|
Can we stop talking about nerfing things please? - 9:10 KST |
On August 23 2011 09:21 aksfjh wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 09:14 IVN wrote:On August 23 2011 08:59 Yaotzin wrote:On August 23 2011 08:54 VirgilSC2 wrote:
Well then maybe Terrans should find a way to counter Zerg without being reliant on purely marines. Nerfing MULEs is probably the one thing that should be done to bring every race's macro mechanic in line with eachother, in order to provide a more equal footing in high level play, as it is, Terrans gain a huge economic advantage for no reason other than picking Terran against Zerg or Protoss players. I can't tell you how many times I've heard a caster say "well X is ahead on Workers, but Y is getting more income because of MULEs"
They may well be imba at the point where making more workers isn't useful anymore. They aren't before that though, at least not noticeably, and most importantly they have very little bearing on the push this thread is about. This push happens when making more workers is still very good. MC lost game 1 despite having like 10 more workers the whole time. That's better than a mule. Ergo the issue ain't the mule. You are wrong. Look at this screen shot. It's from the 1st MC v Puma game on XNC. ![[image loading]](http://www.abload.de/img/mulesxrv7.jpg) Full saturation at 5:50. Push begins at 9. And I've counted. He has used additional 3 MULEs before the push. How much is that? 3 * 270 minerals? Equals 16 marines.Now imagine those 3 MULEs could only bring only a 1/2 or a 1/4 of minerals back, because the mineral line is already saturated and they have to wait on SCVs to finish mining. Suddenly the 111 push becomes easily holdable, assuming you scout it and you are not playing stupidly greedy. And now, suddenly Terran can't hold off a 4 gate, baneling bust, or even a 3 gate pressure expand. This mule nonsense is horrendously shortsighted and doesn't seem to take into account ANYTHING other than this stupid "1-1-1" timing.
I'm sorry, but it does take into account. When is the last time you saw a terran die to a 4gt? I cant seem to remember seeing that in like ages. Maybe its time that an all in from protoss is actually able to kill a terran if he isnt prepared.
|
On August 23 2011 09:11 Yaotzin wrote:
Again, the MULE is not the cause of the 1/1/1 strength. Protoss is ahead in probes by 4-5 (what a mule is worth) and on 2 base, then dies to this push. They have a BETTER economy and die. It is NOT the MULE. So please leave it out of the thread.
The Protoss can have low technology and superior economy by expanding, or equal technology and inferior economy by one-basing. That's the problem. You can't really detach it from the strength of the Mule, or from the relatively low cost of Terran tech, or from the general weakness of low-tech Protoss.
|
On August 23 2011 01:46 floor exercise wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 01:38 Arcanne wrote:On August 23 2011 01:36 Kiarip wrote:
cannons + phoenix hold this with big advantage. so just gotta find a solid way to play a stargate-nexus-forge build yeah because cannons are great against seige tanks Lift up the tanks with phoenix and carry them into cannon range
lol actually, though its obviously not going to be balanced, I must say it'd look pretty cool if phoenixes could still move after lifting a unit - and maybe drop tanks into the lava or something xD
|
On August 23 2011 09:28 VirgilSC2 wrote:
Perhaps an early expand isn't the way to counter 1/1/1.
If you can get away with expanding and having it pay for itself in time, you should expand. This is an obvious rule when talking about any push in the game. Given that you can FE and get away with it against a 1/1/1, you should of course FE.
According to many top Korean players, the Marine Count is the hardest thing to deal with in the 1/1/1 timing push,
Correct. The other units are support units which kill off/nullify Protoss usual response to mass marine.
by reducing the insane income advantage a Terran player has in a 1-base to 1-base income situation, the 1/1/1 build has less marines, and therefore becomes more manageable in a 1-base vs 1-base situation with proper preparation from the Protoss player.
And Terran becomes worse overall. That may or may not be a good thing, but it is not for this thread. You are proposing a general change for a specific problem. It would have ramifications far and beyond the scope of this thread.
