|
Can we stop talking about nerfing things please? - 9:10 KST |
On August 23 2011 07:52 aksfjh wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 07:05 H0i wrote:On August 23 2011 07:01 aksfjh wrote:On August 23 2011 06:51 SxYSpAz wrote:
I personally think they should just nerf the mule, or make it come into play later, idk how they would do it cause i'm not a terran player, but all those rines so early is a biiiitch to deal with. You mean so that Terran can be even more behind in the economic game? The only thing keeping Terrans on even remote equal footing in the mid game economy is the use of the mule. In a general sense, Protoss should be 4-7 workers ahead by the 30 worker mark, which is then matched by the +3-4 workers per mule. You'd have to redesign the way the mule works altogether to balance out any positive or negative side effects. Could you explain to me why terran didn't have the mule in bw and still did fine? Terran units are way more cost efficient. Constant chrono boost on probes doesn't change as much as you think. I really shouldn't respond to this because of the sheer stupidity of comparing BW to SC2, but I will out of humor. Chrono boost effectively gives protoss an extra 10 workers every 17 boosts, or 0.588 workers per ~45 in game seconds (time to get 25 energy). By the 6-7 minute mark, that can yield a +5 worker difference, or a 195-225 minerals per minute difference, which in turn gives about a 750 mineral bonus to Protoss (or 500 if you subtract probe cost). ~4 zealots or ~3 stalkers in army ahead of what Terran can have at the 6-7 minute mark (without mules), or an expansion about 40s ahead if Terran waits for the same mineral levels. Even if you account for mules, which make an entrance around 3.5 minutes in, Protoss is still ahead by ~200 minerals (counting probes). This assumes both players are going for an economic game. Only when full saturation occurs (for Protoss) does Terran begin to actually catch up, but it still takes another ~40s after before numbers even up. You lengthen the time to get mules and the number grows exponentially and not linearly. To suggest that chrono has "little effect" on worker production is a complete lie.
Why even respond to such a bad post :D
Nevermind I'll respond too, you know that in bw protoss didnt have chronoboost right ?
|
Terran just seems too powerful as compared to Protoss and Zerg. Too many strong options. Didn't Dustin Browder basically acknowledge that in an interview not long ago? He indicated the possibility that Toss and Zerg could get new units to make up for that. A new Toss unit might just balance things out...
|
Ok, I'm going to make a suggestion in bold here so everyone sees it.
Redesign the MULE so that it doesn't ignore worker saturation levels.
Terran is now on EQUAL FOOTING in 1 base situations, rather than drastically ahead. (~28% at saturation levels I believe)
Terran therefore has less units with this push, specifically less Marines. Therefore it becomes a "balanced" build, meaning it's still deadly if it catches you off-guard, but if scouted ahead of time becomes feasible to hold in an equal skill situation.
|
Make the mule cost 100 energy and make the oc start with 150 energy. I think this would cripple the advantage that terran has on one base.
|
On August 23 2011 07:25 TimeSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 06:26 Toadvine wrote:On August 23 2011 06:06 TimeSpiral wrote:
All we can do is hope the developers let this thing play out for a little while.
That is what is needed.
Let the metagame balance out this little ruffle. It is far from a free win, but it is a potent all-in (which there are many in SC2). You have like 15 posts in that huge KA whine thread that reached 70 pages around the time Blizzard removed it, arguing in favor of its removal. Why wasn't letting the game play out the preferable option back then? Besides, at the moment, this is probably the single most powerful all-in since SC2's release. Maybe the 3 Gate VR from before the VR nerf would be contender. At the GSL level Protoss literally doesn't win against this build unless the Terran makes a huge mistake. So yeah, at the moment it is very much a free win on that level of play. You have either (a) a ridiculous good memory, or (b) some pretty vigilant search skills. Eitherway, I cannot help but give you mad props for that character argument. I believe the majority of the Protoss community was advising T and Z's of the world to l2p at the time the KA was nerfed? No? I could be wrong, of course. I actually cannot think if a single Terran unit that has not been nerfed since release. The Banshee, maybe? You know, I believe any balance argument pretty much follows the same format: [My Race = UP, your race = IMBA, (IF suggested nerf affects "YOUR RACE" then SUPPORT, else "TROLL RAGE ON TL"] Sitting on the sidelines are the ones who say, "let the metagame balance it out." I think a play encompassing the entire tech-tree is a pretty difficult thing to nerf, but who knows. Maybe it is wildly imba. Let me go plug it into my imba calculator and tell you. How about an on-screen warning for all the imba plays? Yeah. I like that. "Terran has constructed a barrack, a factory and a Starport. Prepare." "Protoss has begun construction of a pylon. Prepare." "There's a nydus worm in your base. Prepare." Haha! Some of the nerfs and buffs have been fine, others have been terrible, but "balancing" a game like this (also known as population management) must be such a nightmare ...
