I recently took an opportunity to share some of the feedback I received from pro players at the G Star event in Korea via a Q & A, and I was interested to see your reactions to that discussion in the blog comments and on the forum. I noticed that some players were worried that we don’t take the community’s feedback into account, and that we only listen to pro players. While we base our balance decisions on many different factors, including pro player feedback, internal testing, tournament play and more, our player community remains a vital source of feedback about StarCraft II. Every week we comb various forums and sites to get a feel for what our players are experiencing, and I thought I’d comment on some of the concerns we’ve seen appear in the community recently.
I wouldnt mind seeing some sort of change to muta in pvz. Its very hard to move out or take a third/fourth once zerg is sitting on a mass number of muta on 3-4 bases.
Edit: as far as the article itself goes, it reassures me that they are keeping in contact with the community. Something I've been interested to know for quite some time is how much they look at TL, compared to other forums and especially Battle.net. Of course, for lower league complaining you'd typically go straight for Battle.net, because that kind of thing is frowned upon here, but I wonder if some unlucky bloke is given the task of trawling through the Balance Discussion Thread and the LR threads every so often.
No answers reek of genius, but all of them seem sensible. I'm happy with it
Some interessing thought from Kim. It's still pretty much " blabla we can't do a lot right now, wait for HotS " but it has some meaning behind it. Not like when Browder talk.
"Ghost EMP is Too Weak" Cant believe that this is true, especially at tvp. I saw in every tournament terran always snacked protoss if they used emp very well.
On January 26 2012 02:57 .kv wrote: glad they are aware of Mutas in PvZ but can't believe there are complaints about emp being too weak
That's how I feel on players saying protoss is to weak.
Honestly game balance wise I think the games pretty good. Was an interesting read but not really much was addressed. Sounds like they are probably just going to wait for HOTS for any major changes again.
On January 26 2012 03:00 sotaporo wrote: i knew terran was weakest race below pro level=D finally someone with credit says that
They are "weakest" at lower levels because lower level players can't play terran that great. Its not a balance problem its a skill problem.
I like that there's been enough of an outcry to warrant a response on removing the Carrier. Gives me hope that they're still trying to work on it internally, even if it does end up going through a design change.
The top level of play in SC2 is certainly a testament to how quickly the human mind can learn to think and adapt in new and abstract environments - which I've always thought is inspiring. Then, I see comments like these:
•Protoss Win Rate is Too Low in Tournaments
•Terran Can’t Beat Protoss
•Forge Fast Expand is Difficult to Stop as Zerg
The fact that these three are all "hot topics" - and mutually exclusive - is a testament to just how idiotic the human mind can be in large groups. I suppose you take the good with the bad, eh?
On January 26 2012 02:57 .kv wrote: glad they are aware of Mutas in PvZ but can't believe there are complaints about emp being too weak
That's how I feel on players saying protoss is to weak.
Honestly game balance wise I think the games pretty good. Was an interesting read but not really much was addressed. Sounds like they are probably just going to wait for HOTS for any major changes again.
I get the feeling that question is more a leftover from a couple of months ago. Like, a couple of months ago Protoss looked almost unplayable in Code S. Since a couple of buffs, The Protoss President coming out of his slump and play becoming more refined in general Protoss seems to be making a recurrence and at the moment, I absolutely agree. Outside of ZvP now and again, Protoss doesn't have any issues at all.
Again, I reckon that he was replying to questions that were asked a while ago, or maybe the leftovers of that whine.
somehow it baffles me how blizzard is ignoring the utter domination of terran at the highest skill level, especially korea which is what an esports game should be balanced around
everyone is joking about it, everyone knows it, even koreans joke all the time about it, yet the only glimmer of community interaction by blizzard talks about carriers, nydus worms and ghosts being too weak
what needs to happen, more than 20 terrans in code s?
Pretty cool. If they are not intending on changing anything, because HotS is coming soon, the "soon" is sooner that many people expect Also, I think it would be quite hard to buff Terran on lower level without making him OP on the higher level. The same about Protoss, I can't see nerfing it on the higher level, while nerfing on lower. Even though, buffing Phoenix would be quite a good idea, as it is underused in every matchup, in my opinion.
On January 26 2012 02:57 .kv wrote: glad they are aware of Mutas in PvZ but can't believe there are complaints about emp being too weak
That's how I feel on players saying protoss is to weak.
Honestly game balance wise I think the games pretty good. Was an interesting read but not really much was addressed. Sounds like they are probably just going to wait for HOTS for any major changes again.
On January 26 2012 03:00 sotaporo wrote: i knew terran was weakest race below pro level=D finally someone with credit says that
They are "weakest" at lower levels because lower level players can't play terran that great. Its not a balance problem its a skill problem.
Yes, that's automatically implied by the fact that terran being weak isn't an issue at pro level. But it is an issue no matter what you call it. Balance below pro-level affects what races people who are starting the game and people who want to try to become pros will choose, to some extent. For an extreme example, if learning how to macro with one race was many times more damanding attention-wise than for the other two, you'd eventually have very few pros playing that race unless it was disproportionately powerful at pro level (which would be a balance problem), since becoming a successful pro with the other two races would be a lot easier.
Not that I think terran will have that issue any time soon, both because so many established pros play terran and because terran still has overall the best performance of the races in SC2 so far, leading wannabe pros towards choosing them.
On January 26 2012 03:07 Zeetox wrote: Even though, buffing Phoenix would be quite a good idea, as it is underused in every matchup, in my opinion.
Phoenix range (say +1) would be an interesting change. Wouldn't automatically make the unit OP, and still wouldn't make it an easy or solid unit, but would help the most with mutas while not changing the rest too much. Maybe it would help stargate builds vs Zerg but I feel those have been much less useful since the Spore buff to 6s burrow.
DK disagrees with the vocal racial majority on the myth of late game tvp and mutaballs.
edit: I think they're missing an easier change they can do to deal with Mutas (and toss winrate in general)
Whats the last BW map with a ton of open space behind/beside your base? If you get rid of that free airspace you force players to risk more when they do drop plays/ run mutas in to snipe stuff. Seems like an obvious fix.