The Protoss can have low technology and superior economy by expanding, or equal technology and inferior economy by one-basing. That's the problem. You can't really detach it from the strength of the Mule, or from the relatively low cost of Terran tech, or from the general weakness of low-tech Protoss.
If you expand, you will have a superior whatever-you-choose compared to a 1basing Protoss. People choose low tech because it's more likely to work, not because they're poor.
|
On August 23 2011 09:30 VirgilSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 09:28 Bagi wrote:On August 23 2011 09:22 VirgilSC2 wrote:On August 23 2011 09:18 Bagi wrote:On August 23 2011 09:13 VirgilSC2 wrote:On August 23 2011 09:08 Bagi wrote:On August 23 2011 09:01 H0i wrote:On August 23 2011 08:51 Bagi wrote:On August 23 2011 08:46 IVN wrote:On August 23 2011 08:40 Bagi wrote:
[quote]
Terran is not automatically ahead in equal base situations. You can't just say "hey, he's mining more minerals because of mules, he must be ahead". Neither is it reasonable to expect terrans to expand at the same rate as the other races.
Mules are the terrans macro boost, the "big thing" kinda like spawn larva or chronoboost/warpgates. All of them are imbalanced on paper, but it somehow balances out in the end. What you are suggesting is gutting the terrans primary macro boost because you think it could fix the 1-1-1 and everything else would be just *fine and dandy*. I really don't think you understand how big of an impact your proposed changes would have. So what? Why does Blizz have those fancy patch test servers anyway? They could just as easily say that a new patch is coming, say that its some random thing, like +5 sec to thank build time, and not even document the MULE change, all the while its being tested by the players on the test server. Then, they can analyze the data, and see if it helps, or if its too drastic, or what ever. Blizzard seems to only take baby steps with patches. A big nerf on a races mineral gathering would be huge at this point, and it would require more testing than the few players on test realm. It could be done with HOTS if Blizzard deems it necessary though. But a big nerf on zealot build time and warpgate time, core mechanics, were just done with big steps? KA removal, voidray speed removal were baby steps? Pylon range change, baby steps? Roach range change, baby steps? Right. Many of the things you list happened a long time ago though, Blizzard is getting more careful with changes - and the game seemed really balanced too until the Koreans rediscovered 1-1-1. Some of the biggest changes were done a while ago (VR nerf, roach buff etc.) yet they still only changed one unit at a time. This MULE idea changes how many minerals the terran player has from the moment he drops his first MULE to until the map is mined out. I think you can see the difference.I don't see the need for the sarcasm though. Did I upset you somehow? On August 23 2011 09:06 VirgilSC2 wrote:
The MULE "nerf" I'm suggesting actually just brings it in line with the macro mechanics of the other two races. The macro mechanics between each race are radically different. There is absolutely no logic to this statement. The proposed MULE idea actually only effects Terran income of dropping MULEs on already fully saturated mineral lines. Yes, the macro mechanics are radcially different, but just because three things that are DESIGNED TO BE BALANCED and simply work differently doesn't give one the excuse to break a limitation that neither other race can ever possibly break, at any point in the game. Can a terran warp in 50 supply in 5 seconds? Can a terran make 50 units from 6 unit producing structures? No, these are limitations that they cannot break and have to deal with. When you drop your first MULE your SCV count is usually at 12 (if you're mining gas), so its not like the MULE gets a free node from the start. It matters. Actually, MULEs and SCVs can mine from the same patch at the same time, so it does get a free patch as soon as you call it down. So how the hell does your change actually work if you allow MULEs and SCVs to mine at the same time? ....MULEs and SCVs can currently mine from the same patch, my proposed change means this CANNOT occur, if you're worried about SCVs stealing patches from MULEs, It can't be THAT complicated for Blizzard to implement a mechanic that gives the MULE priority over the SCV in a conflict situation.
...and thats what I was talking about in the first place, that in your hypothetical world MULEs would mine differently the second you called one down.