I tend to remember people who put some care into their posts. You should probably take that as a compliment. Not that I agreed at the time, but having a properly formulated opinion to disagree with is valuable in itself. By the way, I think a lot of Protosses were ready to accept some kind of nerf to KA, and there were reasonable suggestions floating around that thread. Of course, this was way too complicated for Blizzard's balance team, so they removed it completely.
I dunno, I tend to think of myself as a reasonable person. When Zergs were complaining about ZvP, I wouldn't tell them to l2p or use nydus moar. I don't even necessarily care about game balance in my own play, because I can 3 Gate VR a Terran doing a tech opening, and kill him 70% of the time, completely sidestepping the 1/1/1 issue in the first place.
What really pisses me off is the mongoloidness of it all. If Terrans were doing sick harassment with great micro and multitasking, expanding at good timings and playing with a well defined lategame in mind, I wouldn't complain that much if they were dominating Protoss left and right. Zergs are kind of doing that at the moment, and I still like watching high-level PvZ - and I'm completely in favor of letting that matchup work itself out.
But this, is just massing tons of stuff off 1 base, and then ramming it down the opponent's throat. It makes for absolutely terrible, disheartening games, and makes SC2 seem like a total joke of an aspiring e-sport. I've never played DotA, and have no idea about the rules, but the DotA2 finals were a lot more interesting and fun to watch than MC vs PuMa. The fact that such a garbage build can be so insanely effective just makes me dislike SC2 as a game, and start thinking that maybe it doesn't deserve all this hype, and this great scene; and that at it's core it's a fairly mediocre RTS riding on the coattails of its predecessor. And the fact that you seemingly can't nerf it without fucking up the whole game only serves to reinforce this idea. :/
|
On August 23 2011 08:01 VirgilSC2 wrote:
Ok, I'm going to make a suggestion in bold here so everyone sees it.
Redesign the MULE so that it doesn't ignore worker saturation levels.
Terran is now on EQUAL FOOTING in 1 base situations, rather than drastically ahead. (~28% at saturation levels I believe)
Terran therefore has less units with this push, specifically less Marines. Therefore it becomes a "balanced" build, meaning it's still deadly if it catches you off-guard, but if scouted ahead of time becomes feasible to hold in an equal skill situation.
I like this, I think blizzard should do it.
|
On August 23 2011 08:04 Aookami wrote:
Make the mule cost 100 energy and make the oc start with 150 energy. I think this would cripple the advantage that terran has on one base.
See my post above please, as it's not the amount of MULEs Terran gets, but the way they allow much higher income off of a saturated base, meaning in an equal-base, saturation level income, Terran is always ahead, and this grows exponentially for each base.
|
On August 23 2011 07:16 Sabu113 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 06:30 CryingPoo wrote:On August 23 2011 06:26 JelleSlaets wrote:
1st place on Korean GM ladder is Protoss.
2nd place on China GM ladder is Protoss
3rd place on SEA GM ladder is Protoss
Some players figured out how to beat it. Or did they all of a sudden stop using effective strats on ladder?
Just give Blizzard some time on this. They have already explained how they use bnet statistics to get weighted statistics based on skill / match-up. They also said that they would do emergency patches when the balance all of a sudden shifts towards a side. Meanwhile, I'm sure people will come up with some strat that can throw terran of containing, whether it be void rays or warp prism harass.