Well this wasnt that interesting .... Most of the "concerns" seem to be pretty low level. The most interesting part is what he said about the carrier. They dont want to just "Nr. buff" it. This should be their main philosophy when buffing certain units. For example the Muta vs. Protoss argument: I can see why Protoss player feel like they miss a proper response. As a Zerg I dont like to play that Muta game either, because I dont think a SC2 game shouldnt be played with a basetrade as part of the plan. Sure they could buff Phoenix in numbers and make them a true counter to Mutalisks, but what will hapen in those games? Muta and Phoenix bash each others head together and whoever has more will destory the other one, thats boring and not very creative. There has to be a more dynamic more microable way to bring those fights to the battlefield. Scorge would be great to bring a dynamic airbattle into the game, when the Phoenix is really better the mutalisk. (ofc it must loose the shootmove then). This is not a "I want Scourge back", this is more of an example on how to improve micro and dynamics in fight!
I find it interesting that Zerg is playing well at all levels considering how much Nestea and DRG were complaining at the round of 16 nominations. I'd rather have it Zerg playing well and complaining than being UP and not complaining, but it's still annoying.
On January 26 2012 03:07 Tsubbi wrote: somehow it baffles me how blizzard is ignoring the utter domination of terran at the highest skill level, especially korea which is what an esports game should be balanced around
everyone is joking about it, everyone knows it, even koreans joke all the time about it, yet the only glimmer of community interaction by blizzard talks about carriers, nydus worms and ghosts being too weak
what needs to happen, more than 20 terrans in code s?
Wait a couple of months. Terrans are starting to drop out. While there are still 20 Terrans in Code S, extrapolate the graph of Terrans in Code S from a few months ago. At one point there were something like 26, and now they are falling out a bit more.
In addition, bear in mind that while the argument that "Terrans are just better" is bollocks as far as winrates go, the fact that Terran was by far the most attractive race upon release of SC2 (when pros started practicing) does make the concept of more progamers playing Terran a bit easier to understand and accept.
On January 26 2012 03:16 ch4ppi wrote: Well this wasnt that interesting .... Most of the "concerns" seem to be pretty low level. The most interesting part is what he said about the carrier. They dont want to just "Nr. buff" it. This should be their main philosophy when buffing certain units. For example the Muta vs. Protoss argument: I can see why Protoss player feel like they miss a proper response. As a Zerg I dont like to play that Muta game either, because I dont think a SC2 game shouldnt be played with a basetrade as part of the plan. Sure they could buff Phoenix in numbers and make them a true counter to Mutalisks, but what will hapen in those games? Muta and Phoenix bash each others head together and whoever has more will destory the other one, thats boring and not very creative. There has to be a more dynamic more microable way to bring those fights to the battlefield. Scorge would be great to bring a dynamic airbattle into the game, when the Phoenix is really better the mutalisk. (ofc it must loose the shootmove then). This is not a "I want Scourge back", this is more of an example on how to improve micro and dynamics in fight!
So because you don't like base racing, you think Protoss has a "proper response" to Mutas?
atm I'm of the opinion that we should wait a while and see how Muta play develops in ZvP, because it's not like 1-1-1 where it just looks broken and is very stylistic, but I don't get your stance on this.
I think EMP is fine. Being a terran player myself (platinum @ eu) I often see that I lose against a protoss because I did not place the EMP properly. Many terrans lose because they throw down the EMP randomly to wear down as much shields as possible but then get killed by storms. I think its right that in the late game it is a bit easier for protoss to control the game, but you have totally all chances as a terran to win the game so I think everything is fine.
On January 26 2012 03:16 ch4ppi wrote: Well this wasnt that interesting .... Most of the "concerns" seem to be pretty low level. The most interesting part is what he said about the carrier. They dont want to just "Nr. buff" it. This should be their main philosophy when buffing certain units. For example the Muta vs. Protoss argument: I can see why Protoss player feel like they miss a proper response. As a Zerg I dont like to play that Muta game either, because I dont think a SC2 game shouldnt be played with a basetrade as part of the plan. Sure they could buff Phoenix in numbers and make them a true counter to Mutalisks, but what will hapen in those games? Muta and Phoenix bash each others head together and whoever has more will destory the other one, thats boring and not very creative. There has to be a more dynamic more microable way to bring those fights to the battlefield. Scorge would be great to bring a dynamic airbattle into the game, when the Phoenix is really better the mutalisk. (ofc it must loose the shootmove then). This is not a "I want Scourge back", this is more of an example on how to improve micro and dynamics in fight!
So because you don't like base racing, you think Protoss has a "proper response" to Mutas?
atm I'm of the opinion that we should wait a while and see how Muta play develops in ZvP, because it's not like 1-1-1 where it just looks broken and is very stylistic, but I don't get your stance on this.
Uhm no.... didnt you read what I wrote? I dont like base race as part of the main strategy AS Zerg. And I say that protoss LACKS of a proper response to the todays popular Mutaplay. Basicly I agree that Mutas arent a problem like 1-1-1 or other stuff. Protoss might be able to fight mutas better and better over time, but this doesnt a thing about what I said, because the Muta vs protoss stuff wasnt about muta. It was about the way Blizzard should buff. By Design not by numbers!
On January 26 2012 03:07 Tsubbi wrote: somehow it baffles me how blizzard is ignoring the utter domination of terran at the highest skill level, especially korea which is what an esports game should be balanced around
everyone is joking about it, everyone knows it, even koreans joke all the time about it, yet the only glimmer of community interaction by blizzard talks about carriers, nydus worms and ghosts being too weak
what needs to happen, more than 20 terrans in code s?
so 5 zerg, 5 terran and 2 protoss total champions are "terran total domination" now?
Blizzard shouldn't balance a race just because one race is more favored than other in Korea. It is a unique trend that happens ONLY in korea where there are large amount of terran pros
And it isn't surprising when you have people like Boxer, Nada, and MVP representing as icon of the race. Slayer is practically a team for Terrans to develop secret strats when there's nothing like it for zerg and protoss equivalent. Other zerg and protoss just need to catch up to Nestea/leenock/MC standards
the problem regarding mutas is that any buff to the phoenix might as well lead to mutas becoming completely useless in the matchup (in small numbers, phoenix are already able to challenge mutas), and that is something I wouldn't like to see. I do agree though that mass mutas is kind of hard to deal with lategame, but finding a solution for that that does not make the muta completely useless is hard...
I think David Kim hit the nail on the head with pretty much every issue, and shows an understanding of not being over-reactionary towards changes.
One thing to note is that the Carrier's role definitely DOES NOT need to overlap with the colossus. While both have long range, the colossus is more known for its constant, long-term dps dealer that was simply MADE to be vulnerable to air units.
