|
On November 05 2011 02:21 mlspmatt wrote:
KA was imbalanced, that's why it was removed. KA with warp gates allowed a HT to be warped almost anywhere on the map with instant sci storm. In contrast, ghosts take 45 second to train, then they walk to where they need to go so reinforcing a battle in the middle of the map or getting ghosts to counter Templar was impossible.
If one race has an ability to do something, that the other race is simply incapable of dealing with regardless of skill, That's the definition of imbalanced. Regardless of how skilled a player is, it is not possible to train a ghost, and transport that ghost to the battle field in time to counter a warped in HT with KA. Its simple math. That's why the removal was necessary - and a good change.
This is also poor logic. You are taking one unit as a counter to HT and then saying that because that unit does not work as well as the other unit, then HT must be OP. That is not the case. Perhaps bio play is not the optimal strategy against high templar play. Perhaps mech play in TvP, although harder to pull off, might be the optimal strategy, in which case it would be difficult to storm sieged tanks with vikings protecting form warp prism high templar.
I am getting a little annoyed here with everyone trying to prove it was balanced or imbalanced. You cannot prove that. You can't. Seeing as the races are so different, with so many different strengths and weaknesses, proving balance is ridiculously difficult.
Instead of talking about whether it was balanced or not, since I am sure there is a way to keep it in the game and make it balanced, why don't we discuss whether or not it was an interesting mechanic? Someone earlier mentioned that it was boring and less skillful to warp in instant damage like the high templar is. One possible result of KA is that Zergling run bys would be much more difficult to achieve since storm decimates zerglings. Is this a good thing or a bad thing?
Personally, I thought KA was more likely to allow Protoss to get a 4th or 5th base, and I like longer macro games so this appealed to me. What are some other negatives and positives of the mechanic that have nothing to do with balance?
|
On November 05 2011 01:45 SupLilSon wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2011 01:40 Logros wrote:On November 05 2011 01:18 MarcL wrote:
I would say the KA was OP and u cant compare storm with EMP just for the one reason u can kill units with a storm but u can get off 1 billion emps on the protoss army and no unit will die ... If you EMP their entire army it will die pretty damn quick. Just look at any high level TvP. 2 ghosts by themselves will never kill 50+ supply of protoss deathball. 2 HT w/ KA will kill 50+ supply of MMM. That is the point he is making. KA was a "EASY" button. Protoss could be down 200-70 food and still be holding off subsequent attacks just purely by defending a ramp with KA HT.
Only if you're bad. A few storms shouldn't kill anything if you can micro at all. The problem is when they have so many storms that they blanket storms your army with and you can't escape from it.
I don't think they should have the KA to be honest. It was too strong and had too many uses. If anything to help Protoss, just nerf EMP.
|
On November 05 2011 02:21 flowSthead wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2011 02:14 superstartran wrote:On November 05 2011 02:06 flowSthead wrote:On November 05 2011 01:59 superstartran wrote:On November 05 2011 01:53 Kovaz wrote:
A couple of reasons that I feel KA is good for the game:
1) HT are more exciting than colossi for both players. I would much rather watch an intense micro-battle between ghosts and HTs than watch some colossi and vikings a-move into each other.
2) I feel that the biggest problem with PvT design-wise is that bio armies are too strong and too adaptable for how mobile they are. If KA was still in the game, pure bio armies would just get rolled, rather than just having to add some ghosts and keep on going MMM. I really really really want to see HT armies just win straight up fights against bio, so that terrans can then have a choice between bio (extremely mobile but loses straight-up engagement) and mech (powerful but immobile). TvT and TvZ are arguably the best 2 matchups because of that choice, but bio is >>>>> mech in PvT. The reason is that you can't just throw a few ghosts or vikings into your bio-ball to deal with tanks or banelings. You have to completely change your army composition.
However, I think KA warp-ins are arguably too strong. What I would like to see is the option to either
1) warp in a templar with 50 energy (same cost/cooldown as now)
2) warp in a templar with 75 energy (make it cost more and have a longer cooldown) KA amulet was never overpowered. Period. Statistics prove that fact. Protoss never was above Terran by more than 2% in tournament play, and the second it was removed, has never come close to going back to 50% except during the month of June 2011 which is more of a statistical anomaly more than anything. Anyone coming in here trying to state otherwise is carrying some serious bias. All KA merely did was not allow Terran to constantly drop/swarm the Protoss player to death, and forced him to actually be cost effective in his trades rather than just suicide units constantly at the Protoss player (which is what exactly is occurring right now). As much as I want it back in the game too, statistics don't prove that. Whether or not Protoss was doing well has nothing to do with how OP KA is because people were not playing optimally back then, and because there have been other changes to the game since then. The fact that since then ghosts have become much more popular is an example of a change in the way Terrans play that might mean EMP was always OP, but underused. You cannot prove KA is OP, and since it is gone you cannot prove it is not OP either. So all that you stated was that no one can prove anything was/is OP or balanced, and as such that the removal of KA was bad. I can prove to you with real hard statistics that the removal of KA was bad. KA lead to more dynamic play, and heavy macro based play, and 0 death ball situations. How that is bad for the game, I'll never know. Even if it was "slightly" OP, the positives outweigh the negatives. Simply return EMP to the old EMP radius to counter KA (which was fucking gigantic) and you have a balanced game IMO. Look at the month of March 2011. Protoss is winning by ALOT right? Why? Because KA usage was starting to see alot of play. Terran players didn't adjust to playing against it yet, and had yet to ever face such heavy usage of HT. What happens? Rather than Terran players actually adjusting their play to a new development in the metagame, they simply CRY (which is the truth, look at the posts on TL of high level Terran players during those months) rather than manning up and trying to figure out how to counter heavy HT usage. What happens? KA is removed immediately because Protoss is actually beating Terran in tournaments now (when before they were getting smashed by almost 60% almost every month except the month of April). The whole singular reason that it was removed was because of a knee jerk reaction to a huge spike in Protoss victories that had never occured before. The second KA is removed, Terran win percentage immediately goes up, and continues to go up because they figure out how to utilize Ghosts better. 3 months in tournament play since March 2011 have shown Terran players absolutely SMASHING Protoss players. This is not some coincidence; you do not just go from a 58% to 40% swing within a matter of months. KA was CRUCIAL to defending your 3rd and 4th without having to overcommit an army or resources on warp-ins. The removal of it was a boneheaded decision that was fueled by a bunch of Terran whining because Protoss was actually for once winning (look at the graphs, it supports my arguments). All you have proved is that Protoss strategy relied heavily on KA, and with its removal Protoss strategy was worse. This does not prove that the removal of KA was bad. Look, in general, I agree with your point and the idea that KA is beneficial for expanding more and protecting more bases. But I am not a pro, and I do not understand all the intricacies at play, so I cannot say if it was or was not OP, and I don't think you can as well. I believe that post KA change I have heard Protoss pros like Tyler and Incontrol state that KA removal was a good thing. At least I have heard them say that at some point. I don't know if they still feel that way, or even if they are right, but you cannot prove something was necessary or not OP when strategies change and when people were playing worse than they are now. The fact that Protoss strategy was relying on KA does not mean that its removal was bad for the game. You have no causal link there.