The whole change is so outlandish and unnecessary that discussing it feels like a waste of me time, so I'll just stop here.
|
On August 23 2011 09:25 VirgilSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 09:21 aksfjh wrote:On August 23 2011 09:14 IVN wrote:On August 23 2011 08:59 Yaotzin wrote:On August 23 2011 08:54 VirgilSC2 wrote:
Well then maybe Terrans should find a way to counter Zerg without being reliant on purely marines. Nerfing MULEs is probably the one thing that should be done to bring every race's macro mechanic in line with eachother, in order to provide a more equal footing in high level play, as it is, Terrans gain a huge economic advantage for no reason other than picking Terran against Zerg or Protoss players. I can't tell you how many times I've heard a caster say "well X is ahead on Workers, but Y is getting more income because of MULEs"
They may well be imba at the point where making more workers isn't useful anymore. They aren't before that though, at least not noticeably, and most importantly they have very little bearing on the push this thread is about. This push happens when making more workers is still very good. MC lost game 1 despite having like 10 more workers the whole time. That's better than a mule. Ergo the issue ain't the mule. You are wrong. Look at this screen shot. It's from the 1st MC v Puma game on XNC. Full saturation at 5:50. Push begins at 9. And I've counted. He has used additional 3 MULEs before the push. How much is that? 3 * 270 minerals? Equals 16 marines.Now imagine those 3 MULEs could only bring only a 1/2 or a 1/4 of minerals back, because the mineral line is already saturated and they have to wait on SCVs to finish mining. Suddenly the 111 push becomes easily holdable, assuming you scout it and you are not playing stupidly greedy. And now, suddenly Terran can't hold off a 4 gate, baneling bust, or even a 3 gate pressure expand. This mule nonsense is horrendously shortsighted and doesn't seem to take into account ANYTHING other than this stupid "1-1-1" timing. You're grabbing at straws. You're ASSUMING that Terran can't hold off a 4-gate, which hits at a point in the game right before, or right as the Terran player could reach Mineral Saturation on one-base, which means up until that point, your MULE is functioning just fine. You're ASSUMING that Terran can't hold a baneling bust, should they be down a few units, while in reality, if you scout the Baneling bust and reinforce your wall, you can hold a baneling bust just fine. You're ASSUMING that Terran can't hold a 3-gate pressure expand, see my argument about 4gate. You know what they say about what happens when you assume.
Yet you're also assuming that a nerf to mules would address the situation. The past 900 posts of this thread are nothing but assumptions. There is a very clear and understandable point that any change to the mule would have sweeping changes to the game, and your advocation of such either shows complete disregard for that fact or an outright dishonest interest to see Terran nerfed into the ground.
I'm tired of arguing with people like you who would fit in perfectly in the WoW arena forums spouting completely ridiculous solutions to simple problems. This entire community is so ****ing lopsided against Terran that discussing the finer points of the race and the intricacies of the mechanics falls on deaf ears as people clamour for the slamming of a single race. It's gotten to the point that only the super elite can succeed at it, but you guys won't stop until it's a 2 race game up until GSL Code S. Toodles.
|
I remember when this was really popular back like a year ago or something. It died out. Now it's back and it's as if people forgot what happened to it the last time.
Builds die out, the game changes without nerfs or buffs or anything. A month ago TvT was bio/tank, now it's mech all the way. Let the game grow and stop getting upset just because one of the best terrans beat one of the best protosses. It happens you know?
I know i'm terran so i must be biased, but i'll say this in any situation, even when it's terrans turn to lose. Stop having so short term memory and look at the big picture please. And so now we have a bunch of random people suggesting silly changes just because a build has been popular for like a month? Come on.
I also agree with what Tyler said earlier.
|
graviton beam should be 25 energy for light units, so mass phoenix can at least do something against marines...
|
On August 23 2011 09:33 Yaotzin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 09:28 VirgilSC2 wrote:
Perhaps an early expand isn't the way to counter 1/1/1.
