|
This is clearly a very important issue that warrants everyone going full mad.
|
On October 07 2011 22:44 tnud wrote:Calm the **** down. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/uxz19.png) It'll be alright  EDIT: Should be noted that the map pool rules a lot of the balance in BW.
Thanks, this does put things in perspective.
|
You want to easily correct PvT with one single easy small change!
1.5 patch note:
Terran:
Burrow ability on supply depot has been removed!
Reason: It will now be possible for a toss with a stalker/zealot to scout a 1-1-1 and be sure 100% it is actually really a 1-1-1 because the units will managed to get inside. So, this way, the protoss will be able to prepare adequatly to the upcoming super strong early game push of the terran (that is basically what, build anything on 1base that is units in a combo of choice from your 3 different production facilities) and then push with half your scv to victory or to your loss. Now, with this nerf, protoss will be able to keep on par with the terran on economy/preparation since the terran wont be able to get easy wins with build order advantage (as it is almost impossible for toss since terrans have Scans, early pressure, banshees and medivacs that all come very rapidly to get a good scouting info on the toss).
|
It's funny how every time Khaydarin Amulet is brought up, Terrans pretend that Protoss have some form of gas MULE.
|
On October 12 2011 10:57 pure_protoss wrote:
You want to easily correct PvT with one single easy small change!
1.5 patch note:
Terran:
Burrow ability on supply depot has been removed!
Reason: It will now be possible for a toss with a stalker/zealot to scout a 1-1-1 and be sure 100% it is actually really a 1-1-1 because the units will managed to get inside. So, this way, the protoss will be able to prepare adequatly to the upcoming super strong early game push of the terran (that is basically what, build anything on 1base that is units in a combo of choice from your 3 different production facilities) and then push with half your scv to victory or to your loss. Now, with this nerf, protoss will be able to keep on par with the terran on economy/preparation since the terran wont be able to get easy wins with build order advantage (as it is almost impossible for toss since terrans have Scans, early pressure, banshees and medivacs that all come very rapidly to get a good scouting info on the toss).
??
How does this change things. Of they want to wall off they can still wall off and just lift off the barracks or salvage the Bunker
|
|
|
On October 12 2011 11:42 windsupernova wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 10:57 pure_protoss wrote:
You want to easily correct PvT with one single easy small change!
1.5 patch note:
Terran:
Burrow ability on supply depot has been removed!
Reason: It will now be possible for a toss with a stalker/zealot to scout a 1-1-1 and be sure 100% it is actually really a 1-1-1 because the units will managed to get inside. So, this way, the protoss will be able to prepare adequatly to the upcoming super strong early game push of the terran (that is basically what, build anything on 1base that is units in a combo of choice from your 3 different production facilities) and then push with half your scv to victory or to your loss. Now, with this nerf, protoss will be able to keep on par with the terran on economy/preparation since the terran wont be able to get easy wins with build order advantage (as it is almost impossible for toss since terrans have Scans, early pressure, banshees and medivacs that all come very rapidly to get a good scouting info on the toss). ?? How does this change things. Of they want to wall off they can still wall off and just lift off the barracks or salvage the Bunker
well walling off will be sifficantly harder to do. Also, bunkers are a set back in economy and macro, which is not the case of supply depot. Also, supply depot will now be in the middle of the terran base and be an obstacle to their units which would be a small nerf against drops 
|
On October 07 2011 22:54 MorroW wrote:just give it a month with the new patch and things will start look better no need to call game imbalanced now when patch just came and in the sc1 stats u can see it constantly changing even if maps and patch is the same. its just the players builds that are evolving
Was going to post this. We'll need actually closer to 3 months post-patch for the trends to balance back out. It was already pretty common knowledge that Terran was king and Zerg rolled Protoss post-1.3.
|
Anyone else noticed that zerg winrate went above toss after fungal DPS was buffed?
It's still pretty retarded though that terran has never been 2nd place in the win rate.
|
On October 12 2011 12:52 Conquerer67 wrote:
Anyone else noticed that zerg winrate went above toss after fungal DPS was buffed?
It's still pretty retarded though that terran has never been 2nd place in the win rate.
According to the graph, Terrans were second in June. Zerg had a 50.5% winrate, and Terran merely 50.4%. Worst period in Terran history, no doubt.
|
On October 12 2011 06:07 doko100 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 06:05 Dfgj wrote:On October 12 2011 05:53 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 04:11 freetgy wrote:On October 12 2011 04:01 Erasme wrote:
Didn't want to post at first, but really ? KA gave you only a defender advantage ? Don't be silly. And to the poster above, really ? Buffing the zealot would be the worst thing ever. yes it did, after you lose an engagement as protoss there is nothing that makes a terran or zerg think twice about a-moving your base, and there is nothing as protoss that you can do to stop them either. With warp-in storms that was different. On the opposite, Zerg and Terran always have defensive structures they can pull back to and rely on heavily. That's why Zerg and Terran can expand on everymap first, while Protoss only will be able to if they use Forge First and the map "allowes" to safely wall off. That is so wrong I don't even know what to say. If anything terran is the race who has the hardest time after losing an engagement. Yes you have bunkers, but you just lost all your units and it takes units 25 - 30 seconds to build. So after a big maxed out engagement, they are completely defenseless for at least 25 seconds even if they didn't salvage their bunkers. The implication of this is that Terran just starts building units when the battle is engaged in, or a round of units finished to join the battle as it began. The fair comparison is that Protoss just warped in a wave of units before the battle, and thus has to wait for cooldown rather than getting things instantly. You're also not taking into account things like how effective units are in varying group size. Why would that be the case? In what scenario do both players attack when they hit exactly 200 supply, that is so unrealistic, if you want to theorycraft at least don't come up with the 1 scenario out of 100 millions where protoss doesn't have an advantage. If the protoss really maxes out and then attacks before his gates are off cooldown he's absolutely retarded because he basically nullifies his own advantage of getting to produce units faster than his opponent after the fight is over.