The removal of KA was bad for the game; it has lead to a total domination of Terran over Protoss by 60% or more in tournament play in certain months. If you think that isn't bad for the game, I don't know what to tell you.
On November 05 2011 02:21 mlspmatt wrote:KA was imbalanced, that's why it was removed. KA with warp gates allowed a HT to be warped almost anywhere on the map with instant sci storm. In contrast, ghosts take 45 second to train, then they walk to where they need to go so reinforcing a battle in the middle of the map or getting ghosts to counter Templar was impossible. If one race has an ability to do something, that the other race is simply incapable of dealing with regardless of skill, That's the definition of imbalanced. Regardless of how skilled a player is, it is not possible to train a ghost, and transport that ghost to the battle field in time to counter a warped in HT with KA. Its simple math. That's why the removal was necessary - and a good change. Show nested quote +Ever since KA was removed Blizzard has been struggling to retune the game it seems with wildly game changing patches. Most recent is going to be P upgrades cheaper and EMP reduced. Did KA make for a more balanced game, especially for PvT? This is ridiculous. "Wildly game changing patches?" There have been 0 wild game changing patches. The patches have been small changes that have improved the game, nothing wild has occurred. The game is very balanced but as Blizzard has stated, Terran has an edge against Protoss in very high level play in Korea. And Blizzard is addressing this issue with the upcoming ghost nurf, the small upgrade cost changes among other changes recently. if your going to create a thread regarding balance issues, its wise to make your assertions based on plenty of examples in a more thorough way than this post does. You never addressed any of the issues as to why KA was removed in the first place or attempted to show why that was a mistake. You just assert it was a mistake because Protoss is having trouble vs Terran now. Its entirely possible, and in my judgement correct, to say that KA removal was necessary and a good change but Protoss does seem to have other issues that need to be looked into.
1) Terran has a significant "edge'. I'd call it more of a galaxy than an edge to be honest. If you're looking at Korean only games, Terrans have a gigantic chasam between Protoss that is basically insurmountable at the moment.
2) Removal of abilities and reworking units of the race aren't wildly game changes? Have you ever seen a highly competitive game where they just REMOVE something, or totally rework the unit (Void Ray) in order to balance?
3) The game is not balanced. Tournament play shows Terran has total domination over Zerg and Protoss, with Protoss being on the shortend of the stick getting absolutely smashed by Zerg at the moment because they are unable to secure 3rds cost effectively without being Roach busted every single game.
4) KA being "imbalanced" lead to 1 month of bad Terran win percentage between TvP. It was more flavor of the month that Terran hadn't adapted to yet, considering Terran players didn't know how to even EMP correctly half the time.
5) KA wasn't even imbalanced; for 6 months Terran held a gigantic advantage over Protoss, and yet somehow KA is supposedly only overpowered when Protoss starts winning alot in March. But don't worry, as long as Terran keeps winning 60% or more in literally every match-up, there's no issues!
Even IF KA was supposedly imbalanced, Blizzard should have allowed more time for it to play it, rather than immediately knee jerk nerfing it like they did.
Your arguments are based on opinions of your own. My arguments are based on hard raw statistics. Pretty sure someone has the better argument.
|
On November 05 2011 02:32 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2011 02:21 flowSthead wrote:On November 05 2011 02:14 superstartran wrote:On November 05 2011 02:06 flowSthead wrote:On November 05 2011 01:59 superstartran wrote:On November 05 2011 01:53 Kovaz wrote:
A couple of reasons that I feel KA is good for the game:
1) HT are more exciting than colossi for both players. I would much rather watch an intense micro-battle between ghosts and HTs than watch some colossi and vikings a-move into each other.