The carrier is also long range but not long enough, it could be protoss' way of sniping/breaking through tough defenses, but has not been allowed to fulfill this role because of the insufficient 8 range to release interceptors and this makes them vulnerable to pretty much every AA out there.
Remember that the protoss is outranged completely by Terran, and soon Zerg with the Viper, and protoss' lone long-range unit will be 9 (colossus), and the Void Ray next closest at 7. Protoss in HOTS will constantly be forced to rush into engagements and break contains.
This could be all designed to be the case, but with all casters being outranged by EMP, high templar, sentry, etc may not be able to turn the tables enough for protoss against mass/well-placed ghosts. At least the science Vessel emp was range 8 and didn't cloak, while arbiter stasis was at 9 and could help weaken terran holds.
the problem with pheonixes in PvZ is that infestors wreck them. Also, if protoss invests too much into pheonix and zerg say, tech switches into ultralisks, you have a ton of money that is now useless.
I really think that the problem is two-fold. Pheonixes are not good enough vs mutalisks, and they die (like i'm talking an insane amount of money lost, vs just energy). like.. a comparable loss of m-moving 12 infestors into a 4 fully charged high templars.
I agree with what TT1 said about adding splash to pheonix. i think that would not improve their utility against any other units in the game.
I would also suggest that infestors fungal should not stun, it should slow (at the very least against air units). I think this would solve a myriad of other problems in the game as well as make it more interesting to play/watch. (should this happen, zerg may need compensating buffs)
Every time I read one of these Q&A's it always seems to fly past their head that the colossus is not a good design for the game, as the cliff-walking mechanics are gimmicky at best and the counter-unit relationships are very bland (corrupter/viking). This is especially surprising considering they get the opportunity to really switch things up.
Would be nice if ground-mode vikings received mech upgrades, wouldn't care if they reduced the range as a counter-balance. You only see it being useful in TvT.
On January 26 2012 03:33 acrimoneyius wrote: Every time I read one of these Q&A's it always seems to fly past their head that the colossus is not a good design for the game, as the cliff-walking mechanics are gimmicky at best and the counter-unit relationships are very bland (corrupter/viking). This is especially surprising considering they get the opportunity to really switch things up.
Would be nice if ground-mode vikings received mech upgrades, wouldn't care if they reduced the range as a counter-balance. You only see it being useful in TvT.
Other than that, cool read.
i agree colossus just aren't fun and aren't exciting to watch. wish it was something like reaver that required a bunch of skill to use the aoe effectively
On January 26 2012 03:31 Roxy wrote: Well, some attention is better than none.
My thoughts:
Muta vs Protoss
the problem with pheonixes in PvZ is that infestors wreck them. Also, if protoss invests too much into pheonix and zerg say, tech switches into ultralisks, you have a ton of money that is now useless.
I really think that the problem is two-fold. Pheonixes are not good enough vs mutalisks, and they die (like i'm talking an insane amount of money lost, vs just energy). like.. a comparable loss of m-moving 12 infestors into a 4 fully charged high templars.
I agree with what TT1 said about adding splash to pheonix. i think that would not improve their utility against any other units in the game.
I would also suggest that infestors fungal should not stun, it should slow (at the very least against air units). I think this would solve a myriad of other problems in the game as well as make it more interesting to play/watch. (should this happen, zerg may need compensating buffs)
I also think it's because of Zerg doesn't have to commit to Mutas when they scout mass Phoenixes. They'll just switch to Corrupters and then eventually build Infestors while macroing knowing the Protoss doesn't have an army.
I like TT1's suggestion. It doesn't allow Mutas to become a huge ball, which I feel is what every Protoss is struggling with. They can still harass with a handful of Mutas to good effect.
On January 26 2012 03:33 acrimoneyius wrote: Every time I read one of these Q&A's it always seems to fly past their head that the colossus is not a good design for the game, as the cliff-walking mechanics are gimmicky at best and the counter-unit relationships are very bland (corrupter/viking). This is especially surprising considering they get the opportunity to really switch things up.
Would be nice if ground-mode vikings received mech upgrades, wouldn't care if they reduced the range as a counter-balance. You only see it being useful in TvT.
Other than that, cool read.
Dude made a very intelligent post. I second your thoughts! Its always like the real concerns that has been since SC2 is out arent mentioned at all (underused spells, Marines, Collossus/Viking/Corrupter dynamic)
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
I think it would be a good idea to give Phoenix an upgrade that allows splash instead of a slow ass capital ship I would never build because if I had that much money/time I would just add more templar.
On January 26 2012 03:33 acrimoneyius wrote: Every time I read one of these Q&A's it always seems to fly past their head that the colossus is not a good design for the game, as the cliff-walking mechanics are gimmicky at best and the counter-unit relationships are very bland (corrupter/viking). This is especially surprising considering they get the opportunity to really switch things up.
Would be nice if ground-mode vikings received mech upgrades, wouldn't care if they reduced the range as a counter-balance. You only see it being useful in TvT.
Other than that, cool read.
i agree colossus just aren't fun and aren't exciting to watch. wish it was something like reaver that required a bunch of skill to use the aoe effectively
i assume reaver would be robo (not robo + robo bay/facility? not sure on name). wouldnt this just ruin terran? they are already hesitant to go mech. reaver would wreck bio. this would force them to turtle to 3 base sky-terran, no?
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
I think it would be a good idea to give Phoenix an upgrade that allows splash instead of a slow ass capital ship I would never build because if I had that much money/time I would just add more templar.
This, but i think it should be a spell and not an add to the actual attack. Higher skill ceiling, more depth to relationships between units, but doesn't directly hardcounter mutas
On January 26 2012 03:33 acrimoneyius wrote: Every time I read one of these Q&A's it always seems to fly past their head that the colossus is not a good design for the game, as the cliff-walking mechanics are gimmicky at best and the counter-unit relationships are very bland (corrupter/viking). This is especially surprising considering they get the opportunity to really switch things up.
Would be nice if ground-mode vikings received mech upgrades, wouldn't care if they reduced the range as a counter-balance. You only see it being useful in TvT.
Other than that, cool read.
i agree colossus just aren't fun and aren't exciting to watch. wish it was something like reaver that required a bunch of skill to use the aoe effectively
i assume reaver would be robo (not robo + robo bay/facility? not sure on name). wouldnt this just ruin terran? they are already hesitant to go mech. reaver would wreck bio. this would force them to turtle to 3 base sky-terran, no?
The reaper would have the same use for P like the Collosus, but more interesting and more skillbased (for both sides). Theorycrafting about a unit that does not exist is kinda awkward..
