|
Can we stop talking about nerfing things please? - 9:10 KST |
For those two guys wanting a parody of cee lo green's "F#$@ You", I made a rough version, though I felt like the lyrics cee lo wrote already go with the tone of the game, so i left alot the same. Could use some work still. Just thought it'd be some fun
+ Show Spoiler +I see you comin' cross the map with your 1/1/1, and I'm like FUCK YOU!
Oo, oo, ooo
Guess the 'mortal I chrono'd out wasn't enough, i'm like,
Fuck you!
And fuck him too!
I said, if i was richer, i'd still be with ya
Ha, now ain't mules some shit? (ain't mules some shit?)
And y'know there's pain in my chest
From micro'ing my best, I'm like
Fuck you!
Oo, oo, ooo
Yeah i'm sorry, i dont have a terran army,
But that don't mean I can't beat you there.
I guess you're a pro and I'm more a bronzey,
But the way you play your game ain't fair.
I picture the noob that falls to rage with you
(oh shit 80 apm or lower)
Well
(just thought you should know nerdballer)
Ooooooh
I've got force fields for you
Yeah run home after your all in
I see you comin' cross the map with your 1/1/1, and I'm like FUCK YOU!
Oo, oo, ooo
Guess the 'mortal I chrono'd out wasn't enough, i'm like,
Fuck you!
And fuck him too!
I said, if i was richer, i'd still be with ya
Ha, now ain't mules some shit? (ain't mules some shit?)
And y'know there's pain in my chest
From micro'ing my best, I'm like
Fuck you!
Oo, oo, ooo
Now i know, I had an early expo,
Didn't queue for one little peep.
Trying to harass ya, trying to macro ya.
'Cause building every unit in the game ain't cheap.
I picture the noob that falls to rage with you
(oh shit 80 apm or lower)
Well
(just thought you should know nerdballer)
Ooooooh
I've got force fields for you
I really hate yo ass right now
I see you comin' cross the map with your 1/1/1, and I'm like FUCK YOU!
Oo, oo, ooo
Guess the 'mortal I chrono'd out wasn't enough, i'm like,
Fuck you!
And fuck him too!
I said, if i was richer, i'd still be with ya
Ha, now ain't mules some shit? (ain't mules some shit?)
And y'know there's pain in my chest
From micro'ing my best, I'm like
Fuck you!
Oo, oo, ooo
Now newbie, newbie, newbie, how'd you get to get to bein so bad?
(so bad, so bad, so bad)
I tried to pull my probes but they told me
"you're the one that's bad"
(you're bad, you're bad, you're bad)
Uh! Whhhy? Uh! Whhhy? Uh!
Whhhy ? Oh! I hate you oh!
I'm still better than you. Oooh!
I see you comin' cross the map with your 1/1/1, FUCK YOU!
Oo, oo, ooo
Guess the 'mortal I chrono'd out wasn't enough, i'm like,
Fuck you!
And fuck him too!
I said, if i was richer, i'd still be with ya
Ha, now ain't mules some shit? (ain't mules some shit?)
And y'know there's pain in my chest
From micro'ing my best, I'm like
Fuck you!
Oo, oo, ooo
|
On August 24 2011 14:54 NicolBolas wrote:Show nested quote +Seriously? Seriously? How full of shit is that? If it's your opinion that the game is balance that's fine. If it's your opinion that Terran is more complete/robust/better designed, that's fine. But sorry, you can't have BOTH those opinions at the same time and not be completely full of shit. Actually, you can. All "balanced" means is that, given two players of equal "skill" (however you would measure that), if they play a game, then it's a coin-flip as to who wins. If this is true of a game, then the person who wins more games within a series must have been the better player. A race can be more flexible than another. They can have multiple functioning builds, while another race really only has one or two legitimate options. This only affects balance if that flexibility makes the other race more powerful. If that race needs that flexibility to stand a chance, then it isn't a problem from a balance perspective. The problem with the Terrans is that they'd still be a perfectly functional race if you somehow took away the 1/1/1 build. That is, they're just as good as any other race, and they have flexibility and robustness. It should also be noted that Dustin said that months ago. His opinion on the balance may well have shifted since then.