You're assuming a scenario where battles occur after both players are maxed, which is exactly what you're telling me not to do - taking 1 scenario. The vast majority of battles do not take place in this situation. Waves of units are constantly being warped in/rallied based on build and cooldown times.
Again, you're still not considering how armies scale when you talk about recovering after an engagement.
|
On October 12 2011 06:37 doko100 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 06:27 Drowsy wrote:On October 12 2011 06:24 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 06:18 Drowsy wrote:On October 12 2011 06:11 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 06:08 sjschmidt93 wrote:On October 12 2011 06:04 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 05:59 Drowsy wrote:
Marines are too strong. Nerfing their damage output (in the form of attack speed) would solve pvt and zvt. I don't understand why marines would be a problem in PvT, I also think that they might be slightly too strong in TvZ (at pro level that is, below grandmaster nobody has good enough micro to make marines look imbalanced). I never felt like Marines were a good unit in PvT anyway, Marauders yes, but Marines in PvT? Storms and Collossus completely destroy marines. Also if you decrease the rate of fire what's terran bio gonna do against chargelots? Just auto-lose? Have you seen Puma play TvP (no not his 1-1-1s) That isn't evidence for imbalance though.Marines are easily countered by HTs and collossi in big numbers and stalkers in small numbers. Marines definitely aren't imbalanced in PvT and "puma's pvt" definitely doesn't count as evidence either. Easily countered by Hts and colossus lol. If toss makes it to the point where 6+ colossi with stalker support and a decent economy, he can usually win. Marines make it pretty damn difficult to reach this point because they are insanely cost efficient tier 1 units. And besides, we KNOW marines are imbalanced in zvt. It's kind of ridiculously obvious and has pretty much been that way since release. PVT is obviously terran favored, if they just nerfed marines to fix tvz it would be worth it and it would very likely alleviate pvt imbalance in the same blow. Well I heard forcefields are good and stalkers fare quite well against marines in small numbers aswell. Don't really see what your point is. Midgame you get collossi, early game you have forcefields and stalkers to counter big marine numbers. Or let me guess, we are assuming that the terran has dropped your mineral line with marines and killed all your probes so you are massively behind right now... or no he sniped the robo and you can't build collossi... are there any other worst case scenarios you can come up with so that marines can actually be overpowered in PvT? Just wondering, I can.... I could also come up with scenarios where zerglings might seem overpowered or sentries....."I have no ghosts - i have no burrow...imba imba". Completely pointless. You still haven't addressed zvt. Marines are clearly a problem there, and given the fact that terran is way ahead in pvt, marines being nerfed to fix only ZvT probably still wouldn't break pvt. Like I said, Marines might be imba in high level TvZ. I won't say they definitely are, because I'm not a fan of imba-whining, I think most people use statistics like the ones in this thread to justify their losses rather than look at their own gameplay and improve it. "Oh I play race x and he plays race y and race y has won GSL so therefore race y is imba and there is no way I can win"... seriously none of us play at the same level as top players do and in lower leagues terran (especially masters- platinum) terran is having a very hard time. I personally play in low-mid master league, so I don't know about you guys but pro-balance doesn't affect me at all and I'm sure it doesn't affect any of you guys either. Stop blaming imbalance for losses or switch races, simple. Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 06:36 Condor Hero wrote:On October 12 2011 06:30 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 06:25 Trusty wrote:On October 12 2011 05:53 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 04:11 freetgy wrote:On October 12 2011 04:01 Erasme wrote:
Didn't want to post at first, but really ? KA gave you only a defender advantage ? Don't be silly. And to the poster above, really ? Buffing the zealot would be the worst thing ever. yes it did, after you lose an engagement as protoss there is nothing that makes a terran or zerg think twice about a-moving your base, and there is nothing as protoss that you can do to stop them either. With warp-in storms that was different. On the opposite, Zerg and Terran always have defensive structures they can pull back to and rely on heavily. That's why Zerg and Terran can expand on everymap first, while Protoss only will be able to if they use Forge First and the map "allowes" to safely wall off. If protoss gets kaydarin back it would basically be an impossible lategame for both Z and T again. You kill the protoss army, no problemo, 5 warped in high templars with enough energy for storm are waiting for you... you kill all of them.... no problemo.... 5 warped in high templars with enough energy for storm are waiting for you.... you kill all of them... no problemo.... and so on. Are you playing in like diamond level? who the hell is going to stock 750 gas? Please exaggerate more. Really? Stop rushing every game and play maxed vs. maxed army and maybe you'll find out. Terrans have had it hardest since beta, we get it. Arguing with hypotheticals with people you don't know almost always gets ugly. We should just let the results speak for themselves: based on these statistics, T > P and T > Z. At pro level yes, casual level (everything below grandmaster) no. especially in masters-platinum terran is having the hardest time of all 3 races and I'm sure you are no pro, so does pro balance really affect you? give me an honest answer.