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
I think it would be a good idea to give Phoenix an upgrade that allows splash instead of a slow ass capital ship I would never build because if I had that much money/time I would just add more templar.
Even if it was a minor amount of splash damage, it would be better than dealing with the flying hitpoint blob. One might call it a Death Ball of mutas.
On January 26 2012 03:33 acrimoneyius wrote: Every time I read one of these Q&A's it always seems to fly past their head that the colossus is not a good design for the game, as the cliff-walking mechanics are gimmicky at best and the counter-unit relationships are very bland (corrupter/viking). This is especially surprising considering they get the opportunity to really switch things up.
Would be nice if ground-mode vikings received mech upgrades, wouldn't care if they reduced the range as a counter-balance. You only see it being useful in TvT.
Other than that, cool read.
i agree colossus just aren't fun and aren't exciting to watch. wish it was something like reaver that required a bunch of skill to use the aoe effectively
Yep. Hearing their reasoning behind not including the reaver is even more painful...that it might be "too strong" against bio compositions. Atleast terrans can reactively spread against a scarab shot in much the same way you dodge banelings which is fun micro...it's impossible to really micro against colossus unless it's focus-fire and the very rare opportunity to flank.
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
The old phoenix/colossus style against terran would be ridic if that happened, unless they nerf the base damage and add more 'bonus to light' perhaps. There's already too much splash in the game, which is an interesting mechanic but not if you overdo it.
I think a more interesting mechanic would be an air-forcefield rectangle. Phoenix would ideally be frozen in place just like if they used graviton beam. That way you can properly zone mutas and also prevent viking's from chasing. Also another tool against broodlord's which are insanely strong.
It would be a positional based forcefield (not a accuracy-based like sentry), where you hit the button and it casts in a fixed position based on the direction/position phoenix is.
On January 26 2012 03:33 acrimoneyius wrote: Every time I read one of these Q&A's it always seems to fly past their head that the colossus is not a good design for the game, as the cliff-walking mechanics are gimmicky at best and the counter-unit relationships are very bland (corrupter/viking). This is especially surprising considering they get the opportunity to really switch things up.
Would be nice if ground-mode vikings received mech upgrades, wouldn't care if they reduced the range as a counter-balance. You only see it being useful in TvT.
Other than that, cool read.
i agree colossus just aren't fun and aren't exciting to watch. wish it was something like reaver that required a bunch of skill to use the aoe effectively
Yeah, at least DKim admitted that the issue with the carrier was that it overlapped too much with the collosus. But then he went on to describe how it's too difficult to fix the carrier's role so that's why they want to remove it. How about fixing or removing the boring collosus!
It'd be great if PHX got some upgrade to deal splash... but not just auto splash.
I loved in BW how irridate worked... you had to micro as Zerg to overcome it and could, potentially, use it to harm your opponent. Something like that would be awesome.
Boring questions, boring, non-commital answers. You think the role of the carrier overlaps with the colossus? For god's sake cut the colossus, it's a very shallow unit and it makes TvP unwatchable.
On January 26 2012 03:33 acrimoneyius wrote: Every time I read one of these Q&A's it always seems to fly past their head that the colossus is not a good design for the game, as the cliff-walking mechanics are gimmicky at best and the counter-unit relationships are very bland (corrupter/viking). This is especially surprising considering they get the opportunity to really switch things up.
Would be nice if ground-mode vikings received mech upgrades, wouldn't care if they reduced the range as a counter-balance. You only see it being useful in TvT.
Other than that, cool read.
i agree colossus just aren't fun and aren't exciting to watch. wish it was something like reaver that required a bunch of skill to use the aoe effectively
It's not even that it's "not fun to watch", it just messes up the game. P starts making col -> T must make (double) vikings right away, or it's instaloss. Same is/was true for PvZ & corruptors, although Zergs have a few different styles now besides the roach/hydra/corruptor stuff.
i would like to officially state my opinion that if any other company was in charge of game design i think starcraft 2 would be a more complex game, with a lot more depth of play. i dont think they concretely answered a single question, and they talk about "lower level" without it affecting "higher level", like that's actually something they're really capable of doing without higher level players taking advantage of it.
Would be nice, if phx got an Air slow, maybe with auto atk, 1 sec slow debuff from fleet beacon tech upgrade. or maybe a aoe maelstorm air only upgrade. but any buff to the phx should come from the fleet beacon imo, so they are not stronger early game, just a "fuck i think his going muta i hope this upgrade comes in time before he deals too much dmg".
If we want phoenix to have splash damage, why not bring back that overload spell for them? It could be a research, so that one phoenix isn't just auto-win for toss.
So um - this thread is supposed to be about what David Kim said - right? Seems like everyone has decided this is another "designated balance" thread, and are just talking about random reasons every other race is imba.
If they think carrier is similar to colossus, well then change colossus! It's one of those dull units, and people were complaining about it since forever!
So Protoss is doing well overall, with the exception of tournament wins, which are decided amongst a select group too small for any statistical relevance. And Terran is doing ok-ish at high levels, but struggingly below masters, which is a group representing a huge percentage of the playerbase.
And they're considering buffing protoss overall, but Ghosts are fine and maybe they'll screw around a bit with the Hellions, both of which are units that have the highest effect with great control but get destroyed quickly by players lacking the proper micro (i.e. the huge parts of sub-masters players that have issues in TvZ and TvP).
By no means do I want to complain about balance; I realize that I'm in no position to properly judge it anyway. But I find it curious that Blizzard constantly needs to appease the "pro" figureheads with comments like these, while the masses get vague promises about maybe fooling around with this or that.
And they should fix the game's horrible battle.net interface before they tinker with balance issues. I bet it'd take a fraction of the time to polish this game's menu to the level of SC/BW and WC3 than it'd take for all the fine-tuning the majority won't even notice.
On January 26 2012 03:52 Treehead wrote: So um - this thread is supposed to be about what David Kim said - right? Seems like everyone has decided this is another "designated balance" thread, and are just talking about random reasons every other race is imba.
we're talking about the relationship between mutas and phoenixes and other relationships said in the interview. Not balance whining.