2) I feel that the biggest problem with PvT design-wise is that bio armies are too strong and too adaptable for how mobile they are. If KA was still in the game, pure bio armies would just get rolled, rather than just having to add some ghosts and keep on going MMM. I really really really want to see HT armies just win straight up fights against bio, so that terrans can then have a choice between bio (extremely mobile but loses straight-up engagement) and mech (powerful but immobile). TvT and TvZ are arguably the best 2 matchups because of that choice, but bio is >>>>> mech in PvT. The reason is that you can't just throw a few ghosts or vikings into your bio-ball to deal with tanks or banelings. You have to completely change your army composition.
However, I think KA warp-ins are arguably too strong. What I would like to see is the option to either
1) warp in a templar with 50 energy (same cost/cooldown as now)
2) warp in a templar with 75 energy (make it cost more and have a longer cooldown) KA amulet was never overpowered. Period. Statistics prove that fact. Protoss never was above Terran by more than 2% in tournament play, and the second it was removed, has never come close to going back to 50% except during the month of June 2011 which is more of a statistical anomaly more than anything. Anyone coming in here trying to state otherwise is carrying some serious bias. All KA merely did was not allow Terran to constantly drop/swarm the Protoss player to death, and forced him to actually be cost effective in his trades rather than just suicide units constantly at the Protoss player (which is what exactly is occurring right now). As much as I want it back in the game too, statistics don't prove that. Whether or not Protoss was doing well has nothing to do with how OP KA is because people were not playing optimally back then, and because there have been other changes to the game since then. The fact that since then ghosts have become much more popular is an example of a change in the way Terrans play that might mean EMP was always OP, but underused. You cannot prove KA is OP, and since it is gone you cannot prove it is not OP either. So all that you stated was that no one can prove anything was/is OP or balanced, and as such that the removal of KA was bad. I can prove to you with real hard statistics that the removal of KA was bad. Look at the month of March 2011. Protoss is winning by ALOT right? Why? Because KA usage was starting to see alot of play. Terran players didn't adjust to playing against it yet, and had yet to ever face such heavy usage of HT. What happens? Rather than Terran players actually adjusting their play to a new development in the metagame, they simply CRY (which is the truth, look at the posts on TL of high level Terran players during those months) rather than manning up and trying to figure out how to counter heavy HT usage. What happens? KA is removed immediately because Protoss is actually beating Terran in tournaments now (when before they were getting smashed by almost 60% almost every month except the month of April). The whole singular reason that it was removed was because of a knee jerk reaction to a huge spike in Protoss victories that had never occured before. The second KA is removed, Terran win percentage immediately goes up, and continues to go up because they figure out how to utilize Ghosts better. 3 months in tournament play since March 2011 have shown Terran players absolutely SMASHING Protoss players. This is not some coincidence; you do not just go from a 58% to 40% swing within a matter of months. KA was CRUCIAL to defending your 3rd and 4th without having to overcommit an army or resources on warp-ins. The removal of it was a boneheaded decision that was fueled by a bunch of Terran whining because Protoss was actually for once winning (look at the graphs, it supports my arguments). All you have proved is that Protoss strategy relied heavily on KA, and with its removal Protoss strategy was worse. This does not prove that the removal of KA was bad. Look, in general, I agree with your point and the idea that KA is beneficial for expanding more and protecting more bases. But I am not a pro, and I do not understand all the intricacies at play, so I cannot say if it was or was not OP, and I don't think you can as well. I believe that post KA change I have heard Protoss pros like Tyler and Incontrol state that KA removal was a good thing. At least I have heard them say that at some point. I don't know if they still feel that way, or even if they are right, but you cannot prove something was necessary or not OP when strategies change and when people were playing worse than they are now. The fact that Protoss strategy was relying on KA does not mean that its removal was bad for the game. You have no causal link there. The removal of KA was bad for the game; it has lead to a total domination of Terran over Protoss by 60% or more in tournament play in certain months. If you think that isn't bad for the game, I don't know what to tell you.
KA was imbalanced. Looking at the gameplay, you can obviously see how hard it is for Terran when Protoss is spamming storms nonstop and when Protoss warps in HT to storm MMM drops instead of reacting to them. I'm glad it was removed.
But I think it was just that TvP was inherently in favor of Terran in Korea because of drops and how good the Terran can micro their MMM, so the KA just evened that out. If anything you shouldn't blame KA being removed as the win rate dropping, MMM is just too good vs gateway units.
|
On November 05 2011 02:40 K3Nyy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2011 02:32 superstartran wrote:On November 05 2011 02:21 flowSthead wrote:On November 05 2011 02:14 superstartran wrote:On November 05 2011 02:06 flowSthead wrote:On November 05 2011 01:59 superstartran wrote:On November 05 2011 01:53 Kovaz wrote:
A couple of reasons that I feel KA is good for the game:
1) HT are more exciting than colossi for both players. I would much rather watch an intense micro-battle between ghosts and HTs than watch some colossi and vikings a-move into each other.
2) I feel that the biggest problem with PvT design-wise is that bio armies are too strong and too adaptable for how mobile they are. If KA was still in the game, pure bio armies would just get rolled, rather than just having to add some ghosts and keep on going MMM. I really really really want to see HT armies just win straight up fights against bio, so that terrans can then have a choice between bio (extremely mobile but loses straight-up engagement) and mech (powerful but immobile). TvT and TvZ are arguably the best 2 matchups because of that choice, but bio is >>>>> mech in PvT. The reason is that you can't just throw a few ghosts or vikings into your bio-ball to deal with tanks or banelings. You have to completely change your army composition.