This makes so little sense that it is not even funny....especially at that level of play, it is is so hard for Z/P to scout, and so easy to get scouted...i am more often then not dying to some weired shit from T and not because of the actual game...
Also, when you get the advantage, at that level, zerg usually has to rely on starving T, because you can rarely brake him, unless food is like 2x.
|
On October 12 2011 14:40 Gotmog wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 06:37 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 06:27 Drowsy wrote:On October 12 2011 06:24 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 06:18 Drowsy wrote:On October 12 2011 06:11 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 06:08 sjschmidt93 wrote:On October 12 2011 06:04 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 05:59 Drowsy wrote:
Marines are too strong. Nerfing their damage output (in the form of attack speed) would solve pvt and zvt. I don't understand why marines would be a problem in PvT, I also think that they might be slightly too strong in TvZ (at pro level that is, below grandmaster nobody has good enough micro to make marines look imbalanced). I never felt like Marines were a good unit in PvT anyway, Marauders yes, but Marines in PvT? Storms and Collossus completely destroy marines. Also if you decrease the rate of fire what's terran bio gonna do against chargelots? Just auto-lose? Have you seen Puma play TvP (no not his 1-1-1s) That isn't evidence for imbalance though.Marines are easily countered by HTs and collossi in big numbers and stalkers in small numbers. Marines definitely aren't imbalanced in PvT and "puma's pvt" definitely doesn't count as evidence either. Easily countered by Hts and colossus lol. If toss makes it to the point where 6+ colossi with stalker support and a decent economy, he can usually win. Marines make it pretty damn difficult to reach this point because they are insanely cost efficient tier 1 units. And besides, we KNOW marines are imbalanced in zvt. It's kind of ridiculously obvious and has pretty much been that way since release. PVT is obviously terran favored, if they just nerfed marines to fix tvz it would be worth it and it would very likely alleviate pvt imbalance in the same blow. Well I heard forcefields are good and stalkers fare quite well against marines in small numbers aswell. Don't really see what your point is. Midgame you get collossi, early game you have forcefields and stalkers to counter big marine numbers. Or let me guess, we are assuming that the terran has dropped your mineral line with marines and killed all your probes so you are massively behind right now... or no he sniped the robo and you can't build collossi... are there any other worst case scenarios you can come up with so that marines can actually be overpowered in PvT? Just wondering, I can.... I could also come up with scenarios where zerglings might seem overpowered or sentries....."I have no ghosts - i have no burrow...imba imba". Completely pointless. You still haven't addressed zvt. Marines are clearly a problem there, and given the fact that terran is way ahead in pvt, marines being nerfed to fix only ZvT probably still wouldn't break pvt. Like I said, Marines might be imba in high level TvZ. I won't say they definitely are, because I'm not a fan of imba-whining, I think most people use statistics like the ones in this thread to justify their losses rather than look at their own gameplay and improve it. "Oh I play race x and he plays race y and race y has won GSL so therefore race y is imba and there is no way I can win"... seriously none of us play at the same level as top players do and in lower leagues terran (especially masters- platinum) terran is having a very hard time. I personally play in low-mid master league, so I don't know about you guys but pro-balance doesn't affect me at all and I'm sure it doesn't affect any of you guys either. Stop blaming imbalance for losses or switch races, simple. On October 12 2011 06:36 Condor Hero wrote:On October 12 2011 06:30 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 06:25 Trusty wrote:On October 12 2011 05:53 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 04:11 freetgy wrote:On October 12 2011 04:01 Erasme wrote:
Didn't want to post at first, but really ? KA gave you only a defender advantage ? Don't be silly. And to the poster above, really ? Buffing the zealot would be the worst thing ever. yes it did, after you lose an engagement as protoss there is nothing that makes a terran or zerg think twice about a-moving your base, and there is nothing as protoss that you can do to stop them either. With warp-in storms that was different. On the opposite, Zerg and Terran always have defensive structures they can pull back to and rely on heavily. That's why Zerg and Terran can expand on everymap first, while Protoss only will be able to if they use Forge First and the map "allowes" to safely wall off. If protoss gets kaydarin back it would basically be an impossible lategame for both Z and T again. You kill the protoss army, no problemo, 5 warped in high templars with enough energy for storm are waiting for you... you kill all of them.... no problemo.... 5 warped in high templars with enough energy for storm are waiting for you.... you kill all of them... no problemo.... and so on. Are you playing in like diamond level? who the hell is going to stock 750 gas? Please exaggerate more. Really? Stop rushing every game and play maxed vs. maxed army and maybe you'll find out. Terrans have had it hardest since beta, we get it. Arguing with hypotheticals with people you don't know almost always gets ugly. We should just let the results speak for themselves: based on these statistics, T > P and T > Z. At pro level yes, casual level (everything below grandmaster) no. especially in masters-platinum terran is having the hardest time of all 3 races and I'm sure you are no pro, so does pro balance really affect you? give me an honest answer. This makes so little sense that it is not even funny....especially at that level of play, it is is so hard for Z/P to scout, and so easy to get scouted...i am more often then not dying to some weired shit from T and not because of the actual game... Also, when you get the advantage, at that level, zerg usually has to rely on starving T, because you can rarely brake him, unless food is like 2x.