If you can get away with expanding and having it pay for itself in time, you should expand. This is an obvious rule when talking about any push in the game. Given that you can FE and get away with it against a 1/1/1, you should of course FE. Show nested quote +
According to many top Korean players, the Marine Count is the hardest thing to deal with in the 1/1/1 timing push,
Correct. The other units are support units which kill off/nullify Protoss usual response to mass marine. Show nested quote +
by reducing the insane income advantage a Terran player has in a 1-base to 1-base income situation, the 1/1/1 build has less marines, and therefore becomes more manageable in a 1-base vs 1-base situation with proper preparation from the Protoss player.
And Terran becomes worse overall. That may or may not be a good thing, but it is not for this thread. You are proposing a general change for a specific problem. It would have ramifications far and beyond the scope of this thread.
The problem is, Protoss cannot safely FE against a Terran player intending to 1/1/1 Terran can scout a 1 Gate FE or a Nexus first, or a Forge FE well before committing to their 1/1/1 all-in, and then easily punish it.
|
On August 23 2011 09:31 IVN wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 09:21 aksfjh wrote:On August 23 2011 09:14 IVN wrote:On August 23 2011 08:59 Yaotzin wrote:On August 23 2011 08:54 VirgilSC2 wrote:
Well then maybe Terrans should find a way to counter Zerg without being reliant on purely marines. Nerfing MULEs is probably the one thing that should be done to bring every race's macro mechanic in line with eachother, in order to provide a more equal footing in high level play, as it is, Terrans gain a huge economic advantage for no reason other than picking Terran against Zerg or Protoss players. I can't tell you how many times I've heard a caster say "well X is ahead on Workers, but Y is getting more income because of MULEs"
They may well be imba at the point where making more workers isn't useful anymore. They aren't before that though, at least not noticeably, and most importantly they have very little bearing on the push this thread is about. This push happens when making more workers is still very good. MC lost game 1 despite having like 10 more workers the whole time. That's better than a mule. Ergo the issue ain't the mule. You are wrong. Look at this screen shot. It's from the 1st MC v Puma game on XNC. Full saturation at 5:50. Push begins at 9. And I've counted. He has used additional 3 MULEs before the push. How much is that? 3 * 270 minerals? Equals 16 marines.Now imagine those 3 MULEs could only bring only a 1/2 or a 1/4 of minerals back, because the mineral line is already saturated and they have to wait on SCVs to finish mining. Suddenly the 111 push becomes easily holdable, assuming you scout it and you are not playing stupidly greedy. And now, suddenly Terran can't hold off a 4 gate, baneling bust, or even a 3 gate pressure expand. This mule nonsense is horrendously shortsighted and doesn't seem to take into account ANYTHING other than this stupid "1-1-1" timing. I'm sorry, but it does take into account. When is the last time you saw a terran die to a 4gt? I cant seem to remember seeing that in like ages. Maybe its time that an all in from protoss is actually able to kill a terran if he isnt prepared.
I can cite many of my ladder matches where 5-gates, 4-gates, void allins, baneling busts, blink allins, and other allins that I may have forgotten have caused me a loss because I simply did not have the necessary amount of units. The difference is I analyze where I cut corners and played greedy. I do not make ridiculous balance suggestions because I want to be able to cut more corners.
|
On August 23 2011 09:35 rpgalon wrote:
graviton beam should be 25 energy for light units, so mass phoenix can at least do something against marines...
It would hurt hydras more than marines.
|
On August 23 2011 09:35 rpgalon wrote:
graviton beam should be 25 energy for light units, so mass phoenix can at least do something against marines...
hmm, different cost for graviton beams on different types of units.. that could be quite interesting I must say.
|
I know you guys keep talking at the other guy primarily, but flightless orbitals would be a much more focused change compared with mule rebalancing. It would have some ramifications to terran expo defence, and it might force them to go with PFs more often, but it would specifically discourage excessive 1basing.
|
On August 23 2011 09:35 Deadlyfish wrote:
I remember when this was really popular back like a year ago or something. It died out. Now it's back and it's as if people forgot what happened to it the last time.