That's just broken game design and a horrible way to approach balance. Imagine if there's one race that has excellent scouting while the other race has horrible scouting. This is balanced by the fact the race which has horrible scouting has a lot cheesy builds that can catch the other race off guard. Sure at a certain point of the life of the game, this might be balanced but it's inevitable that as players get better, players playing the race with better scouting will start winning more.
Flexibility just scales better as players skill increases. Rigidity in playstyle on the other hand would cap a player's skill. Playing solid has always been the long-term best way to approach a strategy game and flexibility contributes a huge part to being able to do that.
|
I'm so tired of foreigners, who are way behind Koreans in SC2, lecturing Koreans how to stop 111 even though they can never defend a 111 from a good Korean Terran to post some vods. They act arrogantly as if they know better than Korean pros, and as if Korean Toss are too stupid and lazy to find out a solution. Even Korean zerg and terran pros call 111 imba, why on earth would they do that for a race they don't play if the build is perfectly balanced?
And to the people say 111 have been stopped multiple times, those times were when Terran messed up. Terran can afford some mistakes and still roll, while protoss made 1 mistake (probably play perfectly) and lose.
In the end, solutions are up to Blizzard and Korean pro players.
|
The 'volatility' comes with protoss having to decide what to build.
Did I build enough zealots for marines, and have leftovers for tanks?
Did I build enough stalkers to eliminate all the banshees?
Did I build Enough immortals to snipe tanks?
Did I build any Phoenix to lift the tanks? Did I overcommitt on phoenix?
Most of the time Protoss overcommits to 2 out the 3 or 4 options and is left with either banshees having free reign over units with no AA,
Tanks having free reign of a huge area, or
Marines left over after the big engagement free to run wound and snipe tech structures/pylons/melt probes.
The Protoss units don't have the versatility
|
On August 24 2011 17:01 CellTech wrote:
The 'volatility' comes with protoss having to decide what to build.
Did I build enough zealots for marines, and have leftovers for tanks?
Did I build enough stalkers to eliminate all the banshees?
Did I build Enough immortals to snipe tanks?
Did I build any Phoenix to lift the tanks? Did I overcommitt on phoenix?
Most of the time Protoss overcommits to 2 out the 3 or 4 options and is left with either banshees having free reign over units with no AA,
Tanks having free reign of a huge area, or
Marines left over after the big engagement free to run wound and snipe tech structures/pylons/melt probes.
The Protoss units don't have the versatility
This is pretty much it; its near impossible to have the perfect composition because it should theoretically vary based on your opponents unpredictable unit variation and unit control, and really the Protoss units aren't multipurpose enough to deal with all the terran units i.e. stargate techroute leaves too much dps from the marines
|
I guess they could try buffing Gateway build times so Protoss can feasibly 1gate expand vs Terran every game, that would solve the dilemma until HOTS comes. That way Terran doesn't have to get nerfed
Gateway Pressure hasn't been done against Zerg for a long time either, in most cases just a single stalker. Might revitalize that match up.
|
United States10774 Posts
On August 24 2011 17:01 CellTech wrote:
The 'volatility' comes with protoss having to decide what to build.
Did I build enough zealots for marines, and have leftovers for tanks?
Did I build enough stalkers to eliminate all the banshees?
Did I build Enough immortals to snipe tanks?
Did I build any Phoenix to lift the tanks? Did I overcommitt on phoenix?
Most of the time Protoss overcommits to 2 out the 3 or 4 options and is left with either banshees having free reign over units with no AA,
Tanks having free reign of a huge area, or
Marines left over after the big engagement free to run wound and snipe tech structures/pylons/melt probes.
The Protoss units don't have the versatility
Good post, pretty much sums-up my thoughts about the Protoss composition problem.
|
Watching vVvTime's stream, it looks like a mothership rush is the solution to this all-in off 1 base. It seems like he was just messing around on ladder, but it honestly seemed pretty strong. Vortex forces tanks to unseige. All your units get cloaked, and we know Terran relies on mules with this build, so scans hurt a lot. Time's opponent had to make a ton of vikings, screwing up his composition.
I'm only half-kidding, I'm actually really intrigued by this response.
|
On August 24 2011 17:01 CellTech wrote:
The 'volatility' comes with protoss having to decide what to build.
Did I build enough zealots for marines, and have leftovers for tanks?
Did I build enough stalkers to eliminate all the banshees?