It seems Dayvie does not feel that Protoss has a critical mass problem. It is massively overpowered in late game max vs max situations, where it loses is the midgame. This is why high level Terrans have maintaned good winrates against Protoss for pretty much all time, because they are very active. Low leaguers are too passive and too keen to play deathball vs deathball which is impossible currently. Against Zerg, it is all about getting over 150 supply. Nothing can happen in the game until Broodlords are out, and even those aren't all too powerful on some of the maps. The fact is that Mutalisks are the only thing you can do to win at ZvP besides Broodlord/Infestor situationally, and it seems Protosses are going to figure out Mutas as well. I think the game doesn't look so good balance-wise. It is the same problem of the game being imbalanced in different spots in favor of all races, which makes the numbers look good. But the game lacks some playability because the races are not quite equal at all times and we end up in situations where we don't have a chance to win any more despite supply, economy, or units lost looking equal.
On January 26 2012 03:52 Treehead wrote: So um - this thread is supposed to be about what David Kim said - right? Seems like everyone has decided this is another "designated balance" thread, and are just talking about random reasons every other race is imba.
we're talking about the relationship between mutas and phoenixes and other relationships said in the interview. Not balance whining.
If you just want to complain about mutas I believe there's already a thread about it.
On January 26 2012 03:53 50bani wrote: It seems Dayvie does not feel that Protoss has a critical mass problem. It is massively overpowered in late game max vs max situations, where it loses is the midgame. This is why high level Terrans have maintaned good winrates against Protoss for pretty much all time, because they are very active. Low leaguers are too passive and too keen to play deathball vs deathball which is impossible currently. Against Zerg, it is all about getting over 150 supply. Nothing can happen in the game until Broodlords are out, and even those aren't all too powerful on some of the maps. The fact is that Mutalisks are the only thing you can do to win at ZvP besides Broodlord/Infestor situationally, and it seems Protosses are going to figure out Mutas as well. I think the game doesn't look so good balance-wise. It is the same problem of the game being imbalanced in different spots in favor of all races, which makes the numbers look good. But the game lacks some playability because the races are not quite equal at all times and we end up in situations where we don't have a chance to win any more despite supply, economy, or units lost looking equal.
On January 26 2012 02:55 SeaSwift wrote: Some of the replies are pretty hilarious.
It is the battle.net forums after all, I guess.
Edit: as far as the article itself goes, it reassures me that they are keeping in contact with the community. Something I've been interested to know for quite some time is how much they look at TL, compared to other forums and especially Battle.net. Of course, for lower league complaining you'd typically go straight for Battle.net, because that kind of thing is frowned upon here, but I wonder if some unlucky bloke is given the task of trawling through the Balance Discussion Thread and the LR threads every so often.
No answers reek of genius, but all of them seem sensible. I'm happy with it
Yea, I'll second this. Much of these concerns are things I've either experienced myself or seen others express frustration over on these forums. Whether they resolve the issues before Heart of the Swarm, or not, I think this is a relatively accurate assessment of major community problems (problems for the general rather than the pro gamer).
I am surprised to see fewer Zerg concerns. While I do see nydus as a bit too situational, I also haven't seen much griping about it for a few months. That said, I've also seen more zerg using nydus effectively...especially against FFEs.
On January 26 2012 03:52 Shockk wrote: By no means do I want to complain about balance; I realize that I'm in no position to properly judge it anyway. But I find it curious that Blizzard constantly needs to appease the "pro" figureheads with comments like these, while the masses get vague promises about maybe fooling around with this or that.
Please refrain from doing so, then. It's an ongoing struggle to beat these kinds of concerns out of the collective conciousness of the TL section of the SC2 community, so that we can eventually end up at something approaching a 'smart community'.
On January 26 2012 03:52 Treehead wrote: So um - this thread is supposed to be about what David Kim said - right? Seems like everyone has decided this is another "designated balance" thread, and are just talking about random reasons every other race is imba.
we're talking about the relationship between mutas and phoenixes and other relationships said in the interview. Not balance whining.
If you just want to complain about mutas I believe there's already a thread about it.
complaining!=discussing
that being said i don't necessarily feel mutas are imbalanced vs protoss at all. i just feel like mass muta become a bit too strong (and i play zerg). because the article talked about mutas vs protoss, i feel like this is an appropriate place to talk about it.
On January 26 2012 03:07 Tsubbi wrote: somehow it baffles me how blizzard is ignoring the utter domination of terran at the highest skill level, especially korea which is what an esports game should be balanced around
everyone is joking about it, everyone knows it, even koreans joke all the time about it, yet the only glimmer of community interaction by blizzard talks about carriers, nydus worms and ghosts being too weak
what needs to happen, more than 20 terrans in code s?
Well, he said he doesn't think Terran needs any buffs. To me, that suggests that they are aware of the power of the T race in skilled hands.
On January 26 2012 02:55 SeaSwift wrote: Some of the replies are pretty hilarious.
It is the battle.net forums after all, I guess.
I agree…lol It always amazes me the insight that most of the TL community has in comparison to the battle.net forums. I think it’s a great article and just goes to show you that they are actually listening. Most of his comments are good ones. You can argue with whether you agree on their take on the situation or not, but I think the most important point here is that they are listening to our concerns and have the ability to weed through real concerns vs. community garbage.
The one that strikes me most, because I am a Terran player is the complexity of Terran. It’s hard to master, but when you do, the skill cap is extremely high. As a gold player, I find myself frustrated to no end with Protoss, but then I watch semi-pro & pro matches showing me that it is not impossible and the combinations are endless. I think this is even more apparent when you look at the win/loss ratios from gold to diamond showing Terran is quite low proving that they struggle.
I would also add that I know some would argue that Terran still needs to be nerfed, because in skilled hands they dominate. Well, I’m here to tell you that it’s fine line and they have to be extremely careful with what they do without affecting silver, gold, platinum and even diamond players. You nerf to much and affect the majority of players making it worse than it already is and you are going to have a lot of players just stop playing Terran or the game all together. They obviously don’t want that.
On January 26 2012 03:52 Shockk wrote: So Protoss is doing well overall, with the exception of tournament wins, which are decided amongst a select group too small for any statistical relevance. And Terran is doing ok-ish at high levels, but struggingly below masters, which is a group representing a huge percentage of the playerbase.
ok-ish? OK-ISH? Terran are doing AWESOME at high level.
And seriously, if you can't understand that eSport and pro-level of play is where the balance is relevant... i'm sorry for you. Any balance statement is falacious and utterly stupid if the game is not played at a very high level, simply because it means that the players are only using a small percentage of what is available to them and not efficiently.
And, the game feel actually quite balanced lately.
I've always thought the fix for pvz mutas was simple. +1 phoenix air attack range, while keep their ability the same range It would only have an effect against Mutas, and make phoenix worth their cost as viable anti air.