Builds die out, the game changes without nerfs or buffs or anything. A month ago TvT was bio/tank, now it's mech all the way. Let the game grow and stop getting upset just because one of the best terrans beat one of the best protosses. It happens you know?
I know i'm terran so i must be biased, but i'll say this in any situation, even when it's terrans turn to lose. Stop having so short term memory and look at the big picture please. And so now we have a bunch of random people suggesting silly changes just because a build has been popular for like a month? Come on.
I also agree with what Tyler said earlier.
This was really popular a year ago and then it died out because of Stargate openers and 4gates being the proper response. Now that both of those were nerfed BEFORE Blizzard waited for the metagame to shift, this build is now extremely powerful due to the fact that the two counters used against it have been nerfed.
|
On August 23 2011 09:37 VirgilSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 09:33 Yaotzin wrote:On August 23 2011 09:28 VirgilSC2 wrote:
Perhaps an early expand isn't the way to counter 1/1/1.
If you can get away with expanding and having it pay for itself in time, you should expand. This is an obvious rule when talking about any push in the game. Given that you can FE and get away with it against a 1/1/1, you should of course FE.
According to many top Korean players, the Marine Count is the hardest thing to deal with in the 1/1/1 timing push,
Correct. The other units are support units which kill off/nullify Protoss usual response to mass marine.
by reducing the insane income advantage a Terran player has in a 1-base to 1-base income situation, the 1/1/1 build has less marines, and therefore becomes more manageable in a 1-base vs 1-base situation with proper preparation from the Protoss player.
And Terran becomes worse overall. That may or may not be a good thing, but it is not for this thread. You are proposing a general change for a specific problem. It would have ramifications far and beyond the scope of this thread. The problem is, Protoss cannot safely FE against a Terran player intending to 1/1/1 Terran can scout a 1 Gate FE or a Nexus first, or a Forge FE well before committing to their 1/1/1 all-in, and then easily punish it.
I'd like to see a 'lateral thinking' solution... bring back the Shield Battery.
|
On August 23 2011 09:37 VirgilSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 09:33 Yaotzin wrote:On August 23 2011 09:28 VirgilSC2 wrote:
Perhaps an early expand isn't the way to counter 1/1/1.
If you can get away with expanding and having it pay for itself in time, you should expand. This is an obvious rule when talking about any push in the game. Given that you can FE and get away with it against a 1/1/1, you should of course FE.
According to many top Korean players, the Marine Count is the hardest thing to deal with in the 1/1/1 timing push,
Correct. The other units are support units which kill off/nullify Protoss usual response to mass marine.
by reducing the insane income advantage a Terran player has in a 1-base to 1-base income situation, the 1/1/1 build has less marines, and therefore becomes more manageable in a 1-base vs 1-base situation with proper preparation from the Protoss player.
And Terran becomes worse overall. That may or may not be a good thing, but it is not for this thread. You are proposing a general change for a specific problem. It would have ramifications far and beyond the scope of this thread. The problem is, Protoss cannot safely FE against a Terran player intending to 1/1/1 Terran can scout a 1 Gate FE or a Nexus first, or a Forge FE well before committing to their 1/1/1 all-in, and then easily punish it.
The reason people try to FE so extremely fast seems lost on you though. It's not because they're trying to keep up with the almighty MULE or something. It's because the Terran composition works so much better than anything they can come up with, that they try to win by simply having an overwhelming economic advantage. The obvious issue in this situation is the unit composition and timing, not to...nerf Terran's economy?
|
On August 23 2011 09:35 Deadlyfish wrote:
I remember when this was really popular back like a year ago or something. It died out. Now it's back and it's as if people forgot what happened to it the last time.
Builds die out, the game changes without nerfs or buffs or anything. A month ago TvT was bio/tank, now it's mech all the way. Let the game grow and stop getting upset just because one of the best terrans beat one of the best protosses. It happens you know?
I know i'm terran so i must be biased, but i'll say this in any situation, even when it's terrans turn to lose. Stop having so short term memory and look at the big picture please. And so now we have a bunch of random people suggesting silly changes just because a build has been popular for like a month? Come on.