Did I build Enough immortals to snipe tanks?
Did I build any Phoenix to lift the tanks? Did I overcommitt on phoenix?
Most of the time Protoss overcommits to 2 out the 3 or 4 options and is left with either banshees having free reign over units with no AA,
Tanks having free reign of a huge area, or
Marines left over after the big engagement free to run wound and snipe tech structures/pylons/melt probes.
The Protoss units don't have the versatility
Yeah, waaaay too many variables I guess. The one game where you hit the perfect composition will be followed by a string of losses were you were an Immortal or a few Stalkers too short.
Too bad none of this stuff can be addressed until HOTS. Blizzard really did a poor job at designing Protoss :/
|
Zurich15366 Posts
On August 24 2011 17:01 CellTech wrote:
The 'volatility' comes with protoss having to decide what to build.
Did I build enough zealots for marines, and have leftovers for tanks?
Did I build enough stalkers to eliminate all the banshees?
Did I build Enough immortals to snipe tanks?
Did I build any Phoenix to lift the tanks? Did I overcommitt on phoenix?
Most of the time Protoss overcommits to 2 out the 3 or 4 options and is left with either banshees having free reign over units with no AA,
Tanks having free reign of a huge area, or
Marines left over after the big engagement free to run wound and snipe tech structures/pylons/melt probes.
The Protoss units don't have the versatility
This ia also why I think this will ultimately not be a problem once Protoss gain enough experience to build the correct composition to for each type of Terran death ball.
|
On August 24 2011 17:29 zatic wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 17:01 CellTech wrote:
The 'volatility' comes with protoss having to decide what to build.
Did I build enough zealots for marines, and have leftovers for tanks?
Did I build enough stalkers to eliminate all the banshees?
Did I build Enough immortals to snipe tanks?
Did I build any Phoenix to lift the tanks? Did I overcommitt on phoenix?
Most of the time Protoss overcommits to 2 out the 3 or 4 options and is left with either banshees having free reign over units with no AA,
Tanks having free reign of a huge area, or
Marines left over after the big engagement free to run wound and snipe tech structures/pylons/melt probes.
The Protoss units don't have the versatility This ia also why I think this will ultimately not be a problem once Protoss gain enough experience to build the correct composition to for each type of Terran death ball.
Assuming one actually exists that is
|
On August 24 2011 17:01 CellTech wrote:
The 'volatility' comes with protoss having to decide what to build.
Did I build enough zealots for marines, and have leftovers for tanks?
Did I build enough stalkers to eliminate all the banshees?
Did I build Enough immortals to snipe tanks?
Did I build any Phoenix to lift the tanks? Did I overcommitt on phoenix?
Most of the time Protoss overcommits to 2 out the 3 or 4 options and is left with either banshees having free reign over units with no AA,
Tanks having free reign of a huge area, or
Marines left over after the big engagement free to run wound and snipe tech structures/pylons/melt probes.
The Protoss units don't have the versatility
Thanks for describing the game of Starcraft.
Now you know how we feel when our vikings take out all the broodlords/colossi and we get swamped by the next wave of ultras/zealots 
Seriously though, IMO only the protoss early tech lacks versatility. Late game, completely different story.
edit: happy birthday zatic!
|
On August 24 2011 17:29 zatic wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 17:01 CellTech wrote:
The 'volatility' comes with protoss having to decide what to build.
Did I build enough zealots for marines, and have leftovers for tanks?
Did I build enough stalkers to eliminate all the banshees?
Did I build Enough immortals to snipe tanks?
Did I build any Phoenix to lift the tanks? Did I overcommitt on phoenix?
Most of the time Protoss overcommits to 2 out the 3 or 4 options and is left with either banshees having free reign over units with no AA,
Tanks having free reign of a huge area, or
Marines left over after the big engagement free to run wound and snipe tech structures/pylons/melt probes.
The Protoss units don't have the versatility This ia also why I think this will ultimately not be a problem once Protoss gain enough experience to build the correct composition to for each type of Terran death ball.
But if the different Terran death balls are so easily interchangeable, which they more or less are, surely the reactive burden on the protoss is way too large?
Unless you have complete vision of the T's composition from about two minutes before the push hits your door, wouldn't it be almost impossible to get things right, even if you do know the counters for each ball?