I'm glad they are in charge of balance and not the community. No. 1st Place on Korean GM is NOT Protoss. That Protoss got into GM with a map hack and it's been a huge issue in Korean community. So excluding him leaves mostly Terran's in this case Then it's clearly defendable if you scout it 
more like he can prepare a cheese knowing its coming or abuse unforeseen terrain.
|
On August 23 2011 07:16 Sabu113 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 06:30 CryingPoo wrote:On August 23 2011 06:26 JelleSlaets wrote:
1st place on Korean GM ladder is Protoss.
2nd place on China GM ladder is Protoss
3rd place on SEA GM ladder is Protoss
Some players figured out how to beat it. Or did they all of a sudden stop using effective strats on ladder?
Just give Blizzard some time on this. They have already explained how they use bnet statistics to get weighted statistics based on skill / match-up. They also said that they would do emergency patches when the balance all of a sudden shifts towards a side. Meanwhile, I'm sure people will come up with some strat that can throw terran of containing, whether it be void rays or warp prism harass.
I'm glad they are in charge of balance and not the community. No. 1st Place on Korean GM is NOT Protoss. That Protoss got into GM with a map hack and it's been a huge issue in Korean community. So excluding him leaves mostly Terran's in this case Then it's clearly defendable if you scout it
maybe he loses all the time vs 1-1-1 and win vs everything else? : D We should ask him ! His insight is probably better than most of the people on this thread ^^
|
I posted this in the middle of this huge thread: but what about not nerfing the mule, but nerfing the orbital. Make unupgraded command centres the only ones that can fly. Orbital commands are renamed to Planetary Commands and can no longer be floated.
Also solves stalemate-inducing nonsense after a terran has basically lost, but still has flying mule-dropping command centers everywhere.
And in the context of 1base all ins or contains, it means the terran will mine out faster and not be able to rely on 1basing their natural.
|
On August 23 2011 08:04 Aookami wrote:
Make the mule cost 100 energy and make the oc start with 150 energy. I think this would cripple the advantage that terran has on one base.
Curious, because this would mean terran would get their initial mule, then the following mule at the same times? Isn't the problem with 1/1/1 is that its such a strong initial push? That wouldn't delay this push by much...it'd hurt late game econ.
|
On August 23 2011 08:04 Toadvine wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 07:25 TimeSpiral wrote:On August 23 2011 06:26 Toadvine wrote:On August 23 2011 06:06 TimeSpiral wrote:
All we can do is hope the developers let this thing play out for a little while.
That is what is needed.
Let the metagame balance out this little ruffle. It is far from a free win, but it is a potent all-in (which there are many in SC2). You have like 15 posts in that huge KA whine thread that reached 70 pages around the time Blizzard removed it, arguing in favor of its removal. Why wasn't letting the game play out the preferable option back then? Besides, at the moment, this is probably the single most powerful all-in since SC2's release. Maybe the 3 Gate VR from before the VR nerf would be contender. At the GSL level Protoss literally doesn't win against this build unless the Terran makes a huge mistake. So yeah, at the moment it is very much a free win on that level of play. You have either (a) a ridiculous good memory, or (b) some pretty vigilant search skills. Eitherway, I cannot help but give you mad props for that character argument. I believe the majority of the Protoss community was advising T and Z's of the world to l2p at the time the KA was nerfed? No? I could be wrong, of course. I actually cannot think if a single Terran unit that has not been nerfed since release. The Banshee, maybe? You know, I believe any balance argument pretty much follows the same format: [My Race = UP, your race = IMBA, (IF suggested nerf affects "YOUR RACE" then SUPPORT, else "TROLL RAGE ON TL"] Sitting on the sidelines are the ones who say, "let the metagame balance it out." I think a play encompassing the entire tech-tree is a pretty difficult thing to nerf, but who knows. Maybe it is wildly imba. Let me go plug it into my imba calculator and tell you. How about an on-screen warning for all the imba plays? Yeah. I like that. "Terran has constructed a barrack, a factory and a Starport. Prepare." "Protoss has begun construction of a pylon. Prepare." "There's a nydus worm in your base. Prepare." Haha! Some of the nerfs and buffs have been fine, others have been terrible, but "balancing" a game like this (also known as population management) must be such a nightmare ... I tend to remember people who put some care into