However, I think KA warp-ins are arguably too strong. What I would like to see is the option to either
1) warp in a templar with 50 energy (same cost/cooldown as now)
2) warp in a templar with 75 energy (make it cost more and have a longer cooldown) KA amulet was never overpowered. Period. Statistics prove that fact. Protoss never was above Terran by more than 2% in tournament play, and the second it was removed, has never come close to going back to 50% except during the month of June 2011 which is more of a statistical anomaly more than anything. Anyone coming in here trying to state otherwise is carrying some serious bias. All KA merely did was not allow Terran to constantly drop/swarm the Protoss player to death, and forced him to actually be cost effective in his trades rather than just suicide units constantly at the Protoss player (which is what exactly is occurring right now). As much as I want it back in the game too, statistics don't prove that. Whether or not Protoss was doing well has nothing to do with how OP KA is because people were not playing optimally back then, and because there have been other changes to the game since then. The fact that since then ghosts have become much more popular is an example of a change in the way Terrans play that might mean EMP was always OP, but underused. You cannot prove KA is OP, and since it is gone you cannot prove it is not OP either. So all that you stated was that no one can prove anything was/is OP or balanced, and as such that the removal of KA was bad. I can prove to you with real hard statistics that the removal of KA was bad. Look at the month of March 2011. Protoss is winning by ALOT right? Why? Because KA usage was starting to see alot of play. Terran players didn't adjust to playing against it yet, and had yet to ever face such heavy usage of HT. What happens? Rather than Terran players actually adjusting their play to a new development in the metagame, they simply CRY (which is the truth, look at the posts on TL of high level Terran players during those months) rather than manning up and trying to figure out how to counter heavy HT usage. What happens? KA is removed immediately because Protoss is actually beating Terran in tournaments now (when before they were getting smashed by almost 60% almost every month except the month of April). The whole singular reason that it was removed was because of a knee jerk reaction to a huge spike in Protoss victories that had never occured before. The second KA is removed, Terran win percentage immediately goes up, and continues to go up because they figure out how to utilize Ghosts better. 3 months in tournament play since March 2011 have shown Terran players absolutely SMASHING Protoss players. This is not some coincidence; you do not just go from a 58% to 40% swing within a matter of months. KA was CRUCIAL to defending your 3rd and 4th without having to overcommit an army or resources on warp-ins. The removal of it was a boneheaded decision that was fueled by a bunch of Terran whining because Protoss was actually for once winning (look at the graphs, it supports my arguments). All you have proved is that Protoss strategy relied heavily on KA, and with its removal Protoss strategy was worse. This does not prove that the removal of KA was bad. Look, in general, I agree with your point and the idea that KA is beneficial for expanding more and protecting more bases. But I am not a pro, and I do not understand all the intricacies at play, so I cannot say if it was or was not OP, and I don't think you can as well. I believe that post KA change I have heard Protoss pros like Tyler and Incontrol state that KA removal was a good thing. At least I have heard them say that at some point. I don't know if they still feel that way, or even if they are right, but you cannot prove something was necessary or not OP when strategies change and when people were playing worse than they are now. The fact that Protoss strategy was relying on KA does not mean that its removal was bad for the game. You have no causal link there. The removal of KA was bad for the game; it has lead to a total domination of Terran over Protoss by 60% or more in tournament play in certain months. If you think that isn't bad for the game, I don't know what to tell you. KA was imbalanced. Looking at the gameplay, you can obviously see how hard it is for Terran when Protoss is spamming storms nonstop and when Protoss warps in HT to storm MMM drops instead of reacting to them. I'm glad it was removed. But I think it was just that TvP was inherently in favor of Terran in Korea because of drops and how good the Terran can micro their MMM, so the KA just evened that out. If anything you shouldn't blame KA being removed as the win rate dropping, MMM is just too good vs gateway units.
KA was not imbalanced; for 6 months Protoss had no significant advantage over Terran. For the majority of those 6 months, they were being smashed. Only when KA started picking up in popularity did Protoss suddenly start winning tournaments across the board, and it was for a VERY short period of time too.
I didn't see Terran players whine about KA during beta, or during the 6 months of total domination that they had over the world of SC2. So how come they only started to cry about it during the month of March when a race actually tries something new for once?