Also cause they're only having the hardest time due to the players' fault (bad macro/mechanics/execution, etc.), which is why balancing for us is kind of stupid IMO, because you'd be balancing to compensate for faulty mechanics, not cause anything is inherently bad/weak/broken.
edit- it's analogous to stress testing products as hard as you can, not just for normal use, because it's hard to balance/make the same product (game) for a certain skillset when it varies the most; for SC balancing at the highest level means that everything is theoretically balanced if everyone plays well; if winrates aren't balanced at lower leagues (assuming theoretical balance) then it's due to that set of players' not playing optimally, not cause the game needs to be changed.
|
On October 12 2011 06:15 doko100 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 06:10 Silidons wrote:On October 12 2011 05:53 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 04:11 freetgy wrote:On October 12 2011 04:01 Erasme wrote:
Didn't want to post at first, but really ? KA gave you only a defender advantage ? Don't be silly. And to the poster above, really ? Buffing the zealot would be the worst thing ever. yes it did, after you lose an engagement as protoss there is nothing that makes a terran or zerg think twice about a-moving your base, and there is nothing as protoss that you can do to stop them either. With warp-in storms that was different. On the opposite, Zerg and Terran always have defensive structures they can pull back to and rely on heavily. That's why Zerg and Terran can expand on everymap first, while Protoss only will be able to if they use Forge First and the map "allowes" to safely wall off. That is so wrong I don't even know what to say. If anything terran is the race who has the hardest time after losing an engagement. Yes you have bunkers, but you just lost all your units and it takes units 25 - 30 seconds to build. So after a big maxed out engagement, they are completely defenseless for at least 25 seconds even if they didn't salvage their bunkers. Protoss however can warp in units 5 seconds after the fight is over. Then you have a 25 second cooldown on the warpgate and need to wait another 5 seconds for your warp in. All in all protoss gets almost twice the amount of units after a maxed battle compared to terran in almost the exact same time. If protoss gets kaydarin back it would basically be an impossible lategame for both Z and T again. You kill the protoss army, no problemo, 5 warped in high templars with enough energy for storm are waiting for you... you kill all of them.... no problemo.... 5 warped in high templars with enough energy for storm are waiting for you.... you kill all of them... no problemo.... and so on. it wasn't defender's advantage, it was defender's advantage based on a ridiculously imbalanced mechanic. Yes protoss didn't dominate every matchup back then, but the main reason for that was that timing attacks (mainly terran) were about 10x stronger compared to now, stim got nerfed (I'm not even sure by how much,like a minute?) and protoss players lost alot of games early on because they were too bad to forcefield properly or simply defend the pushes. The game however has evolved now, back then it was mainly rush games in every matchup, now we are at a point in SC2 where we have more macro games than rush games almost. If you give protoss kaydarin back the race is gonna be broken again lategame. might aswell just give protoss an auto-win button after the 20 minute mark or so. How can you even say such a thing? First of all, protoss units are known to be not as good as their zerg/terran counterparts when it comes to efficiency based upon cost when speaking with gateway units. Secondly, "If protoss gets kaydarin back it would basically be an impossible lategame for both Z and T again" yet protoss has never ever gone above 52% win ratio...what on earth are you basing your assumption on? Players like idrA? Did you read the graph? Please post something that is actually relevant to the thread and not just shit that makes no sense whatsoever. Honest question. Are you stupid? As I explained, back then the metagame was based on early rushes and short games, lategame only affected a small portion of all games. Now the game has evolved and more and more games get into lategame. 52% blabla.... look at the actual gameplay... being able to convert ressources into instant damage is ridiculously overpowered... you aren't actually paying for an ht, you are paying for 80dmg when warping in a high templar. If you your only argument is "you are wrong because I say so and you make no sense derp" then I feel bad for you, because you are wasting my time. And there is no reason to cuss at people because they disagree with you, grow up. Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 06:15 pPingu wrote:That is so wrong I don't even know what to say. If anything terran is the race who has the hardest time after losing an engagement. Yes you have bunkers, but you just lost all your units and it takes units 25 - 30 seconds to build. So after a big maxed out engagement, they are completely defenseless for at least 25 seconds even if they didn't salvage their bunkers. This would only be true if the terransloses everything in the engagement and the protoss keeps the majority of his army. But terran units with help of stim are faster than protoss units, so you always have the capacity to run away of a bad engagement or with some surivors (if the protoss forcefields your army, then you should have ghosts or sniped the sentries in the battle) and retreat to bunkers and pf, which give you the time to rebuild your army. That again is assuming that the terran wins the engagement and hits every emp perfectly.But we are discussing the situation AFTER a battle, it doesn't matter how the army died, the point is that if the army is dead, terran has the hardest time to reinforce their army quickly enough. what happened before that is irrelevant, because it doesn't change this aspect of the game.
So you're basing your entire argument on a fabrication. That's a brilliant way to put your way across, and you even begin your post questioning my intelligence. I'm sorry but I thought you were supposed to base assumptions on actual data rather than fabrications (me showing how protoss never went above 52% w:l, and you making up "oh well games never went over 12 mins back then lolol".
Great to see another zerg player though, nice to meet you.
|
Seeing how the game has evolved, I think that Blizzard could reverse the warpgate nerf and bring back amulet, without touching any other race, and that would fix a lot of things.
|
On October 07 2011 22:44 tnud wrote:Calm the **** down. It'll be alright EDIT: Should be noted that the map pool rules a lot of the balance in BW.