On January 26 2012 03:52 Treehead wrote: So um - this thread is supposed to be about what David Kim said - right? Seems like everyone has decided this is another "designated balance" thread, and are just talking about random reasons every other race is imba.
I haven't seen any balance whining. All I've seen is discussion on design and relationships between units.
lmao Forge FE is hard for Zerg to deal with. Wtf is that kinda question? Protoss either gonna 3 gates expand or take risk to FFE, and even with 3 gates expand they're still so far behind in economy and Zerg doesn't want Protoss to play an econ and macro games? Well if FFE is hard to deal with then they should just bring back the good old 4 gates lol.
Forge Fast Expand is Difficult to Stop as Zerg This is something we discussed at BlizzCon as well. The new units we’re bringing in should allow zerg to play more aggressively versus players who are defending heavily with little intention of attacking in the early/mid game. For now, we believe this isn’t a game breaking issue because overall, zerg is performing well against protoss. In fact, zerg is not struggling at any level of play, and their win ratio compared to skill is extremely solid at every skill level.
I really hope this is PR directed at bronze league zergs, if they actually want to change the way the match up work into non ffe than i am worried for the knowledge of the game ( and strategy game in general ) as well as the way pvz is now and how it was in the gw expand days when zerg did not knew how to play eco.
On January 26 2012 03:05 Treehead wrote: The top level of play in SC2 is certainly a testament to how quickly the human mind can learn to think and adapt in new and abstract environments - which I've always thought is inspiring. Then, I see comments like these:
•Protoss Win Rate is Too Low in Tournaments
•Terran Can’t Beat Protoss
•Forge Fast Expand is Difficult to Stop as Zerg
The fact that these three are all "hot topics" - and mutually exclusive - is a testament to just how idiotic the human mind can be in large groups. I suppose you take the good with the bad, eh?
Haha ya I was just going to say the same thing. Pretty hilarious series of statements.
Forge Fast Expand is Difficult to Stop as Zerg This is something we discussed at BlizzCon as well. The new units we’re bringing in should allow zerg to play more aggressively versus players who are defending heavily with little intention of attacking in the early/mid game. For now, we believe this isn’t a game breaking issue because overall, zerg is performing well against protoss. In fact, zerg is not struggling at any level of play, and their win ratio compared to skill is extremely solid at every skill level.
I really hope this is PR directed at bronze league zergs, if they actually want to change the way the match up work into non ffe than i am worried for the knowledge of the game ( and strategy game in general ) as well as the way pvz is now and how it was in the gw expand days when zerg did not knew how to play eco.
When I saw this i giggled a lot... As a protoss player roach busts on every map except Shakuras are nearly impossible to hold (the one base version more so)... If you do hold you usually lose your entire wall off and maybe an expo... I cant believe that people say it is even remotely hard to play against.
On January 26 2012 03:52 Shockk wrote: So Protoss is doing well overall, with the exception of tournament wins, which are decided amongst a select group too small for any statistical relevance. And Terran is doing ok-ish at high levels, but struggingly below masters, which is a group representing a huge percentage of the playerbase.
ok-ish? OK-ISH? Terran are doing AWESOME at high level.
And seriously, if you can't understand that eSport and pro-level of play is where the balance is relevant... i'm sorry for you. Any balance statement is falacious and utterly stupid if the game is not played at a very high level, simply because it means that the players are only using a small percentage of what is available to them and not efficiently.
And, the game feel actually quite balanced lately.
So in essence you are saying “let’s exclude the majority of our customers and only pander to the highest level of players” affectively wiping out three fourths of their customers making the game not very profitable. You have to make the game fun at all levels, which means balanced at all levels. Not just the highest even if you consider the highest the most relevant.
And I agree the game does feel fairly balanced even no I have an endless amount of frustration at my level, but I realize I just haven't been able to master Terran.
On January 26 2012 03:52 Shockk wrote: So Protoss is doing well overall, with the exception of tournament wins, which are decided amongst a select group too small for any statistical relevance. And Terran is doing ok-ish at high levels, but struggingly below masters, which is a group representing a huge percentage of the playerbase.
ok-ish? OK-ISH? Terran are doing AWESOME at high level.
And seriously, if you can't understand that eSport and pro-level of play is where the balance is relevant... i'm sorry for you. Any balance statement is falacious and utterly stupid if the game is not played at a very high level, simply because it means that the players are only using a small percentage of what is available to them and not efficiently.
And, the game feel actually quite balanced lately.
But eSports don't make money for Blizzard, it the little guys that populate the metals and the 2v2s. Are you that enthusiastic about HotS? I'm not and don't feel like I have to have it, to be honest. Also if the declining player numbers according to sc2ranks are at all accurate, it means HotS won't sell well, and the other expansion might even be cancelled imo.
On January 26 2012 03:50 Angel_ wrote: i would like to officially state my opinion that if any other company was in charge of game design i think starcraft 2 would be a more complex game, with a lot more depth of play. i dont think they concretely answered a single question, and they talk about "lower level" without it affecting "higher level", like that's actually something they're really capable of doing without higher level players taking advantage of it.
Good thing it is only your opinion, most companies would take the ez step and mirror the races so everything is the same but named differently and then consider it balanced and never patch it again.
On January 26 2012 04:03 Figgy wrote: I've always thought the fix for pvz mutas was simple. +1 phoenix air attack range, while keep their ability the same range It would only have an effect against Mutas, and make phoenix worth their cost as viable anti air.
Actually it would effect overlord/queen/spore dynamic in PvZ midgame as well. PvT would be affected despite your wishful thinking. Remember phoenix/colossus style that was popular during TSL 3? Even +1 might be too much...maybe .5. Still, there are better ways to design the unit.
On January 26 2012 03:53 50bani wrote: It seems Dayvie does not feel that Protoss has a critical mass problem. It is massively overpowered in late game max vs max situations, where it loses is the midgame. This is why high level Terrans have maintaned good winrates against Protoss for pretty much all time, because they are very active. Low leaguers are too passive and too keen to play deathball vs deathball which is impossible currently. Against Zerg, it is all about getting over 150 supply. Nothing can happen in the game until Broodlords are out, and even those aren't all too powerful on some of the maps. The fact is that Mutalisks are the only thing you can do to win at ZvP besides Broodlord/Infestor situationally, and it seems Protosses are going to figure out Mutas as well. I think the game doesn't look so good balance-wise. It is the same problem of the game being imbalanced in different spots in favor of all races, which makes the numbers look good. But the game lacks some playability because the races are not quite equal at all times and we end up in situations where we don't have a chance to win any more despite supply, economy, or units lost looking equal.
you make some good points, but i dont know why people believe in this myth that a game of which consists of totally different fractions(terran/zerg/protoss) can be equal at every level and every stage of the game. Not even broodwar can say " o hey it requires equal amount of difficulty to beat certain strategys". The fact is, it will never be possible and even if it comes near to that , it still would be a matter of opinion on what is harder to execute compared to defending it.