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On November 05 2011 01:51 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2011 01:46 SupLilSon wrote:On November 05 2011 01:45 superstartran wrote:On November 05 2011 01:35 SupLilSon wrote:On November 05 2011 00:59 RemrafGrez wrote:On November 05 2011 00:30 SupLilSon wrote:
Wait, am I missing something from the OP? I really don't understand how those 2 games show anything about KA at all. First game is San vs Sc and second game is Oz vs MKP. So you are trying to analyze balance based off of 2 games with completely different players? You may have a point but the extreme lack of effort to provide any basis seriously hinders this argument. IIRC, even a large portion of Protoss players back then were convinced that KA was pretty damn broken. All of the games from the old series involved KA just about. Game 9 of the new series is of the same players with heavy HT play but no KA. That's 6 games, plus a non KA game to show San and SC's skill is still about equal. San is known for liking HT play, but the fact that he gets curbstomped when he's a whole gold base ahead (3 bases to 2) for 4 game minutes is mindblowing. I think that one game is a perfect example of why KA makes more sense than the route Blizz is trying to take. One game shows that they are equal skill level? You must not watch GSL too much... Sc is a far superior player to San and IMO KA was the only reason San even took games from Sc. KA in conjunction with warpgate was a terrible function to have in the game. 6 supply of templar could wipe out 50+ supply of bio on a whim. And you would have games like the Sc vs San game where a Terran player would be astronomically ahead yet not be able to do anything because of the pure strength of KA. SC was not a far superior player to San then, and the only reason why he lost was because he missed a shit ton of EMPs and made bone headed mistakes throughout that entire series. People arguing that KA removal was proper really don't understand the game at all, because as a P, the only way to defend against 2+ Medivac drops without over comitting as P was through the usage of KA. Since the removal of KA, PvT win percentage plummeted from 50% (Yes, at the time when KA was at it's height in popularity, Protoss was still only winning 50% of the time against Terran in tournament play) to a poor like mid to low 40s. Blizzard obviously made a mistake, and KA removal was obviously crippling to an entire tech tree that was based on KA. Not to mention that nothing was given in return to Protoss except an Archon buff which really isn't even that good, since Marines eat through Archon shields like breakfast anyways, same with mass EMPs which has become extremely popular lately. Storm was balanced around the fact that Khydarian Amulet existed; if KA was to be removed, they need to revert Storm back to the old beta radius where it was way bigger and much more useful. Right now Storm is pretty much terrible against any decent Terran, and going Templar tech is suicide for the most part. Right now if you have a hard to defend 3rd, Terran basically gets a free win without even having to do anything but harass/contain with drops and trade armies with Protoss effectively (which isn't hard to do as long as you fight in an open area where you can surround/get a good concave). All the talk about Terran having a weak late game (of which there were plenty of top pros whining about) was total nonsense after watching guys like Puma and MVP absolutely destroy Archon/Templar/Colossus armies with MMMGViking and solid EMPs. In short, KA removal was bad, especially when Protoss was given 0 compensation for it. Protoss has no way to secure 3rds without dying if the 3rd is slightly too far away from the natural. Warp-ins are not strong enough to defend against Rax drops. If you watch any recent mid to late game TvP, it favors Terran heavily now with their ability to just harass literally for free and do massive damage. That was a huge problem that all Protoss players were worried about, and clearly that is what is what causing Protoss to lose so much (other than 1-1-1 which was just silly). Ok, w.e don't believe Jinro, a player who probably has 100% more experience and knowledge with both those players... I'm not gonna argue who is better and who is not. You realize that Jinro and Tyler actually argued against the removal of KA when it was being removed right? They wanted alternatives rather than removals. In fact, alot of pro Terran players stated that removal of KA was NOT the way to balance the game. Right now, you see Protoss players unable to secure their 3rd against Terran players in nearly every single high level game, unless it is a map where the 3rd is easy to get to. That reason is because there is NO more KA. Without it, you get utterly creamed by octodrops that will constantly happen, as the Terran player slowly pulls ahead by continuously expanding and just massing cheap effective infantry that can trade armies with you all day. And at the time, results wise BOTH San and SC were equals. You aren't going to win that argument, period.
Results matter very little when determining who is better -_-
Khaydarin was way too strong.
|
the amulet will never be seen again, i have no idea how anyone could think that was balanced
|
On November 05 2011 02:29 flowSthead wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2011 02:21 mlspmatt wrote:
KA was imbalanced, that's why it was removed. KA with warp gates allowed a HT to be warped almost anywhere on the map with instant sci storm. In contrast, ghosts take 45 second to train, then they walk to where they need to go so reinforcing a battle in the middle of the map or getting ghosts to counter Templar was impossible.
If one race has an ability to do something, that the other race is simply incapable of dealing with regardless of skill, That's the definition of imbalanced. Regardless of how skilled a player is, it is not possible to train a ghost, and transport that ghost to the battle field in time to counter a warped in HT with KA. Its simple math. That's why the removal was necessary - and a good change.
This is also poor logic. You are taking one unit as a counter to HT and then saying that because that unit does not work as well as the other unit, then HT must be OP. That is not the case. Perhaps bio play is not the optimal strategy against high templar play. Perhaps mech play in TvP, although harder to pull off, might be the optimal strategy, in which case it would be difficult to storm sieged tanks with vikings protecting form warp prism high templar. I am getting a little annoyed here with everyone trying to prove it was balanced or imbalanced. You cannot prove that. You can't. Seeing as the races are so different, with so many different strengths and weaknesses, proving balance is ridiculously difficult. Instead of talking about whether it was balanced or not, since I am sure there is a way to keep it in the game and make it balanced, why don't we discuss whether or not it was an interesting mechanic? Someone earlier mentioned that it was boring and less skillful to warp in instant damage like the high templar is. One possible result of KA is that Zergling run bys would be much more difficult to achieve since storm decimates zerglings. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? Personally, I thought KA was more likely to allow Protoss to get a 4th or 5th base, and I like longer macro games so this appealed to me. What are some other negatives and positives of the mechanic that have nothing to do with balance?
I can't take seriously anyone who doesn't think the ghost is the unit designed to counter HT. I'm sorry, that's beyond ridiculous.
Perhaps bio play is not the optimal strategy against high templar play. Perhaps mech play in TvP, although harder to pull off, might be the optimal strategy, in which case it would be difficult to storm sieged tanks with vikings protecting form warp prism high templar.
You might be right here. If i can just get protoss players to tell me before the game what build they're going to do, then i can adjust my play and use mech. Otherwise, by the time Protoss techs to HT, Terran already has his infrastructure built, upgrades started, and its too late.
Do you watch starcraft? Your arguing an ability that was removed months and months ago was a bad decision and your reasoning is that of a 6 year old - Ghosts may not be the best counter to HT and maybe Terran should use Mech vs HT.
|
I don't really understand all these comments like "KA was obviously OP" or "KA was obviously imbalanced"
Virtually every single player is biased, or every single player isn't skilled eough to deal with it.