THANK YOU SO MUCH ! Protoss complaining about being down for 2 months or so is ridiculous.
|
On October 12 2011 17:38 T0fuuu wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2011 22:44 tnud wrote:Calm the **** down. It'll be alright EDIT: Should be noted that the map pool rules a lot of the balance in BW. THANK YOU SO MUCH ! Protoss complaining about being down for 2 months or so is ridiculous.
*ahem*
Look at may, and watch the trend from there.
|
On October 12 2011 15:13 Silidons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 06:15 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 06:10 Silidons wrote:On October 12 2011 05:53 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 04:11 freetgy wrote:On October 12 2011 04:01 Erasme wrote:
Didn't want to post at first, but really ? KA gave you only a defender advantage ? Don't be silly. And to the poster above, really ? Buffing the zealot would be the worst thing ever. yes it did, after you lose an engagement as protoss there is nothing that makes a terran or zerg think twice about a-moving your base, and there is nothing as protoss that you can do to stop them either. With warp-in storms that was different. On the opposite, Zerg and Terran always have defensive structures they can pull back to and rely on heavily. That's why Zerg and Terran can expand on everymap first, while Protoss only will be able to if they use Forge First and the map "allowes" to safely wall off. That is so wrong I don't even know what to say. If anything terran is the race who has the hardest time after losing an engagement. Yes you have bunkers, but you just lost all your units and it takes units 25 - 30 seconds to build. So after a big maxed out engagement, they are completely defenseless for at least 25 seconds even if they didn't salvage their bunkers. Protoss however can warp in units 5 seconds after the fight is over. Then you have a 25 second cooldown on the warpgate and need to wait another 5 seconds for your warp in. All in all protoss gets almost twice the amount of units after a maxed battle compared to terran in almost the exact same time. If protoss gets kaydarin back it would basically be an impossible lategame for both Z and T again. You kill the protoss army, no problemo, 5 warped in high templars with enough energy for storm are waiting for you... you kill all of them.... no problemo.... 5 warped in high templars with enough energy for storm are waiting for you.... you kill all of them... no problemo.... and so on. it wasn't defender's advantage, it was defender's advantage based on a ridiculously imbalanced mechanic. Yes protoss didn't dominate every matchup back then, but the main reason for that was that timing attacks (mainly terran) were about 10x stronger compared to now, stim got nerfed (I'm not even sure by how much,like a minute?) and protoss players lost alot of games early on because they were too bad to forcefield properly or simply defend the pushes. The game however has evolved now, back then it was mainly rush games in every matchup, now we are at a point in SC2 where we have more macro games than rush games almost. If you give protoss kaydarin back the race is gonna be broken again lategame. might aswell just give protoss an auto-win button after the 20 minute mark or so. How can you even say such a thing? First of all, protoss units are known to be not as good as their zerg/terran counterparts when it comes to efficiency based upon cost when speaking with gateway units. Secondly, "If protoss gets kaydarin back it would basically be an impossible lategame for both Z and T again" yet protoss has never ever gone above 52% win ratio...what on earth are you basing your assumption on? Players like idrA? Did you read the graph? Please post something that is actually relevant to the thread and not just shit that makes no sense whatsoever. Honest question. Are you stupid? As I explained, back then the metagame was based on early rushes and short games, lategame only affected a small portion of all games. Now the game has evolved and more and more games get into lategame. 52% blabla.... look at the actual gameplay... being able to convert ressources into instant damage is ridiculously overpowered... you aren't actually paying for an ht, you are paying for 80dmg when warping in a high templar. If you your only argument is "you are wrong because I say so and you make no sense derp" then I feel bad for you, because you are wasting my time. And there is no reason to cuss at people because they disagree with you, grow up. On October 12 2011 06:15 pPingu wrote:That is so wrong I don't even know what to say. If anything terran is the race who has the hardest time after losing an engagement. Yes you have bunkers, but you just lost all your units and it takes units 25 - 30 seconds to build. So after a big maxed out engagement, they are completely defenseless for at least 25 seconds even if they didn't salvage their bunkers. This would only be true if the terransloses everything in the engagement and the protoss keeps the majority of his army. But terran units with help of stim are faster than protoss units, so you always have the capacity to run away of a bad engagement or with some surivors (if the protoss forcefields your army, then you should have ghosts or sniped the sentries in the battle) and retreat to bunkers and pf, which give you the time to rebuild your army. That again is assuming that the terran wins the engagement and hits every emp perfectly.But we are discussing the situation AFTER a battle, it doesn't matter how the army died, the point is that if the army is dead, terran has the hardest time to reinforce their army quickly enough. what happened before that is irrelevant, because it doesn't change this aspect of the game. So you're basing your entire argument on a fabrication. That's a brilliant way to put your way across, and you even begin your post questioning my intelligence. I'm sorry but I thought you were supposed to base assumptions on actual data rather than fabrications (me showing how protoss never went above 52% w:l, and you making up "oh well games never went over 12 mins back then lolol". Great to see another zerg player though, nice to meet you.
What part of "if both players lose their entire maxed armies, it takes terran the longest to get their first set of defensive units out" don't you understand?
yet again your argument is :" you are wrong because I say so".I won't waste more time arguing with 12 year olds from now on. If you don't understand the premise don't even bother to pretend that you understand the conclusion.