their posts. You should probably take that as a compliment. Not that I agreed at the time, but having a properly formulated opinion to disagree with is valuable in itself. By the way, I think a lot of Protosses were ready to accept some kind of nerf to KA, and there were reasonable suggestions floating around that thread. Of course, this was way too complicated for Blizzard's balance team, so they removed it completely. I dunno, I tend to think of myself as a reasonable person. When Zergs were complaining about ZvP, I wouldn't tell them to l2p or use nydus moar. I don't even necessarily care about game balance in my own play, because I can 3 Gate VR a Terran doing a tech opening, and kill him 70% of the time, completely sidestepping the 1/1/1 issue in the first place. What really pisses me off is the mongoloidness of it all. If Terrans were doing sick harassment with great micro and multitasking, expanding at good timings and playing with a well defined lategame in mind, I wouldn't complain that much if they were dominating Protoss left and right. Zergs are kind of doing that at the moment, and I still like watching high-level PvZ - and I'm completely in favor of letting that matchup work itself out. But this, is just massing tons of stuff off 1 base, and then ramming it down the opponent's throat. It makes for absolutely terrible, disheartening games, and makes SC2 seem like a total joke of an aspiring e-sport. I've never played DotA, and have no idea about the rules, but the DotA2 finals were a lot more interesting and fun to watch than MC vs PuMa. The fact that such a garbage build can be so insanely effective just makes me dislike SC2 as a game, and start thinking that maybe it doesn't deserve all this hype, and this great scene; and that at it's core it's a fairly mediocre RTS riding on the coattails of its predecessor. And the fact that you seemingly can't nerf it without fucking up the whole game only serves to reinforce this idea. :/
I take my hat off to you, good sir! Very well said.
However, there is a way to nerf it, without breaking the whole game.
Patch 1.4
.
.
.
MULEs can no longer harvest from a mineral patch, that's being harvested by an SCV (super saturation).
.
.
.
.
.
May I have my Nobel Prize now, plz?
|
has anyone tried something like forge first and get armor before it hits? Like forge +3 gates
|
On August 23 2011 08:08 Resistentialism wrote:
I posted this in the middle of this huge thread: but what about not nerfing the mule, but nerfing the orbital. Make unupgraded command centres the only ones that can fly. Orbital commands are renamed to Planetary Commands and can no longer be floated.
Also solves stalemate-inducing nonsense after a terran has basically lost, but still has flying mule-dropping command centers everywhere.
And in the context of 1base all ins or contains, it means the terran will mine out faster and not be able to rely on 1basing their natural.
Another reasonable solution, as it would make players either:
A) Build CC in their main, produce SCV's off of it, expand when safe, then morph to OC. Still leaving a short period of time where a push can force a cancel.
B) Build CC in their expansion, and leave them vulnerable to pushes designed to force a cancel.
|
On August 23 2011 08:01 VirgilSC2 wrote:
Ok, I'm going to make a suggestion in bold here so everyone sees it.
Redesign the MULE so that it doesn't ignore worker saturation levels.
Terran is now on EQUAL FOOTING in 1 base situations, rather than drastically ahead. (~28% at saturation levels I believe)
Terran therefore has less units with this push, specifically less Marines. Therefore it becomes a "balanced" build, meaning it's still deadly if it catches you off-guard, but if scouted ahead of time becomes feasible to hold in an equal skill situation.
Changing the principles of how mules work is a far bigger change than this situation warrants. It would be a huge change to the terran economy, which would affect every single aspect of terran play. Probably comparable to giving the marine 5 damage and saying its fine because of the 1-1-1.
What they need to do is find a way for protoss to crank out some units faster without breaking everything.
|
On August 23 2011 08:12 mmianzde wrote:
has anyone tried something like forge first and get armor before it hits? Like forge +3 gates
Forge first against a terran? Let me ask you this: are you Mr. Bean's son?
You know what would happen with forge first? Terran wouldnt bother with 111, he would just make 3 rax mass MM and go kill you. Or contain with bunkers and expo behind it.
|
On August 23 2011 08:10 IVN wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 08:04 Toadvine wrote:On August 23 2011 07:25 TimeSpiral wrote:On August 23 2011 06:26 Toadvine wrote:On August 23 2011 06:06 TimeSpiral wrote:
All we can do is hope the developers let this thing play out for a little while.
