EPTIs that a queen will prob beat a banshee in a 1v1 fight :D Thought I would want blizzard to swingbat too early. Would prefer if they gave protoss a shot at beating it themself
Why 1/1/1 is considered to be imbalanced in Korea - Page 40
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
Can we stop talking about nerfing things please? - 9:10 KST | ||
|
JoeAWESOME
Sweden1080 Posts
Is that a queen will prob beat a banshee in a 1v1 fight :D Thought I would want blizzard to swingbat too early. Would prefer if they gave protoss a shot at beating it themself | ||
|
Medrea
10003 Posts
On August 22 2011 13:27 Finchy711 wrote: Not sure what you read there but the gas steal isn't meant to stop 1/1/1 it's meant to delay it. I'm pretty sure if T doesn't get the second gas quickly (~16food) then this push won't come at 9mins and if it does it won't be nearly as strong. I'm not sure if you've ever watched 1-2 marines try to kill an assimilator but it doesn't happen instantly. (Usually 1 b/c of reactor going down after first marine, which is obviously used to deny further scouting) Also it would be good to note here that if the marine/s are targeting the assim then that leaves your probe alive to figure out what T is doing. So if by "only slightly changing the outcome" you mean delaying it by the lost gas mining time to take advantage of your much faster expo then yes you're 100% correct. You also failed to acknowledge that a change in BO is still something that you have to account for which in itself throws off the timing. Oh I wouldn't know the specifics. From what has been said on TL from other terrans is that by the time they need that second gas anyway it would be pretty close to dying to the marines anyway. So your not stopping terran from getting as much gas as you might think you are. | ||
|
Ranir
413 Posts
On August 22 2011 06:09 zerglingsfolife wrote: Can we wait another month or two before patching? See if protoss can develop a counter on their own. If it's still imba by then, then sure, go ahead and patch. This strat have been there for a lot of time so I'm not sure why you're saying we should wait for 1-2 months to see if something figures out something. I haven't read all of posts but from what I've seen some people think that nexus first or 1 gate nexus is viable vs 1/1/1. I agree that it's viable vs 1/1/1 but when you nexus first how the fuck do you know 1/1/1 is comming, you only saw 1 gaz and 1 rax from the terran and you can poke to see what addon he got. 1) You Nexus first: the guy sees it, drops another rax and goes for a 2 rax with what ever he has and maybe bring some scvs 2) For the 1 gate expand there's so many reaction that the terran can do, bunker rush you, get another rax etc. I really can't see those 2 strats viable. I think maybe the viable strat is that you need some kind of scout (robo or hallucination), expand and drop a stargate for phoenix to kill the banshee and to lift up tanks. I'm scared that this post will make terrans make this strat a lot more. | ||
|
Medrea
10003 Posts
On August 22 2011 13:32 JoeAWESOME wrote: The problem with: "Reduce banshee damage to non light armored units. I suggested this about a dozen pages ago and people couldn't really argue against it." Is that a queen will prob beat a banshee in a 1v1 fight :D Thought I would want blizzard to swingbat too early. Would prefer if they gave protoss a shot at beating it themself It's been around forever but the magic mix of units has been uncovered. Even when it used to be a tank marine medivac all-in it was pretty ridiculous. Also would the queen-banshee thing really twist that matchup? How many queen all-ins do we see? | ||
|
lulzury
United States236 Posts
| ||
|
Amui
Canada10567 Posts
On August 22 2011 13:33 Ranir wrote: This strat have been there for a lot of time so I'm not sure why you're saying we should wait for 1-2 months to see if something figures out something. I haven't read all of posts but from what I've seen some people think that nexus first or 1 gate nexus is viable vs 1/1/1. I agree that it's viable vs 1/1/1 but when you nexus first how the fuck do you know 1/1/1 is comming, you only saw 1 gaz and 1 rax from the terran and you can poke to see what addon he got. 1) You Nexus first: the guy sees it, drops another rax and goes for a 2 rax with what ever he has and maybe bring some scvs 2) For the 1 gate expand there's so many reaction that the terran can do, bunker rush