If you take out bias out of it, statistically the matchup favored the TERRAN at the height of KA. If you take out bias, KA strategies were only around for a month, not even enough time or a full metagame shift. Blizzard seriously removed and ability based off 1 small month of pro data. what happened to the wait and see approach?
|
The thing that irritates me is that with the energy upgrade for infestors it's just the build time for infestor to be able to lay down fungels. Same goes for ghosts, they can spawn and launch EMPs. Now, I know its arguable that warp-cooldown isn't an unit producing time factor, but let's say we do - we have to wait ~40 seconds for cooldown, ~5 seconds for the warpin and then wait ~44 seconds to be able to storm. I really dont understand why they removed KA.
|
You are comparing 9 games where it was balanced to 900 games when it made protoss win. I am not seeing the argument here. It's like saying when roach was 1 supply, it made for better games because in these 5 games I chose it was super close.
|
Hey, remember how everyone was complaining that Protoss is way too boring to play with/against as it had pretty much one viable army composition that revolved around cololsi with added templar in the late game?
Remember how Blizzard addressed this by making the Archon, Immortal and WP more useful, thus giving P player more options?
Remember how they also fixed the shittiest and most boring MU in the entire game?
This is just a reminder.
4) KA being "imbalanced" lead to 1 month of bad Terran win percentage between TvP. It was more flavor of the month that Terran hadn't adapted to yet, considering Terran players didn't know how to even EMP correctly half the time.
Except there was talk about Blizzard 'looking into' KA since December 2010/January 2011.
What now?
|
On November 05 2011 02:46 Liquid`Jinro wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2011 01:51 superstartran wrote:On November 05 2011 01:46 SupLilSon wrote:On November 05 2011 01:45 superstartran wrote:On November 05 2011 01:35 SupLilSon wrote:On November 05 2011 00:59 RemrafGrez wrote:On November 05 2011 00:30 SupLilSon wrote:
Wait, am I missing something from the OP? I really don't understand how those 2 games show anything about KA at all. First game is San vs Sc and second game is Oz vs MKP. So you are trying to analyze balance based off of 2 games with completely different players? You may have a point but the extreme lack of effort to provide any basis seriously hinders this argument. IIRC, even a large portion of Protoss players back then were convinced that KA was pretty damn broken. All of the games from the old series involved KA just about. Game 9 of the new series is of the same players with heavy HT play but no KA. That's 6 games, plus a non KA game to show San and SC's skill is still about equal. San is known for liking HT play, but the fact that he gets curbstomped when he's a whole gold base ahead (3 bases to 2) for 4 game minutes is mindblowing. I think that one game is a perfect example of why KA makes more sense than the route Blizz is trying to take. One game shows that they are equal skill level? You must not watch GSL too much... Sc is a far superior player to San and IMO KA was the only reason San even took games from Sc. KA in conjunction with warpgate was a terrible function to have in the game. 6 supply of templar could wipe out 50+ supply of bio on a whim. And you would have games like the Sc vs San game where a Terran player would be astronomically ahead yet not be able to do anything because of the pure strength of KA. SC was not a far superior player to San then, and the only reason why he lost was because he missed a shit ton of EMPs and made bone headed mistakes throughout that entire series. People arguing that KA removal was proper really don't understand the game at all, because as a P, the only way to defend against 2+ Medivac drops without over comitting as P was through the usage of KA. Since the removal of KA, PvT win percentage plummeted from 50% (Yes, at the time when KA was at it's height in popularity, Protoss was still only winning 50% of the time against Terran in tournament play) to a poor like mid to low 40s. Blizzard obviously made a mistake, and KA removal was obviously crippling to an entire tech tree that was based on KA. Not to mention that nothing was given in return to Protoss except an Archon buff which really isn't even that good, since Marines eat through Archon shields like breakfast anyways, same with mass EMPs which has become extremely popular lately. Storm was balanced around the fact that Khydarian Amulet existed; if KA was to be removed, they need to revert Storm back to the old beta radius where it was way bigger and much more useful. Right now Storm is pretty much terrible against any decent Terran, and going Templar tech is suicide for the most part. Right now if you have a hard to defend 3rd, Terran basically gets a free win without even having to do anything but harass/contain with drops and trade armies with Protoss effectively (which isn't hard to do as long as you fight in an open area where you can surround/get a good concave). All the talk about Terran having a weak late game (of which there were plenty of top pros whining about) was total nonsense after watching guys like Puma and MVP absolutely destroy Archon/Templar/Colossus armies with MMMGViking and solid EMPs. In short, KA removal was bad, especially when Protoss was given 0 compensation for it. Protoss has no way to secure 3rds without dying if the 3rd is slightly too far away from the natural. Warp-ins are not strong enough to defend against Rax drops. If you watch any recent mid to late game TvP, it favors Terran heavily now with their ability to just harass literally for free and do massive damage. That was a huge problem that all Protoss players were worried about, and clearly that is what is what causing Protoss to lose so much (other than 1-1-1 which was just silly). Ok, w.e don't believe Jinro, a player who probably has 100% more experience and knowledge with both those players... I'm not gonna argue who is better and who is not. You realize that Jinro and Tyler actually argued against the removal of KA when it was being removed right? They wanted alternatives rather than removals. In fact, alot of pro Terran players stated that removal of KA was NOT the way to balance the game. Right now, you see Protoss players unable to secure their 3rd against Terran players in nearly every single high level game, unless it is a map where the 3rd is easy to get to. That reason is because there is NO more KA. Without it, you get utterly creamed by octodrops that will constantly happen, as the Terran player slowly pulls ahead by continuously expanding and just massing cheap effective infantry that can trade armies with you all day. And at the time, results wise BOTH San and SC were equals. You aren't going to win that argument, period. Results matter very little when determining who is better -_- Khaydarin was way too strong.