Do you think terran in broodwar has to try harder for their wins? i definately would say so , Idra in his broodwar days is famous for QQ'in about how weak terran is in broodwar(his race). However what does flash have to say about all of this? BAD NOOB IS BAD i'd presume.
On January 26 2012 03:52 Shockk wrote: So Protoss is doing well overall, with the exception of tournament wins, which are decided amongst a select group too small for any statistical relevance. And Terran is doing ok-ish at high levels, but struggingly below masters, which is a group representing a huge percentage of the playerbase.
And they're considering buffing protoss overall, but Ghosts are fine and maybe they'll screw around a bit with the Hellions, both of which are units that have the highest effect with great control but get destroyed quickly by players lacking the proper micro (i.e. the huge parts of sub-masters players that have issues in TvZ and TvP).
By no means do I want to complain about balance; I realize that I'm in no position to properly judge it anyway. But I find it curious that Blizzard constantly needs to appease the "pro" figureheads with comments like these, while the masses get vague promises about maybe fooling around with this or that.
And they should fix the game's horrible battle.net interface before they tinker with balance issues. I bet it'd take a fraction of the time to polish this game's menu to the level of SC/BW and WC3 than it'd take for all the fine-tuning the majority won't even notice.
The thing about that is it is impossible to balance for higher and lower levels. I don't think they should balance for lower levels.
I mean look at BW. The majority of people in BW was like D level which was like masters and lower in SC2 but nobody said anything about the game is too hard. TvP was hard as hell in the lower levels but people just aimed to get better, not complain about the game being too hard.
On January 26 2012 03:52 Shockk wrote: So Protoss is doing well overall, with the exception of tournament wins, which are decided amongst a select group too small for any statistical relevance. And Terran is doing ok-ish at high levels, but struggingly below masters, which is a group representing a huge percentage of the playerbase.
ok-ish? OK-ISH? Terran are doing AWESOME at high level.
And seriously, if you can't understand that eSport and pro-level of play is where the balance is relevant... i'm sorry for you. Any balance statement is falacious and utterly stupid if the game is not played at a very high level, simply because it means that the players are only using a small percentage of what is available to them and not efficiently.
And, the game feel actually quite balanced lately.
But eSports don't make money for Blizzard, it the little guys that populate the metals and the 2v2s. Are you that enthusiastic about HotS? I'm not and don't feel like I have to have it, to be honest. Also if the declining player numbers according to sc2ranks are at all accurate, it means HotS won't sell well, and the other expansion might even be cancelled imo.
There is so much wrong information in this post it is staggering.
Large tournaments have to pay Blizzard in order to use SC2. Even small tournaments provided valuable marketing for Blizzard and SC2 and help promote the brand. There is no recurring monthly subscription for playing SC2, so if Blizzard wants to make money in addition to initial sales of the game, it is through these tournaments and the additional players it might bring in.
Declining player numbers means that the "casual" players are getting sick of Wings of Liberty. This is perfectly normal and expected to be frank. I don't think Blizzard expected every single person who purchased the game to play regularly for the rest of their lives. It's a statement for the longevity of the game that players only started to decline almost a year and a half after release with only minor content additions.
I also guarantee you that unless they really didn't like SC2, most of those people will buy HotS and play it for at least a little bit, just like they did with WoL. Not playing SC2 doesn't mean that they're done with the franchise, it means they are done with WoL. But they bought it for a reason, and unless the game didn't live up to their standard, they'll buy HotS for the same reason.
And there is no way they'll cancel Legacy of the Void unless HotS is a complete failure (which I don't see happening). Too much potential money there for them to just scrap it for no reason.
Agree on all points, wouldn't say FFE is a problem PvZ though... and where's the snipe-nerf for lategame TvZ? Thought that was probably the most needed change of all. (I play Toss)
Its cool that they are listening to the community on current balance issues and FoTM build problems but are Blizzard ever going to tackle the issue of P needing a from the ground up redesign? People in this thread have already pointed out colossus as a badly designed unit and the whole concept of warp-gates is still pretty terrible.
TvP is annoying as hell to play, Terran can crush early-mid game while toss can either go for some all-in or be super passive till they hit three base. Terran can hang outside Tosses natural, splitting armies and dropping while delaying the toss 3rd. Once again we are presented with the scenario where the toss can't do much but defend and keep their colossus/templars and tech buildings alive.
Terran has to go Vikings when they see Colossus and are inevitably going to add ghosts later while toss has nearly zero harass options apart from some surprise DTs or blink-stalkers both of which usually are part of an all-in. Chargelots are boring, minimal micro damage sponges, which lead to the comical situation of a terran player kiting at 300apm while the toss can't actually do anything other than make sure their core ball doesn't fall too far behind the chargelots. I could go on but suffice to say the matchup is flawed and not fun to watch or play.
I kind of like the suggestion for 0 supply observers in the comments. I mean they do cost 75 gas.
Mutas are a bitch in PvZ, but phoenix can kite mutas forever until you get storms or archons. Stargates are still pretty good against zerg. I'm trying out phoenix into chargelot/sentry into HT-- not too bad.
So blizzard will now listen to bronzies to adjust the game??????? Moving units etc (read Terran cant beat Protoss). Terran is very generic very basic race, if you played any rts before (CnC, War3) its very simplistic (at lower levels)... I dont understand you Kim
On January 26 2012 02:47 SgtCoDFish wrote: I noticed this as I logged into B.net; it's a blog by David Kim answering some questions about some current hot topics in SC2.
The topics he discusses are:
Mass Mutalisks vs. Protoss
Protoss Win Rate is Too Low in Tournaments
Carrier Removal in Heart of the Swarm
Terran Can’t Beat Protoss
Ghost EMP is Too Weak
Forge Fast Expand is Difficult to Stop as Zerg
Nydus Worm is Too Inconsistent — Make It More Like the Overlord Transport
I recently took an opportunity to share some of the feedback I received from pro players at the G Star event in Korea via a Q & A, and I was interested to see your reactions to that discussion in the blog comments and on the forum. I noticed that some players were worried that we don’t take the community’s feedback into account, and that we only listen to pro players. While we base our balance decisions on many different factors, including pro player feedback, internal testing, tournament play and more, our player community remains a vital source of feedback about StarCraft II. Every week we comb various forums and sites to get a feel for what our players are experiencing, and I thought I’d comment on some of the concerns we’ve seen appear in the community recently.