you, get another rax etc. I really can't see those 2 strats viable. I think maybe the viable strat is that you need some kind of scout (robo or hallucination), expand and drop a stargate for phoenix to kill the banshee and to lift up tanks. I'm scared that this post will make terrans make this strat a lot more. There have been a few dozen of these threads in the last few weeks. Every terran who frequents these forums is bound to have seen one by now. I don't mind if terran has a build that can put heavy pressure onto a greedy FE. That's part of the game. What I do mind is that the safest protoss build requires insane amounts of outplaying to hold off a terran all-in even with ~2.5-3 minutes advance warning, when the greedy build does significantly better. | ||
|
Medrea
10003 Posts
On August 22 2011 13:36 lulzury wrote: My suggestion would be that any buildings that are lifted lose their addons (reactor/tech-lab) Yeesh, considering that terran is built around swapping addon's that sounds fairly drastic. | ||
|
Kamais_Ookin
Canada4218 Posts
On August 22 2011 13:36 lulzury wrote: Terrans would be crippled from that silly idea.My suggestion would be that any buildings that are lifted lose their addons (reactor/tech-lab) | ||
|
unit
United States2621 Posts
| ||
|
Medrea
10003 Posts
On August 22 2011 13:38 unit wrote: im of the opinion that the nerfbat is not needed here...TvZ is perfectly fine as is, in addition to that PvZ recently has also been bad for protoss in korea, meaning that buffs might be more appropriate here An interesting thought, although what buff is a good question. That matchup is shifting every month with blizzard not doing anything. I think a buff is a bit of an oddball move to do. Its not like 1-1-1 is way WAY over broken. Its just the normal SLIGHTLY broken. Any one of quite a few changes can tone it down a notch. | ||
|
Truedot
444 Posts
terrans can easy mode with mass banshee/viking/tank/thor, and just sit there and waste you because your air based AA gets owned by thor/vik, while your bround based AA gets owned by banshee tank/thor. The unit just needs to counter armored as well as it does now, and counter light less well. Its meant to snipe out tanks colossi thors and whatnot, its not meant to kill AA chances completely or force a reaction that causes you to lose 100% of the time. This will also benefit a protoss as zealots will stand much more of a chance to get rid of marines while stalkers and sentry knock down the banshee. Thats the problem with protoss. Their meat screen vanishes from the huge dps of these things, leaving the vulnerable units, well, vulnerable. If zealots became a cost effective measure, being that they are the cheapest protoss unit barring intys, then the all-in gets countered not by some extra ability of protoss but by protoss being able to field a cheap enough response. The same will hold true for zerg, as it will become more cost effective to have hydras, and to have fewer to counter a relatively cheap air unit that does tons of damage. To put things in perspective, I'd like to list out corruptor vs Banshee, only because they are the same cost in two different races. Banshee: AG only (anti-ground). moderate hp 12x2 damage per attack round VS ALL. no damage restriction. (24 damage vs 0 armor, 22 vs 1 armor, etc) high rate of fire ability to cloak. fast speed LIGHT, being countered directly by very few units in game. Corruptor: AA only high hp 14 damage (+6 to massive ONLY) moderate rate of fire ability to corrupt (+20% more damage to unit until it dies, cd on 15) moderate speed ARMORED, being countered directly by a wide assortment of units. If we take into consideration these two are EQUAL cost, you can see that the banshee has far more utility and far more early game potential for deadly damage. why compare an AA to an AG? because when a weapon gets specialized its meant to be deadly at that specialization. Ok, so the corruptor kind of underperforms in the ability and damage department, at least you can get that corruptor out fast to deal with banshees. oh, 120 seconds to build a spire? nvm. The point is that its far quicker to tech to a highly deadly unit that also features a lot more ways it can be used and a lot more early game danger than it is to get the unit that runs it off, but cant chase it and kill it, which itself, has very low utility other than direct confrontation. And these units are the same price. Different races should be different. One race shouldn't have something that completely gives the finger to common sense cost/utility equations. | ||