I feel like the root of the problem is that the T's units are good against most of the P army, while the P units are specific counters. So the terran has to build a really, really skewed composition before it starts to fail (eg nothing but banshees when P has phoenix), while toss has to keep his unit balance tight on the basis of very little information to even stand a chance.
|
A joke bout Zerg learning curve:
- Dealing with 2 rax: Terran has to build depot before rax, bunker build time increases, salvage costs 25%.
- Dealing with Voidray: Fluxvain and third charge on void removed, spore crawler root time decreases to only 6 secs
- Dealing with HT killing natural: Amulet removed
- Dealing with Protoss deathball: infestor buff which is also good in ZvT
|
On August 24 2011 17:39 Belisarius wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 17:29 zatic wrote:On August 24 2011 17:01 CellTech wrote:
The 'volatility' comes with protoss having to decide what to build.
Did I build enough zealots for marines, and have leftovers for tanks?
Did I build enough stalkers to eliminate all the banshees?
Did I build Enough immortals to snipe tanks?
Did I build any Phoenix to lift the tanks? Did I overcommitt on phoenix?
Most of the time Protoss overcommits to 2 out the 3 or 4 options and is left with either banshees having free reign over units with no AA,
Tanks having free reign of a huge area, or
Marines left over after the big engagement free to run wound and snipe tech structures/pylons/melt probes.
The Protoss units don't have the versatility This ia also why I think this will ultimately not be a problem once Protoss gain enough experience to build the correct composition to for each type of Terran death ball. But if the different Terran death balls are so easily interchangeable, which they more or less are, surely the reactive burden on the protoss is unrealistically large? Unless you have complete vision of the T's composition from about two minutes before the push hits your door, surely it's almost impossible to get the balance right, even if do you know the counters for each ball. I feel like the root of the problem is that the T's units are good against most of the opposing P army, while the P units are specific counters. So the terran has to build a really, really skewed composition before it starts to fail (eg nothing but banshees against phoenix), while the onus is on the toss to keep his unit balance exceedingly tight on the basis of very little information.
100% Agreed.
Protoss has enough units to play Tetris with and find something that fits the gaps, but the problem is being able to achieve that composition that is within reason of the game that is currently being played.
Due to the way Protoss works, before you reach a specific composition there are risks associated to get there. Take for example rushing to Colossus, until that Colossus is out your army is incredibly vulnerable and in most cases you rely on completely shutting out the enemy from your base just to not get steam rolled.
Certain compositions may exist, but if getting there means you are vulnerable to 95% of other Terran antics and puts you considerably behind if the Terran happens to not be doing a 1/1/1 then really, it is not a solution.
And the way the current Metagame is working, even with such flexibility offered you are still leashed to a lot of core Tech. You MUST get a Robotics, you MUST get Sentries and in the vast majority of cases you MUST expand, doing a mix of those three makes it difficult to extend to the other branches.
IF the solution to beat 1/1/1 is just to go Phoenix/Chargelot on one base without getting Robotics or too many Sentries so you may afford the Chargelot and Phoenix tech whilst still having a reasonable army, how is that a reasonable solution?
The Terran race is so flexible, they are capable of fixing all three of their core tiers and being relatively safe. But Protoss? You cannot safely rush things like Charge or Templars off a single base. In most cases you NEED an expansion to drive resources to make it possible but you cannot just rush Charge or High Temps whilst expand, that is still too risky. It leaves you to such wide tech timings, moments before Charge/Storm is done, Cloaked Banshees and having a super small army if you just try do too much at once
Protoss's branching Tech tree and the versatility you see at face value feels like such a facade
|
On August 24 2011 17:18 Dommk wrote:
I guess they could try buffing Gateway build times so Protoss can feasibly 1gate expand vs Terran every game, that would solve the dilemma until HOTS comes. That way Terran doesn't have to get nerfed
Gateway Pressure hasn't been done against Zerg for a long time either, in most cases just a single stalker. Might revitalize that match up.
You know I've thought this too, just a few seconds would make a huge difference. I know they've been a yoyo when it comes to the Zealot build times with almost every patch, it seems to be either 33 seconds or 38 seconds. The most recent major patch was supposed to take the Zealot down to 33 seconds but was instead held at 38 seconds (I don't know why) with the Sentry build time buffed; which does not do much for Protoss offensive options early game.