That is what is needed.
Let the metagame balance out this little ruffle. It is far from a free win, but it is a potent all-in (which there are many in SC2). You have like 15 posts in that huge KA whine thread that reached 70 pages around the time Blizzard removed it, arguing in favor of its removal. Why wasn't letting the game play out the preferable option back then? Besides, at the moment, this is probably the single most powerful all-in since SC2's release. Maybe the 3 Gate VR from before the VR nerf would be contender. At the GSL level Protoss literally doesn't win against this build unless the Terran makes a huge mistake. So yeah, at the moment it is very much a free win on that level of play. You have either (a) a ridiculous good memory, or (b) some pretty vigilant search skills. Eitherway, I cannot help but give you mad props for that character argument. I believe the majority of the Protoss community was advising T and Z's of the world to l2p at the time the KA was nerfed? No? I could be wrong, of course. I actually cannot think if a single Terran unit that has not been nerfed since release. The Banshee, maybe? You know, I believe any balance argument pretty much follows the same format: [My Race = UP, your race = IMBA, (IF suggested nerf affects "YOUR RACE" then SUPPORT, else "TROLL RAGE ON TL"] Sitting on the sidelines are the ones who say, "let the metagame balance it out." I think a play encompassing the entire tech-tree is a pretty difficult thing to nerf, but who knows. Maybe it is wildly imba. Let me go plug it into my imba calculator and tell you. How about an on-screen warning for all the imba plays? Yeah. I like that. "Terran has constructed a barrack, a factory and a Starport. Prepare." "Protoss has begun construction of a pylon. Prepare." "There's a nydus worm in your base. Prepare." Haha! Some of the nerfs and buffs have been fine, others have been terrible, but "balancing" a game like this (also known as population management) must be such a nightmare ... I tend to remember people who put some care into their posts. You should probably take that as a compliment. Not that I agreed at the time, but having a properly formulated opinion to disagree with is valuable in itself. By the way, I think a lot of Protosses were ready to accept some kind of nerf to KA, and there were reasonable suggestions floating around that thread. Of course, this was way too complicated for Blizzard's balance team, so they removed it completely. I dunno, I tend to think of myself as a reasonable person. When Zergs were complaining about ZvP, I wouldn't tell them to l2p or use nydus moar. I don't even necessarily care about game balance in my own play, because I can 3 Gate VR a Terran doing a tech opening, and kill him 70% of the time, completely sidestepping the 1/1/1 issue in the first place. What really pisses me off is the mongoloidness of it all. If Terrans were doing sick harassment with great micro and multitasking, expanding at good timings and playing with a well defined lategame in mind, I wouldn't complain that much if they were dominating Protoss left and right. Zergs are kind of doing that at the moment, and I still like watching high-level PvZ - and I'm completely in favor of letting that matchup work itself out. But this, is just massing tons of stuff off 1 base, and then ramming it down the opponent's throat. It makes for absolutely terrible, disheartening games, and makes SC2 seem like a total joke of an aspiring e-sport. I've never played DotA, and have no idea about the rules, but the DotA2 finals were a lot more interesting and fun to watch than MC vs PuMa. The fact that such a garbage build can be so insanely effective just makes me dislike SC2 as a game, and start thinking that maybe it doesn't deserve all this hype, and this great scene; and that at it's core it's a fairly mediocre RTS riding on the coattails of its predecessor. And the fact that you seemingly can't nerf it without fucking up the whole game only serves to reinforce this idea. :/ I take my hat off to you, good sir! Very well said. However, there is a way to nerf it, without breaking the whole game.
Patch 1.4
.
.
.
MULEs can no longer harvest from a mineral patch, that's been harvested by an SCV (super saturation).
.
.
.
.
.May I have my Nobel Prize now, plz?
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I stole your Nobel Prize-winning idea from the patent office and posted it before you.
Still, I'd like to reinforce this idea, it leaves Terrans with the MULE ability that allows them to "keep up" economically when they cannot produce workers at the same rate as other races, but denies them an advantage after saturation points are reached.
|
On August 23 2011 08:14 Bagi wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 08:01 VirgilSC2 wrote:
Ok, I'm going to make a suggestion in bold here so everyone sees it.