|
susySquark
United States1692 Posts
| ||
|
Virid
United States130 Posts
| ||
|
Truedot
444 Posts
On August 22 2011 13:45 Virid wrote: Maybe we could understand better by figuring out why 1-1-1 doesn't work versus Zerg. really? it doesn't this is news to me, since banshees work over the low AA zerg race. | ||
|
susySquark
United States1692 Posts
On August 22 2011 13:45 Virid wrote: Maybe we could understand better by figuring out why 1-1-1 doesn't work versus Zerg. Because zerg either goes hatch first or pool hatch, which are safer than going Gate Nexus, or Nexus first, the ways that OP says for P to hold it off. To elaborate: Protoss has the smallest defenders advantage out of all the races. You defend by having more units present than the enemy, more often than not. Terran has bunkers and siege tanks, Zerg, while not as strong as Terran, has creep, queens, and spines which can be built after spawning pool. Protoss cannons are almost useless against 1/1/1, require investing in a forge, and cost 150 minerals. | ||
|
Deezl
United States355 Posts
On August 22 2011 06:03 Liquid`Tyler wrote: Something like this was a possibility ever since so many protoss players began to rely on 15nexus and 1gate expand. I've never understood the economic necessity of expanding so soon. 1gate robo and 1gate star (for phoenix) builds can yield economically sound mid games without sacrificing early game information. I don't think there is such an economic necessity. I think protoss players saw that they could get away with really early expansions and so they did it. Now it's back to being a coinflip like it ought to be. Rushing to gather information remains the most reliable way to get to mid game on even ground or to win outright against opponents not intending to enter mid game. Of course, this requires perfect use of the information, so it is a more difficult way to play until all the necessary knowledge has been discovered, at which point it makes all the things it counters absolutely obsolete. I imagine 1-1-1 is one such thing. Tyler, we really appreciate the post and all, but don't 1-gate SG expo and 1-gate Robo expo both fall to the 1/1/1 all-in, and in some cases fall to the Marine/SCV all-in (stargate?) What is the point of scouting it if you can't live through it? What do you think about Hallucinate as a viable scouting alternative vs. T? | ||
|
LuckyMacro
United States1482 Posts
These threads. | ||
|
Crisco
1170 Posts
On August 22 2011 13:43 susySquark wrote: Making the Zealot charge cheaper, quicker to research, or earlier in the tech tree would tremendously help the 1/1/1 defense, while minimally impacting PvZ, since charge is almost never gotten in that matchup. Put it in the Cybernetic Core, analogous to dragoon range. The upgrade is one of the slowest ones in the game as it is, so having it in an earlier tech tree isn't a bad idea. On top of that, one has to decide to rush warp gate or go straight for charge, which could be an interesting thing to decide. Worst case scenario, you can give it a conditional lower tech building (forge?) | ||
|
Severedevil
United States4839 Posts
0) Gas steals. They narrow the space of build options, and take Cloak off the table. (You can also delay the death of the assimilator by pressuring the front.) 0.5) Two-gas-before-core builds. If you intend to one-base against a 1/1/1, the additional gas might allow a stronger composition. 1) Very early pressure. Stuff like zealot-before-core with a chrono on the gateway for good measure. Can you hinder the Terran/delay his build/force him to show his hand? If you can get good information on the Terran's build early on (after your probe would normally be denied), you can make very sharp adjustments, like expanding immediately or proxying. 2) 1 Gate Stargate --> Phoenix. I hear it won't hold a Terran infantry rush, but I'm unconvinced. Certain 'unmanageable' low-tech pushes can be held by emergency pylon-walling your own ramp. 3) 1 Gate Robo --> Prism. Fast Robo openings always seem to expect a fast observer for scouting. But a Warp Prism has greater aggressive potential than an observer, and can be used in an early fight to save injured/concussed units. 4) Naked Tech. Usually a Protoss will conceal their tech plan, but dropping the building before you can eliminate the Terran's scout -- or even before you start your Warp Tech/Stalker -- can greatly accelerate a timing. (Ideally, Terran doesn't find out if you cancelled or not, or the tech can legitimately be used for paths that incur different responses.) | ||