On October 12 2011 14:40 Gotmog wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 06:37 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 06:27 Drowsy wrote:On October 12 2011 06:24 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 06:18 Drowsy wrote:On October 12 2011 06:11 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 06:08 sjschmidt93 wrote:On October 12 2011 06:04 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 05:59 Drowsy wrote:
Marines are too strong. Nerfing their damage output (in the form of attack speed) would solve pvt and zvt. I don't understand why marines would be a problem in PvT, I also think that they might be slightly too strong in TvZ (at pro level that is, below grandmaster nobody has good enough micro to make marines look imbalanced). I never felt like Marines were a good unit in PvT anyway, Marauders yes, but Marines in PvT? Storms and Collossus completely destroy marines. Also if you decrease the rate of fire what's terran bio gonna do against chargelots? Just auto-lose? Have you seen Puma play TvP (no not his 1-1-1s) That isn't evidence for imbalance though.Marines are easily countered by HTs and collossi in big numbers and stalkers in small numbers. Marines definitely aren't imbalanced in PvT and "puma's pvt" definitely doesn't count as evidence either. Easily countered by Hts and colossus lol. If toss makes it to the point where 6+ colossi with stalker support and a decent economy, he can usually win. Marines make it pretty damn difficult to reach this point because they are insanely cost efficient tier 1 units. And besides, we KNOW marines are imbalanced in zvt. It's kind of ridiculously obvious and has pretty much been that way since release. PVT is obviously terran favored, if they just nerfed marines to fix tvz it would be worth it and it would very likely alleviate pvt imbalance in the same blow. Well I heard forcefields are good and stalkers fare quite well against marines in small numbers aswell. Don't really see what your point is. Midgame you get collossi, early game you have forcefields and stalkers to counter big marine numbers. Or let me guess, we are assuming that the terran has dropped your mineral line with marines and killed all your probes so you are massively behind right now... or no he sniped the robo and you can't build collossi... are there any other worst case scenarios you can come up with so that marines can actually be overpowered in PvT? Just wondering, I can.... I could also come up with scenarios where zerglings might seem overpowered or sentries....."I have no ghosts - i have no burrow...imba imba". Completely pointless. You still haven't addressed zvt. Marines are clearly a problem there, and given the fact that terran is way ahead in pvt, marines being nerfed to fix only ZvT probably still wouldn't break pvt. Like I said, Marines might be imba in high level TvZ. I won't say they definitely are, because I'm not a fan of imba-whining, I think most people use statistics like the ones in this thread to justify their losses rather than look at their own gameplay and improve it. "Oh I play race x and he plays race y and race y has won GSL so therefore race y is imba and there is no way I can win"... seriously none of us play at the same level as top players do and in lower leagues terran (especially masters- platinum) terran is having a very hard time. I personally play in low-mid master league, so I don't know about you guys but pro-balance doesn't affect me at all and I'm sure it doesn't affect any of you guys either. Stop blaming imbalance for losses or switch races, simple. On October 12 2011 06:36 Condor Hero wrote:On October 12 2011 06:30 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 06:25 Trusty wrote:On October 12 2011 05:53 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 04:11 freetgy wrote:On October 12 2011 04:01 Erasme wrote:
Didn't want to post at first, but really ? KA gave you only a defender advantage ? Don't be silly. And to the poster above, really ? Buffing the zealot would be the worst thing ever. yes it did, after you lose an engagement as protoss there is nothing that makes a terran or zerg think twice about a-moving your base, and there is nothing as protoss that you can do to stop them either. With warp-in storms that was different. On the opposite, Zerg and Terran always have defensive structures they can pull back to and rely on heavily. That's why Zerg and Terran can expand on everymap first, while Protoss only will be able to if they use Forge First and the map "allowes" to safely wall off. If protoss gets kaydarin back it would basically be an impossible lategame for both Z and T again. You kill the protoss army, no problemo, 5 warped in high templars with enough energy for storm are waiting for you... you kill all of them.... no problemo.... 5 warped in high templars with enough energy for storm are waiting for you.... you kill all of them... no problemo.... and so on. Are you playing in like diamond level? who the hell is going to stock 750 gas? Please exaggerate more. Really? Stop rushing every game and play maxed vs. maxed army and maybe you'll find out. Terrans have had it hardest since beta, we get it. Arguing with hypotheticals with people you don't know almost always gets ugly. We should just let the results speak for themselves: based on these statistics, T > P and T > Z. At pro level yes, casual level (everything below grandmaster) no. especially in masters-platinum terran is having the hardest time of all 3 races and I'm sure you are no pro, so does pro balance really affect you? give me an honest answer. This makes so little sense that it is not even funny....especially at that level of play, it is is so hard for Z/P to scout, and so easy to get scouted...i am more often then not dying to some weired shit from T and not because of the actual game... Also, when you get the advantage, at that level, zerg usually has to rely on starving T, because you can rarely brake him, unless food is like 2x.