I also agree with what Tyler said earlier.
This build was around since beta. It was strong the whole time, and the only real counter was 4gt. But back then, 4gts were much stronger and came much earlier. Now, terrans can defend a 4gt even while executing this crazy ultra tech build.
|
I can't speak for the pro scene but as a gold terran.. I've been using the 1-1-1 all in against protoss on the ladder recently.. and i gotta say.. it works pretty darn well. If i ever lose its only cuz i didnt execute it properly.
|
On August 23 2011 09:37 Razuik wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 09:31 IVN wrote:On August 23 2011 09:21 aksfjh wrote:On August 23 2011 09:14 IVN wrote:On August 23 2011 08:59 Yaotzin wrote:On August 23 2011 08:54 VirgilSC2 wrote:
Well then maybe Terrans should find a way to counter Zerg without being reliant on purely marines. Nerfing MULEs is probably the one thing that should be done to bring every race's macro mechanic in line with eachother, in order to provide a more equal footing in high level play, as it is, Terrans gain a huge economic advantage for no reason other than picking Terran against Zerg or Protoss players. I can't tell you how many times I've heard a caster say "well X is ahead on Workers, but Y is getting more income because of MULEs"
They may well be imba at the point where making more workers isn't useful anymore. They aren't before that though, at least not noticeably, and most importantly they have very little bearing on the push this thread is about. This push happens when making more workers is still very good. MC lost game 1 despite having like 10 more workers the whole time. That's better than a mule. Ergo the issue ain't the mule. You are wrong. Look at this screen shot. It's from the 1st MC v Puma game on XNC. Full saturation at 5:50. Push begins at 9. And I've counted. He has used additional 3 MULEs before the push. How much is that? 3 * 270 minerals? Equals 16 marines.Now imagine those 3 MULEs could only bring only a 1/2 or a 1/4 of minerals back, because the mineral line is already saturated and they have to wait on SCVs to finish mining. Suddenly the 111 push becomes easily holdable, assuming you scout it and you are not playing stupidly greedy. And now, suddenly Terran can't hold off a 4 gate, baneling bust, or even a 3 gate pressure expand. This mule nonsense is horrendously shortsighted and doesn't seem to take into account ANYTHING other than this stupid "1-1-1" timing. I'm sorry, but it does take into account. When is the last time you saw a terran die to a 4gt? I cant seem to remember seeing that in like ages. Maybe its time that an all in from protoss is actually able to kill a terran if he isnt prepared. I can cite many of my ladder matches where 5-gates, 4-gates, void allins, baneling busts, blink allins, and other allins that I may have forgotten have caused me a loss because I simply did not have the necessary amount of units. The difference is I analyze where I cut corners and played greedy. I do not make ridiculous balance suggestions because I want to be able to cut more corners.
This isn't about your play. I'm going to just make an assumption which is something I hate to do, but I'm going to go ahead and say that your macro pales in comparison to that of a professional gamer. Therefore, citing examples from YOUR GAMES does absolutely no good in balance discussion.
|
On August 23 2011 09:35 Deadlyfish wrote:
I remember when this was really popular back like a year ago or something. It died out. Now it's back and it's as if people forgot what happened to it the last time.
Builds die out, the game changes without nerfs or buffs or anything. A month ago TvT was bio/tank, now it's mech all the way. Let the game grow and stop getting upset just because one of the best terrans beat one of the best protosses. It happens you know?
I know i'm terran so i must be biased, but i'll say this in any situation, even when it's terrans turn to lose. Stop having so short term memory and look at the big picture please. And so now we have a bunch of random people suggesting silly changes just because a build has been popular for like a month? Come on.
I also agree with what Tyler said earlier.
It became popular again because of huge nerfs to protoss. Especially the warpgate timing nerf made it impossible for protoss to punish or at least try to punish a terran who goes for this build, resulting in the only "counter" being expanding preemptively, which can be scouted before terran starts the 1-1-1. He can then do 2rax to destroy the protoss expand build or just continue the 1-1-1 and win anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