|
Amui
Canada10567 Posts
On August 22 2011 13:42 Truedot wrote: If any damage reduction, I'd say slightly less to light (such as -4 per volley). that'd make it like the good old wraith, doubled up of course due to it being a two shotter, meaning it wouldn't wipe workers so fast giving you time to respond. its worse than mutalisks for this reason. it'd also allow your cheaper ground based light units to counter it somewhat. marines wouldn't get completely rocked, hydras wouldn't either. This would make them a unit that doesn't directly counter AA but is highly damaging to armor, which seems like what its for to begin with. It also makes some sense due to thors countering it, but then it woukld also counter thor hard and with cloak to boot. terrans can easy mode with mass banshee/viking/tank/thor, and just sit there and waste you because your air based AA gets owned by thor/vik, while your bround based AA gets owned by banshee tank/thor. The unit just needs to counter armored as well as it does now, and counter light less well. Its meant to snipe out tanks colossi thors and whatnot, its not meant to kill AA chances completely or force a reaction that causes you to lose 100% of the time. This will also benefit a protoss as zealots will stand much more of a chance to get rid of marines while stalkers and sentry knock down the banshee. Thats the problem with protoss. Their meat screen vanishes from the huge dps of these things, leaving the vulnerable units, well, vulnerable. If zealots became a cost effective measure, being that they are the cheapest protoss unit barring intys, then the all-in gets countered not by some extra ability of protoss but by protoss being able to field a cheap enough response. The same will hold true for zerg, as it will become more cost effective to have hydras, and to have fewer to counter a relatively cheap air unit that does tons of damage. To put things in perspective, I'd like to list out corruptor vs Banshee, only because they are the same cost in two different races. Banshee: AG only (anti-ground). moderate hp 12x2 damage per attack round VS ALL. no damage restriction. (24 damage vs 0 armor, 22 vs 1 armor, etc) high rate of fire ability to cloak. fast speed LIGHT, being countered directly by very few units in game. Corruptor: AA only high hp 14 damage (+6 to massive ONLY) moderate rate of fire ability to corrupt (+20% more damage to unit until it dies, cd on 15) moderate speed ARMORED, being countered directly by a wide assortment of units. If we take into consideration these two are EQUAL cost, you can see that the banshee has far more utility and far more early game potential for deadly damage. why compare an AA to an AG? because when a weapon gets specialized its meant to be deadly at that specialization. Ok, so the corruptor kind of underperforms in the ability and damage department, at least you can get that corruptor out fast to deal with banshees. oh, 120 seconds to build a spire? nvm. The point is that its far quicker to tech to a highly deadly unit that also features a lot more ways it can be used and a lot more early game danger than it is to get the unit that runs it off, but cant chase it and kill it, which itself, has very low utility other than direct confrontation. And these units are the same price. Different races should be different. One race shouldn't have something that completely gives the finger to common sense cost/utility equations. No. The 2shot mechanic on both workers and marines defines TvT in early-midgame. Just because you can't manage to deal with one banshee is not a good reason to nerf it. If you just nerf it's damage to non-light, it really only affects TvZ 2port in other matchups. Single port banshees usually don't end up killing queens if there is creep spread between main and natural. If you have air dominance in TvT and make a banshee, it's just going to kill tanks slower, the other guy is still going to have to unsiege and run because he can't shoot up. As of right now though, banshees rip stalkers to shreds(even 3/3/3 stalkers lose to a banshee), so even if protoss cleans up the ground army, reinforcing stalkers sometimes aren't enough to deal with the 3 leftover banshees. | ||
| ||