I would agree that KA was too strong in it's old form, but straight up removing it was not any better. I think however an upgrade should be available that let's templar spawn with 60-65 energy. Enough energy such that if you engage an enemy army on their side of the map and happen to get beaten, you'll be able to warp templar in and have AoE defense available as a response.
|
I was thinking about making topic like that few months ago. KA gave toss some sort of defensive advantage which P doesnt have at all.
warp prism storms OP? they're easier to spot and defend then baneling drops or BFH. Long games were more entertaining one year ago. Remember Mana vs Naama? Back and forth all game long, now the game usually ends after one big engagement.
Waiting 44.4 sec to get storm is really pain in the ass, basically u are investing in something useless for almost one minute and even after that u are not sure to do any damage (compared to emp/fungal)
|
On November 05 2011 02:51 GhostFall wrote:
I don't really understand all these comments like "KA was obviously OP" or "KA was obviously imbalanced"
Virtually every single player is biased, or every single player isn't skilled eough to deal with it.
If you take out bias out of it, statistically the matchup favored the TERRAN at the height of KA. If you take out bias, KA strategies were only around for a month, not even enough time or a full metagame shift. Blizzard seriously removed and ability based off 1 small month of pro data. what happened to the wait and see approach?
They nurfed reapers like the day after Morrows Reaper assault vs Idra. Thors were nurfed the week after Thorzains Thor build was so successful in TSL 3. When Blizzard sees something they think is clearly wrong, they fix it immediately.
I don't understand this discussion at all. When Browder mentioned KA in a HOTS interviews, he chuckled as to how they thought KA would ever be balanced in combination with warp gates. He didn't say it was a close call, he didn't say it needed a lot of thought, he said it was obvious.
|
On November 05 2011 02:51 mlspmatt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2011 02:29 flowSthead wrote:On November 05 2011 02:21 mlspmatt wrote:
KA was imbalanced, that's why it was removed. KA with warp gates allowed a HT to be warped almost anywhere on the map with instant sci storm. In contrast, ghosts take 45 second to train, then they walk to where they need to go so reinforcing a battle in the middle of the map or getting ghosts to counter Templar was impossible.
If one race has an ability to do something, that the other race is simply incapable of dealing with regardless of skill, That's the definition of imbalanced. Regardless of how skilled a player is, it is not possible to train a ghost, and transport that ghost to the battle field in time to counter a warped in HT with KA. Its simple math. That's why the removal was necessary - and a good change.
This is also poor logic. You are taking one unit as a counter to HT and then saying that because that unit does not work as well as the other unit, then HT must be OP. That is not the case. Perhaps bio play is not the optimal strategy against high templar play. Perhaps mech play in TvP, although harder to pull off, might be the optimal strategy, in which case it would be difficult to storm sieged tanks with vikings protecting form warp prism high templar. I am getting a little annoyed here with everyone trying to prove it was balanced or imbalanced. You cannot prove that. You can't. Seeing as the races are so different, with so many different strengths and weaknesses, proving balance is ridiculously difficult. Instead of talking about whether it was balanced or not, since I am sure there is a way to keep it in the game and make it balanced, why don't we discuss whether or not it was an interesting mechanic? Someone earlier mentioned that it was boring and less skillful to warp in instant damage like the high templar is. One possible result of KA is that Zergling run bys would be much more difficult to achieve since storm decimates zerglings. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? Personally, I thought KA was more likely to allow Protoss to get a 4th or 5th base, and I like longer macro games so this appealed to me. What are some other negatives and positives of the mechanic that have nothing to do with balance? I can't take seriously anyone who doesn't think the ghost is the unit designed to counter HT. I'm sorry, that's beyond ridiculous. Show nested quote +Perhaps bio play is not the optimal strategy against high templar play. Perhaps mech play in TvP, although harder to pull off, might be the optimal strategy, in which case it would be difficult to storm sieged tanks with vikings protecting form warp prism high templar. You might be right here. If i can just get protoss players to tell me before the game what build they're going to do, then i can adjust my play and use mech. Otherwise, by the time Protoss techs to HT, Terran already has his infrastructure built, upgrades started, and its too late. Do you watch starcraft? Your arguing an ability that was removed months and months ago was a bad decision and your reasoning is that of a 6 year old - Ghosts may not be the best counter to HT and maybe Terran should use Mech vs HT.
I am arguing that balance is almost impossible to logically argue through because there are way too many factors and match ups involved. I am arguing that you have insufficient and imperfect data. I am arguing that due to shifts in the future metagame, it is possible that KA may be OP or may not be OP.
I am also arguing that whether or not a unit is supposed to hard counter another unit, does not mean that that is the only way to play. Your logic is very poor. Vikings hard counter BroodLords which means I shouldn't use Ghosts to snipe Broodlords? Marauders hard counter Ultralisks, so I shouldn't use Ghosts to snipe Ultralisks? Ghosts can EMP Infestors, so I shouldn't use Siege tanks to outrange infesters and kill them? What?
I am arguing that Ghosts work very well in bio play, they transition nicely into it because you already have barracks with tech labs on them. I am also saying that if you were playing mech, then high templars would be outranged by siege tanks (the way infestors are) so you could arguably handle them, especially since with enough blue flame hellions, you could roast them fairly well. I am not sure how viable the strategy is because Bio play is easier and more popular than mech in TvP, and because KA is removed.