Redesign the MULE so that it doesn't ignore worker saturation levels.
Terran is now on EQUAL FOOTING in 1 base situations, rather than drastically ahead. (~28% at saturation levels I believe)
Terran therefore has less units with this push, specifically less Marines. Therefore it becomes a "balanced" build, meaning it's still deadly if it catches you off-guard, but if scouted ahead of time becomes feasible to hold in an equal skill situation. What they need to do is find a way for protoss to crank out some units faster without breaking everything.
It's called not nerfing (warp)gate timings a lot because bronze players can't deal with 2gate proxy or 4gate.
|
On August 23 2011 07:58 cilinder007 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 07:52 aksfjh wrote:On August 23 2011 07:05 H0i wrote:On August 23 2011 07:01 aksfjh wrote:On August 23 2011 06:51 SxYSpAz wrote:
I personally think they should just nerf the mule, or make it come into play later, idk how they would do it cause i'm not a terran player, but all those rines so early is a biiiitch to deal with. You mean so that Terran can be even more behind in the economic game? The only thing keeping Terrans on even remote equal footing in the mid game economy is the use of the mule. In a general sense, Protoss should be 4-7 workers ahead by the 30 worker mark, which is then matched by the +3-4 workers per mule. You'd have to redesign the way the mule works altogether to balance out any positive or negative side effects. Could you explain to me why terran didn't have the mule in bw and still did fine? Terran units are way more cost efficient. Constant chrono boost on probes doesn't change as much as you think. I really shouldn't respond to this because of the sheer stupidity of comparing BW to SC2, but I will out of humor. Chrono boost effectively gives protoss an extra 10 workers every 17 boosts, or 0.588 workers per ~45 in game seconds (time to get 25 energy). By the 6-7 minute mark, that can yield a +5 worker difference, or a 195-225 minerals per minute difference, which in turn gives about a 750 mineral bonus to Protoss (or 500 if you subtract probe cost). ~4 zealots or ~3 stalkers in army ahead of what Terran can have at the 6-7 minute mark (without mules), or an expansion about 40s ahead if Terran waits for the same mineral levels. Even if you account for mules, which make an entrance around 3.5 minutes in, Protoss is still ahead by ~200 minerals (counting probes). This assumes both players are going for an economic game. Only when full saturation occurs (for Protoss) does Terran begin to actually catch up, but it still takes another ~40s after before numbers even up. You lengthen the time to get mules and the number grows exponentially and not linearly. To suggest that chrono has "little effect" on worker production is a complete lie. Why even respond to such a bad post :D Nevermind I'll respond too, you know that in bw protoss didnt have chronoboost right ?
I'm aware of that, thanks. =P I was merely commenting on the insinuation that chronoboost has little or no effect on workers.
As for those calling for mules to ignore saturation levels, it's not that simple. Protoss and Zerg already get huge boosts to their economy before Terran, which causes Terran to be behind without the mule. Even after the mule hits, the cummulative resources gained far surpass what the Terran can achieve until minutes after saturation. It's only 3-4 workers prior to saturation by Terran (22-23 workers total) does Terran begin to catch up in total resources by about 220 minerals per mule. That's about 1.5 mules to bridge the gap in resources beyond the saturation point, or about 8.5 minutes into the game.
My main point to take away from this is that it's a complicated system and simply nerfing mules, on any level, would drastically affect Terran's ability to both defend and execute pushes that are vital points in Terran metagame. I feel that the only reasonable time to address the relationship would be for an expansion, when in depth testing and analysis can be done.
|
I think that one of the guys that posted before me saying that a 100 energy mule with 150 starting energy on a command center is on to something though that is a little drastic. May I propose a 75 energy mule with 100 energy starting on orbital commands. It gives you your first 2 mules at the same times but delays all following mules. So instead of the first push being powered out by 4-5 mules it will be based off 3-4 mules. This reduces the marine count by 6-12 on the first push and even more on the following pushes.
Edit: Just realized this weakens Dt's a bit since orbitals start with 2 scans in this scenario so scan cost and DT cost might have to be taken into consideration if this change was implemented.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
