just look at the 2 factory blue flame opening vs. Z. If Z gets a bit complacent they are totally hosed.
Same as roach/bane busts vs. T. You have reapers and hellions to scout in the early game.. you should have enough time to know to make some Tanks or Banshees.
|
On April 29 2014 23:08 DinoMight wrote:
Every race has things they take critical damage from if they just play on autopilot mode without being really diligent about scouting.
Name them in PvT?
|
This is why this thread has a bad reputation, people like DinoMight responding to a long well written suggestion with `l2p, brah'.
|
I would -LOVE- experimentation with flat out damage buffs (or even +1 range or -1 range on overcharge) to the siege tank. Possibly a +15/20 buff vs all with a fusion core upgrade! Bring back the positional powerhouse!
With current larger an open maps (nerf was with Steppes of War in mind ffs), muta buffs, vipers and half the Protoss anti-tank arsenal still in place, I think testing this out is something not too harmful and might make Terran biotank a TON more interesting.
Upgrade must be really late game though, with the intention of favoring Tank play by giving them longevity, and so it comes after the air transition in mech v bio. Opinions?
Marine tank games are the best games in history of SC2
|
On April 29 2014 23:13 SC2Toastie wrote:
I would -LOVE- experimentation with flat out damage buffs (or even +1 range or -1 range on overcharge) to the siege tank. Possibly a +15/20 buff vs all with a fusion core upgrade! Bring back the positional powerhouse!
With current larger an open maps (nerf was with Steppes of War in mind ffs), muta buffs, vipers and half the Protoss anti-tank arsenal still in place, I think testing this out is something not too harmful and might make Terran biotank a TON more interesting.
Upgrade must be really late game though, with the intention of favoring Tank play by giving them longevity, and so it comes after the air transition in mech v bio. Opinions?
Marine tank games are the best games in history of SC2
No thanks, Mech vs Zerg can already be boring enough, no need to enforce even longer games by making it even better even later.
|
On April 29 2014 23:08 DinoMight wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2014 22:50 DomeGetta wrote:
I know a lot of people have been bitching about this thread siting things like "it can't work bc people are biased etc etc" but I just read a few pages and I have to say it is kind of refreshing to hear (at least some) intelligent discussion around this. My main is somewhere between mid and high masters on NA as a Terran but I actually watch more SC currently than I play due to work.
Current balance issues:
TvZ
Macro games- this one in my opinion is so easy to improve if not totally fix - it's already been tested and live with plenty of data to review. The match-up post overseer buff but pre mine nerf was approaching as close to balanced as it ever has been. You were just starting to see Zerg players crush Terrans with smart micro and execution (Dimaga / Flash - who we all know isn't BWflash but who is still a top proleague Terran losing to an EU zerg) - DRG/Innovation (who at the time was far and away the best TvZ player in the world got worked by DRG in GSL in incredible fashion - the games were so entertaining it was truly a gift to watch). Mines could seem OP at the time because they do wreak super damage on clumps of units a moved at them (just like banelings do) - but once Zerg started lining up lings vs bunching them up and disarming mines with mutas / lines of lings / overlords/overseers it got very interesting. Unfortunately - Zerg players who were gold pre queen buff in wol - and then high diamond or masters at the end incessant whining caused Blizz to nerf the mine under the guise of "stale metagame etc". I remember posting at the time how this was a ludicrous idea as mech will be exactly the same and bio/mine will be UP but players will still use bio/mine bc mech really isn't viable - voila you have the current metagame.
All in wise:
Timings including roaches are still too strong - it's not a necessary mechanism for the match-up anymore (it hasn't been since the queen buff). Terran can blind build a tank and hope a timing comes else he is behind vs a macrozerg or he can not build a tank and just accept taking tremendous damage from something that a gold level zerg player can execute. The entire idea of being able to decide on a whim whether or not you want to all in a player is a little broken as well (1 building allows u to spend say 20 larva on roaches or instead drones if you see a tank) this however is not going to be fixed without a full redesign.
Suggestions:
- Go back to the old widow mine - or for fear of tremendous zerg tears incoming - at least reduce the damage that you did with the nerf.
- Reduce roach damage to buildings.
TvP - the ghost upg and mine buff really were supremely helpful in the match-up. Some of the obnoxious all ins (chargelot/archon) are now easy to hold if scouted properly (as all ins should be). Unfortunately - there are still about 20 different options the Protoss player has that the Terran player must prepare for in order to not straight up lose build order wise. This forces an inefficient opening in a match-up that favors P as the game goes longer (and please spare me the canned response of - no late game T is favored because T can build 40 orbitals and sacrifice all their scvs - if this is actually the case let me know why you never see this happen in any Korean pro level game - the Protoss can force max engagements and instantly remax because of the warp-gate mechanic well before this mule adv kicks in unless the Terran some how got an incredible lead in the mid-game). Inefficient openings (economy wise) make mid game pressure (the only adv that T has in this matchup) much more difficult to be effective. I don't think the late game issues can be fixed without an entire race redesign but they can be mitigated by allowing the Terran more economic friendly openings via reducing the strength of certain all ins or the total number to scout for.
Suggestions:
Remove ebay req for turrets:
Increase blink cooldown Reduce roach damage to buildings? Remove ebay requirement for turrets? Sounds like you just need to work on your scouting brah. Every race has things they take critical damage from if they just play on autopilot mode without being really diligent about scouting. Just look at the 2 factory blue flame opening vs. Z. If Z gets a bit complacent they are totally hosed. Same as roach/bane busts vs. T. You have reapers and hellions to scout in the early game.. you should have enough time to know to make some Tanks or Banshees.