Your theorycrafting is terrible though. You can tech to Ghosts after barracks. Literally, one building after barracks and you can build ghosts. To get High Templars you have to build a Cyber Core, then a Twilight Council, then a Templar Archives, then research Storm, then research KA for the situation you are describing. Are you seriously trying to argue that with KA it is impossible for Terran to get ghosts out in time?
|
On November 05 2011 02:29 flowSthead wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2011 02:21 mlspmatt wrote:
KA was imbalanced, that's why it was removed. KA with warp gates allowed a HT to be warped almost anywhere on the map with instant sci storm. In contrast, ghosts take 45 second to train, then they walk to where they need to go so reinforcing a battle in the middle of the map or getting ghosts to counter Templar was impossible.
If one race has an ability to do something, that the other race is simply incapable of dealing with regardless of skill, That's the definition of imbalanced. Regardless of how skilled a player is, it is not possible to train a ghost, and transport that ghost to the battle field in time to counter a warped in HT with KA. Its simple math. That's why the removal was necessary - and a good change.
This is also poor logic. You are taking one unit as a counter to HT and then saying that because that unit does not work as well as the other unit, then HT must be OP. That is not the case. Perhaps bio play is not the optimal strategy against high templar play. Perhaps mech play in TvP, although harder to pull off, might be the optimal strategy, in which case it would be difficult to storm sieged tanks with vikings protecting form warp prism high templar. I am getting a little annoyed here with everyone trying to prove it was balanced or imbalanced. You cannot prove that. You can't. Seeing as the races are so different, with so many different strengths and weaknesses, proving balance is ridiculously difficult. Instead of talking about whether it was balanced or not, since I am sure there is a way to keep it in the game and make it balanced, why don't we discuss whether or not it was an interesting mechanic? Someone earlier mentioned that it was boring and less skillful to warp in instant damage like the high templar is. One possible result of KA is that Zergling run bys would be much more difficult to achieve since storm decimates zerglings. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? Personally, I thought KA was more likely to allow Protoss to get a 4th or 5th base, and I like longer macro games so this appealed to me. What are some other negatives and positives of the mechanic that have nothing to do with balance?
I agree with you in general, in particular about the ridiculous reductive ghost v templar (v infestor) comparisons, as if all three casters are supposed to be completely equal or equivalent, rather than suitably useful to their particular races.
Painuser (I think on SoTG) talked about how KA made it impossible for a terran to just roll through a protoss after winning a major engagement, as is kind of shown in the sC v San game. He was correct but that was for me exactly what made KA a good thing. You're terran, you've taken a significant advantage through good play, so consolidate your advantage, the game shouldn't be over just because you've won a big battle. The potential for the protoss to claw his back if the terran doesn't micro well out of the storms made for good games, as did the sight of San hanging on by his fingernails.
It's worth noting who won the San v sC game in the end, and brings up the other point about "warp-in storms", 150 gas for one storm. I mean 5sec warp-in for storm is great but you still need a really massive economy for the amount of storms that could really devastate an army. So what did sC do, just kept wearing San down until his economy wasn't able to support 1 storm per 150 gas.
When I watched that game despite the protoss losing I thought it pointed to a bright future for PvT as a spectacle. Others may disagree, I guess some people thought it a bit silly but personally I wish we still had the chance for pro games like that.
There is a reasonable point about the power of colossus + storm in a death ball, especially if you have a pylon in the vicinity.. but I really rather they'd addressed this by doing something to colossus rather than getting rid of KA. I'm disappointed that there doesn't seem to be any sight of it's re-emergence in HOTS.
|
They need to make KA work with gateways. Would actually give a purpose to transforming a wg back into a gw. Make it fair for each race atleast.
|
On November 05 2011 01:35 SupLilSon wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2011 00:59 RemrafGrez wrote:On November 05 2011 00:30 SupLilSon wrote:
Wait, am I missing something from the OP? I really don't understand how those 2 games show anything about KA at all. First game is San vs Sc and second game is Oz vs MKP. So you are trying to analyze balance based off of 2 games with completely different players? You may have a point but the extreme lack of effort to provide any basis seriously hinders this argument. IIRC, even a large portion of Protoss players back then were convinced that KA was pretty damn broken. All of the games from the old series involved KA just about. Game 9 of the new series is of the same players with heavy HT play but no KA. That's 6 games, plus a non KA game to show San and SC's skill is still about equal. San is known for liking HT play, but the fact that he gets curbstomped when he's a whole gold base ahead (3 bases to 2) for 4 game minutes is mindblowing. I think that one game is a perfect example of why KA makes more sense than the route Blizz is trying to take. One game shows that they are equal skill level? You must not watch GSL too much... Sc is a far superior player to San and IMO KA was the only reason San even took games from Sc. KA in conjunction with warpgate was a terrible function to have in the game. 6 supply of templar could wipe out 50+ supply of bio on a whim. And you would have games like the Sc vs San game where a Terran player would be astronomically ahead yet not be able to do anything because of the pure strength of KA.
I watched all the old games in the OP and I never saw one where Terran was astronomically ahead and couldn't win. I did however see one old game and one new game where the Protoss was astronomically ahead and lost. I mean a 4 minute lead on a gold base... ????
|
this thread contains so much bias and misinformation. -,.-
everyone just please take a step back and read what you've wrote, review it, see if it makes sense before posting. comparing psi storm and emp, ht drop to medivac drop, blaming KA while ignoring WG, these stuff just induces facepalm and derails the discussion.
now with that said, KA's removal i think is unfair, it should have reduced the gain by half so it still takes time to gain enough energy for storm but taking it away was just damn harsh. there are times where my split templars get emp blanketed and forced to just make archons. now i make templars and leave them in base for just in case of emp wipe...but that shouldn't be necessary.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