They've nerfed the WG time through the life of SC2 and I think this most recent one went slightly over the line so that, IMO, Protoss Tier 1 units either need a mini-buff to compensate, or just have slightly reduced build times from the Gateways for Zealot, Sentry, Stalker (or just give us back our 140 seconds WG research time; which seems highly unlikely at the moment - well at least they didn't do 180 seconds like they originally planned for the patch).
|
On August 24 2011 17:18 Dommk wrote:
I guess they could try buffing Gateway build times so Protoss can feasibly 1gate expand vs Terran every game, that would solve the dilemma until HOTS comes. That way Terran doesn't have to get nerfed
Gateway Pressure hasn't been done against Zerg for a long time either, in most cases just a single stalker. Might revitalize that match up.
You want to be able to 1 gate expand every game without worrying about anything? The whole point of the game is risk and reward. Expanding soon or being safe, it's a choice you have to make, you cant just be safe AND FE.
|
On August 24 2011 18:37 Deadlyfish wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 17:18 Dommk wrote:
I guess they could try buffing Gateway build times so Protoss can feasibly 1gate expand vs Terran every game, that would solve the dilemma until HOTS comes. That way Terran doesn't have to get nerfed
Gateway Pressure hasn't been done against Zerg for a long time either, in most cases just a single stalker. Might revitalize that match up. You want to be able to 1 gate expand every game without worrying about anything? The whole point of the game is risk and reward. Expanding soon or being safe, it's a choice you have to make, you cant just be safe AND FE.
I agree, it would be stupid if you could FE every game without any risk.
|
On August 24 2011 18:37 Deadlyfish wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 17:18 Dommk wrote:
I guess they could try buffing Gateway build times so Protoss can feasibly 1gate expand vs Terran every game, that would solve the dilemma until HOTS comes. That way Terran doesn't have to get nerfed
Gateway Pressure hasn't been done against Zerg for a long time either, in most cases just a single stalker. Might revitalize that match up. You want to be able to 1 gate expand every game without worrying about anything? The whole point of the game is risk and reward. Expanding soon or being safe, it's a choice you have to make, you cant just be safe AND FE.
Terran can in TvP.
Protoss has the following problem in PvT, there are like 6 builds that can demolish fast expansions(proxy thor rush, 2 rax, one of the 10 1-1-1 all-ins, 3rax, marine-tank pushs), but you never know what's coming after you. But the terran could also take an early expansion and you're way behind if you go for a safe build. 1 rax marine expansion is actually really really safe. The only all-in you have to fear is 3gate proxy-void ray.
For Protoss, if you want to go an early expansion there is always a huge risk, because terran can respond to your build, he can scout everything and act accordingly to it, the Protoss can't.
It's rock-paper-scissor while Terran has the fountain.
|
On August 24 2011 18:37 Deadlyfish wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 17:18 Dommk wrote:
I guess they could try buffing Gateway build times so Protoss can feasibly 1gate expand vs Terran every game, that would solve the dilemma until HOTS comes. That way Terran doesn't have to get nerfed
Gateway Pressure hasn't been done against Zerg for a long time either, in most cases just a single stalker. Might revitalize that match up. You want to be able to 1 gate expand every game without worrying about anything? The whole point of the game is risk and reward. Expanding soon or being safe, it's a choice you have to make, you cant just be safe AND FE.
The point is right now, that it is considerably harder to 1gate expand as Protoss than for a Terran to take a quick Expansion. That is what the OP is getting out, there are builds right now for Terran to flat out kill a 1gate expand with little effort, that is the problem. I'm not saying make 1gate expand extremely safe, but make it much safer than it is right now, at least to the point where you can do it and hold off a timing with reasonable micro and preparation like Terran and Zerg can do. A few second off Stalker/Zealot/Sentry build times from Gateways is really all that is needed to not get steam rolled.
Keep in mind there is STILL a risk, it just means the risk isn't getting raped by a bunch of Marines/Marauders before your warpgate tech is even ready
Not exactly the most elegant solution, but the problem is right now that 1gate/Nexus first are really the only builds Protoss has that has a reasonable chance against 1/1/1, and if 1/1/1 does happen to be imbalanced then nerfing Terran can be avoided by making it easier for Protoss to expand
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