Just to answer you
The first one is for TvP - if you drop an ebay for fear of DT's or Oracles and they are 1 base blinking you it's auto lose (see Inno/Hero from IEM). Unless you know a way to scout every hex of the map it's actually pretty difficult to find out in time.
TvZ - yes you can fly an overlord into my base to see if I'm going 2 fac blue flame and yes I can double scan your main and natural and hope I see the roach warren at 5:45 that you threw down. Let's compare the results of these 2 things - 100 minerals for you. 540 minerals for me + the fact that you having a roach warren doesn't actually mean I need a tank if you decide that because I scanned you are now going to drone. It's actually less of an investment just to build a tank which slows down your infrastructure substantially. And if reaper is the only way to scout a roach all in you are basically saying that Terran has to open reaper with no other option which becomes very predictable and is weak to macro oriented zerg openings imo.
|
On April 29 2014 23:17 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2014 23:13 SC2Toastie wrote:
I would -LOVE- experimentation with flat out damage buffs (or even +1 range or -1 range on overcharge) to the siege tank. Possibly a +15/20 buff vs all with a fusion core upgrade! Bring back the positional powerhouse!
With current larger an open maps (nerf was with Steppes of War in mind ffs), muta buffs, vipers and half the Protoss anti-tank arsenal still in place, I think testing this out is something not too harmful and might make Terran biotank a TON more interesting.
Upgrade must be really late game though, with the intention of favoring Tank play by giving them longevity, and so it comes after the air transition in mech v bio. Opinions?
Marine tank games are the best games in history of SC2 No thanks, Mech vs Zerg can already be boring enough, no need to enforce even longer games by making it even better even later.
This is what the guy above me talks about.
Mech TvZ has a problem with economy in this game and Zerg lacking strong Anti Air without resorting to SH+Static. It's a problem with Zerg AA (also vs Toss) and SH design..
Lower level players struggling to end mech (it hardly happens in pro levels! Don't bring up 2/3 incidents) is not an argument.
|
On April 29 2014 23:08 DinoMight wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2014 22:50 DomeGetta wrote:
I know a lot of people have been bitching about this thread siting things like "it can't work bc people are biased etc etc" but I just read a few pages and I have to say it is kind of refreshing to hear (at least some) intelligent discussion around this. My main is somewhere between mid and high masters on NA as a Terran but I actually watch more SC currently than I play due to work.
Current balance issues:
TvZ
Macro games- this one in my opinion is so easy to improve if not totally fix - it's already been tested and live with plenty of data to review. The match-up post overseer buff but pre mine nerf was approaching as close to balanced as it ever has been. You were just starting to see Zerg players crush Terrans with smart micro and execution (Dimaga / Flash - who we all know isn't BWflash but who is still a top proleague Terran losing to an EU zerg) - DRG/Innovation (who at the time was far and away the best TvZ player in the world got worked by DRG in GSL in incredible fashion - the games were so entertaining it was truly a gift to watch). Mines could seem OP at the time because they do wreak super damage on clumps of units a moved at them (just like banelings do) - but once Zerg started lining up lings vs bunching them up and disarming mines with mutas / lines of lings / overlords/overseers it got very interesting. Unfortunately - Zerg players who were gold pre queen buff in wol - and then high diamond or masters at the end incessant whining caused Blizz to nerf the mine under the guise of "stale metagame etc". I remember posting at the time how this was a ludicrous idea as mech will be exactly the same and bio/mine will be UP but players will still use bio/mine bc mech really isn't viable - voila you have the current metagame.
All in wise:
Timings including roaches are still too strong - it's not a necessary mechanism for the match-up anymore (it hasn't been since the queen buff). Terran can blind build a tank and hope a timing comes else he is behind vs a macrozerg or he can not build a tank and just accept taking tremendous damage from something that a gold level zerg player can execute. The entire idea of being able to decide on a whim whether or not you want to all in a player is a little broken as well (1 building allows u to spend say 20 larva on roaches or instead drones if you see a tank) this however is not going to be fixed without a full redesign.
Suggestions:
- Go back to the old widow mine - or for fear of tremendous zerg tears incoming - at least reduce the damage that you did with the nerf.
- Reduce roach damage to buildings.
TvP - the ghost upg and mine buff really were supremely helpful in the match-up. Some of the obnoxious all ins (chargelot/archon) are now easy to hold if scouted properly (as all ins should be). Unfortunately - there are still about 20 different options the Protoss player has that the Terran player must prepare for in order to not straight up lose build order wise. This forces an inefficient opening in a match-up that favors P as the game goes longer (and please spare me the canned response of - no late game T is favored because T can build 40 orbitals and sacrifice all their scvs - if this is actually the case let me know why you never see this happen in any Korean pro level game - the Protoss can force max engagements and instantly remax because of the warp-gate mechanic well before this mule adv kicks in unless the Terran some how got an incredible lead in the mid-game). Inefficient openings (economy wise) make mid game pressure (the only adv that T has in this matchup) much more difficult to be effective. I don't think the late game issues can be fixed without an entire race redesign but they can be mitigated by allowing the Terran more economic friendly openings via reducing the strength of certain all ins or the total number to scout for.
Suggestions:
Remove ebay req for turrets:
Increase blink cooldown Reduce roach damage to buildings? Remove ebay requirement for turrets? Sounds like you just need to work on your scouting brah. Every race has things they take critical damage from if they just play on autopilot mode without being really diligent about scouting. Just look at the 2 factory blue flame opening vs. Z. If Z gets a bit complacent they are totally hosed. Same as roach/bane busts vs. T. You have reapers and hellions to scout in the early game.. you should have enough time to know to make some Tanks or Banshees.
as shown by impact this weekend, with evo chambers and queen block its pretty easy to hide a swell of units in your base until you are ready to unleash them on the opponent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