Funnily enough, what I said is actually proven by global statistics and not a set of 900 more or less randomly chosen games.
|
On October 12 2011 17:53 doko100 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 15:13 Silidons wrote:On October 12 2011 06:15 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 06:10 Silidons wrote:On October 12 2011 05:53 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 04:11 freetgy wrote:On October 12 2011 04:01 Erasme wrote:
Didn't want to post at first, but really ? KA gave you only a defender advantage ? Don't be silly. And to the poster above, really ? Buffing the zealot would be the worst thing ever. yes it did, after you lose an engagement as protoss there is nothing that makes a terran or zerg think twice about a-moving your base, and there is nothing as protoss that you can do to stop them either. With warp-in storms that was different. On the opposite, Zerg and Terran always have defensive structures they can pull back to and rely on heavily. That's why Zerg and Terran can expand on everymap first, while Protoss only will be able to if they use Forge First and the map "allowes" to safely wall off. That is so wrong I don't even know what to say. If anything terran is the race who has the hardest time after losing an engagement. Yes you have bunkers, but you just lost all your units and it takes units 25 - 30 seconds to build. So after a big maxed out engagement, they are completely defenseless for at least 25 seconds even if they didn't salvage their bunkers. Protoss however can warp in units 5 seconds after the fight is over. Then you have a 25 second cooldown on the warpgate and need to wait another 5 seconds for your warp in. All in all protoss gets almost twice the amount of units after a maxed battle compared to terran in almost the exact same time. If protoss gets kaydarin back it would basically be an impossible lategame for both Z and T again. You kill the protoss army, no problemo, 5 warped in high templars with enough energy for storm are waiting for you... you kill all of them.... no problemo.... 5 warped in high templars with enough energy for storm are waiting for you.... you kill all of them... no problemo.... and so on. it wasn't defender's advantage, it was defender's advantage based on a ridiculously imbalanced mechanic. Yes protoss didn't dominate every matchup back then, but the main reason for that was that timing attacks (mainly terran) were about 10x stronger compared to now, stim got nerfed (I'm not even sure by how much,like a minute?) and protoss players lost alot of games early on because they were too bad to forcefield properly or simply defend the pushes. The game however has evolved now, back then it was mainly rush games in every matchup, now we are at a point in SC2 where we have more macro games than rush games almost. If you give protoss kaydarin back the race is gonna be broken again lategame. might aswell just give protoss an auto-win button after the 20 minute mark or so. How can you even say such a thing? First of all, protoss units are known to be not as good as their zerg/terran counterparts when it comes to efficiency based upon cost when speaking with gateway units. Secondly, "If protoss gets kaydarin back it would basically be an impossible lategame for both Z and T again" yet protoss has never ever gone above 52% win ratio...what on earth are you basing your assumption on? Players like idrA? Did you read the graph? Please post something that is actually relevant to the thread and not just shit that makes no sense whatsoever. Honest question. Are you stupid? As I explained, back then the metagame was based on early rushes and short games, lategame only affected a small portion of all games. Now the game has evolved and more and more games get into lategame. 52% blabla.... look at the actual gameplay... being able to convert ressources into instant damage is ridiculously overpowered... you aren't actually paying for an ht, you are paying for 80dmg when warping in a high templar. If you your only argument is "you are wrong because I say so and you make no sense derp" then I feel bad for you, because you are wasting my time. And there is no reason to cuss at people because they disagree with you, grow up. On October 12 2011 06:15 pPingu wrote:That is so wrong I don't even know what to say. If anything terran is the race who has the hardest time after losing an engagement. Yes you have bunkers, but you just lost all your units and it takes units 25 - 30 seconds to build. So after a big maxed out engagement, they are completely defenseless for at least 25 seconds even if they didn't salvage their bunkers. This would only be true if the terransloses everything in the engagement and the protoss keeps the majority of his army. But terran units with help of stim are faster than protoss units, so you always have the capacity to run away of a bad engagement or with some surivors (if the protoss forcefields your army, then you should have ghosts or sniped the sentries in the battle) and retreat to bunkers and pf, which give you the time to rebuild your army. That again is assuming that the terran wins the engagement and hits every emp perfectly.But we are discussing the situation AFTER a battle, it doesn't matter how the army died, the point is that if the army is dead, terran has the hardest time to reinforce their army quickly enough. what happened before that is irrelevant, because it doesn't change this aspect of the game. So you're basing your entire argument on a fabrication. That's a brilliant way to put your way across, and you even begin your post questioning my intelligence. I'm sorry but I thought you were supposed to base assumptions on actual data rather than fabrications (me showing how protoss never went above 52% w:l, and you making up "oh well games never went over 12 mins back then lolol". Great to see another zerg player though, nice to meet you. What part of "if both players lose their entire maxed armies, it takes terran the longest to get their first set of defensive units out" don't you understand? yet again your argument is :" you are wrong because I say so".I won't waste more time arguing with 12 year olds from now on. If you don't understand the premise don't even bother to pretend that you understand the conclusion. Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 14:40 Gotmog wrote:On October 12 2011 06:37 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 06:27 Drowsy wrote:On October 12 2011 06:24 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 06:18 Drowsy wrote:On October 12 2011 06:11 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 06:08 sjschmidt93 wrote:On October 12 2011 06:04 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 05:59 Drowsy wrote:
Marines are too strong. Nerfing their damage output (in the form of attack speed) would solve pvt and zvt. I don't understand why marines would be a problem in PvT, I also think that they might be slightly too strong in TvZ (at pro level that is, below grandmaster nobody has good enough micro to make marines look imbalanced). I never felt like Marines were a good unit in PvT anyway, Marauders yes, but Marines in PvT? Storms and Collossus completely destroy marines. Also if you decrease the rate of fire what's terran bio gonna do against chargelots? Just auto-lose? Have you seen Puma play TvP (no not his 1-1-1s) That isn't evidence for imbalance though.Marines are easily countered by HTs and collossi in big numbers and stalkers in small numbers. Marines definitely aren't imbalanced in PvT and "puma's pvt" definitely doesn't count as evidence either. Easily countered by Hts and colossus lol. If toss makes it to the point where 6+ colossi with stalker support and a decent economy, he can usually win. Marines make it pretty damn difficult to reach this point because they are insanely cost efficient tier 1 units. And besides, we KNOW marines are imbalanced in zvt. It's kind of ridiculously obvious and has pretty much been that way since release. PVT is obviously terran favored, if they just nerfed marines to fix tvz it would be worth it and it would very likely alleviate pvt imbalance in the same blow. Well I heard forcefields are good and stalkers fare quite well against marines in small numbers aswell. Don't really see what your point is. Midgame you get collossi, early game you have forcefields and stalkers to counter big marine numbers. Or let me guess, we are assuming that the terran has dropped your mineral line with marines and killed all your probes so you are massively behind right now... or no he sniped the robo and you can't build collossi... are there any other worst case scenarios you can come up with so that marines can actually be overpowered in PvT? Just wondering, I can.... I could also come up with scenarios where zerglings might seem overpowered or sentries....."I have no ghosts - i have no burrow...imba imba". Completely pointless. You still haven't addressed zvt. Marines are clearly a problem there, and given the fact that terran is way ahead in pvt, marines being nerfed to fix only ZvT probably still wouldn't break pvt. Like I said, Marines might be imba in high level TvZ. I won't say they definitely are, because I'm not a fan of imba-whining, I think most people use statistics like the ones in this thread to justify their losses rather than look at their own gameplay and improve it. "Oh I play race x and he plays race y and race y has won GSL so therefore race y is imba and there is no way I can win"... seriously none of us play at the same level as top players do and in lower leagues terran (especially masters- platinum) terran is having a very hard time. I personally play in low-mid master league, so I don't know about you guys but pro-balance doesn't affect me at all and I'm sure it doesn't affect any of you guys either. Stop blaming imbalance for losses or switch races, simple. On October 12 2011 06:36 Condor Hero wrote:On October 12 2011 06:30 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 06:25 Trusty wrote:On October 12 2011 05:53 doko100 wrote:On October 12 2011 04:11 freetgy wrote:On October 12 2011 04:01 Erasme wrote:
Didn't want to post at first, but really ? KA gave you only a defender advantage ? Don't be silly. And to the poster above, really ? Buffing the zealot would be the worst thing ever. yes it did, after you lose an engagement as protoss there is nothing that makes a terran or zerg think twice about a-moving your base, and there is nothing as protoss that you can do to stop them either. With warp-in storms that was different. On the opposite, Zerg and Terran always have defensive structures they can pull back to and rely on heavily. That's why Zerg and Terran can expand on everymap first, while Protoss only will be able to if they use Forge First and the map "allowes" to safely wall off. If protoss gets kaydarin back it would basically be an impossible lategame for both Z and T again. You kill the protoss army, no problemo, 5 warped in high templars with enough energy for storm are waiting for you... you kill all of them.... no problemo.... 5 warped in high templars with enough energy for storm are waiting for you.... you kill all of them... no problemo.... and so on. Are you playing in like diamond level? who the hell is going to stock 750 gas? Please exaggerate more. Really? Stop rushing every game and play maxed vs. maxed army and maybe you'll find out. Terrans have had it hardest since beta, we get it. Arguing with hypotheticals with people you don't know almost always gets ugly. We should just let the results speak for themselves: based on these statistics, T > P and T > Z. At pro level yes, casual level (everything below grandmaster) no. especially in masters-platinum terran is having the hardest time of all 3 races and I'm sure you are no pro, so does pro balance really affect you? give me an honest answer. This makes so little sense that it is not even funny....especially at that level of play, it is is so hard for Z/P to scout, and so easy to get scouted...i am more often then not dying to some weired shit from T and not because of the actual game... Also, when you get the advantage, at that level, zerg usually has to rely on starving T, because you can rarely brake him, unless food is like 2x. Funnily enough, what I said is actually proven by global statistics and not a set of 900 more or less randomly chosen games.
Sorta not really. You speak almost as if when a maxed Terran engages, he loses his entire army -instantly- and only begins reproducing as the protoss marches to his front door, which is BS. Terran bio production on a decent economy is insane.
The engagements can be fairly drawn out unless you actually just stand still and let a protoss throw zealots at you while shredding your ball apart with full impact storms and colossus shots. Assuming you're kiting and actually producing, you'll have reinforcements waiting at home. If you actually traded horribly and didn't kill all of the colossus/HT, well, you're probably dead on even economies. The protoss will only be reinforcing with more gateway units which bio tears apart.
The protoss is only going to be warping in gateway units. If the colossus/HT die, well, GL to the protoss when the Terran comes marching along. I don't really care to entertain the protoss is UP vs terran argument, but it's ridiculous to suggest Terran actually doesn't produce units throughout a properly micro'ed, high level engagement unless he was absolutely smashed and lost; in which case, the issue certainly isn't the nature of terran production vs protoss production.
|
If you've ever played on the KR server at masters+ level you will understand why people say Protoss right now is UP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