I thought it was pretty interesting, and it answers some of the questions I would've liked to ask him myself. Enjoy. :D
Notice hao most of this shit is protoss related... Notice how we havent heard from huk in a while.. notice hao orgasm toss (oGsMC = orGasMC toss well not anymoar ) got demoted to code a.. Fuck
On January 26 2012 04:30 architecture wrote: How come only P's can complain about mass muta?
Mass muta is equally annoying and ridiculous in TvZ.
Protoss dont have marines. Marines make holding mutas so much easier than stalkers. There is no critical mass of mutas that will kill a big bunch of stimmed marines while mutas will start raping huge groups of stalkers.
On January 26 2012 03:52 Shockk wrote: So Protoss is doing well overall, with the exception of tournament wins, which are decided amongst a select group too small for any statistical relevance. And Terran is doing ok-ish at high levels, but struggingly below masters, which is a group representing a huge percentage of the playerbase.
ok-ish? OK-ISH? Terran are doing AWESOME at high level.
And seriously, if you can't understand that eSport and pro-level of play is where the balance is relevant... i'm sorry for you. Any balance statement is falacious and utterly stupid if the game is not played at a very high level, simply because it means that the players are only using a small percentage of what is available to them and not efficiently.
And, the game feel actually quite balanced lately.
But eSports don't make money for Blizzard, it the little guys that populate the metals and the 2v2s. Are you that enthusiastic about HotS? I'm not and don't feel like I have to have it, to be honest. Also if the declining player numbers according to sc2ranks are at all accurate, it means HotS won't sell well, and the other expansion might even be cancelled imo.
Aside from the fact that this is a moot point, as Blizz recognise this (to an extent, and better than you do) and stated in the blog that they're looking to make things better for lower level terrans even if it means higher terrans have to work harder.
You have a very narrow view to say that eSports doesn't make money for Blizzard, or rather StarCraft existing as an esport. Surely you can see that the growth of MLG and GSL, as well as other tournaments, propagating StarCraft further and further is making Blizzard money? How many people are there who are just going to encounter StarCraft as a game rather than as an esport? Not very many left, this long after launch. It's the exposure of SC2 to the mainstream that is what will generate sales now. Blizzard will enjoy the highest revenues if they support the competitive scene as best they can, I mean they even have a deal in place where they take 50% of ad revenue of any tournament with a prize pool higher than $5k.
Look at reddit, where Starcraft posts occupy top 10 spots on the front page for hours almost daily. There is no question that continuing to support SC2 as an esport pays for itself even in free advertising everywhere. Those little guys in 2v2s and metals? Theres a high chance the reason they found out about StarCraft is because of it's power and exposure as an esport.
On January 26 2012 03:50 Angel_ wrote: i would like to officially state my opinion that if any other company was in charge of game design i think starcraft 2 would be a more complex game, with a lot more depth of play. i dont think they concretely answered a single question, and they talk about "lower level" without it affecting "higher level", like that's actually something they're really capable of doing without higher level players taking advantage of it.
completely disagree with that. i think blizzards approach is very good, and i'd just ignore the talk about low level balance as something they say to keep the masses at peace. not something they actually do often or at all.
On January 26 2012 04:22 HaXXspetten wrote: Agree on all points, wouldn't say FFE is a problem PvZ though... and where's the snipe-nerf for lategame TvZ? Thought that was probably the most needed change of all. (I play Toss)
Ghost snipe is not a problem in TvZ, considering you always need tanks against zerg against a competent unit composition and broodlords attacking ghosts with tanks hurting them with friendly fire is always a problem. It's just a micro battle (and its a lot more complex than ghost vs HT, which is just retarded). Also if your ghosts are even slightly out of position in a scenario where both players have equal supply, you just lose the game as Terran.
I think there was a game MVP vs Stephano or some other zerg where he made 50 ghosts, the other guy had broodlord/infestor/ling with similar supplies and the zerg won, even with the terran on the high ground. That's just one game, but it's fucking MVP. There is no problem with ghost snipe.
EDIT: I think it was against darkforce actually. O hai darkforce.
On January 26 2012 03:52 Shockk wrote: So Protoss is doing well overall, with the exception of tournament wins, which are decided amongst a select group too small for any statistical relevance. And Terran is doing ok-ish at high levels, but struggingly below masters, which is a group representing a huge percentage of the playerbase.
ok-ish? OK-ISH? Terran are doing AWESOME at high level.
And seriously, if you can't understand that eSport and pro-level of play is where the balance is relevant... i'm sorry for you. Any balance statement is falacious and utterly stupid if the game is not played at a very high level, simply because it means that the players are only using a small percentage of what is available to them and not efficiently.
And, the game feel actually quite balanced lately.
But eSports don't make money for Blizzard, it the little guys that populate the metals and the 2v2s. Are you that enthusiastic about HotS? I'm not and don't feel like I have to have it, to be honest. Also if the declining player numbers according to sc2ranks are at all accurate, it means HotS won't sell well, and the other expansion might even be cancelled imo.
There is so much wrong information in this post it is staggering.
Large tournaments have to pay Blizzard in order to use SC2. Even small tournaments provided valuable marketing for Blizzard and SC2 and help promote the brand. There is no recurring monthly subscription for playing SC2, so if Blizzard wants to make money in addition to initial sales of the game, it is through these tournaments and the additional players it might bring in.
Declining player numbers means that the "casual" players are getting sick of Wings of Liberty. This is perfectly normal and expected to be frank. I don't think Blizzard expected every single person who purchased the game to play regularly for the rest of their lives. It's a statement for the longevity of the game that players only started to decline almost a year and a half after release with only minor content additions.
I also guarantee you that unless they really didn't like SC2, most of those people will buy HotS and play it for at least a little bit, just like they did with WoL. Not playing SC2 doesn't mean that they're done with the franchise, it means they are done with WoL. But they bought it for a reason, and unless the game didn't live up to their standard, they'll buy HotS for the same reason.
And there is no way they'll cancel Legacy of the Void unless HotS is a complete failure (which I don't see happening). Too much potential money there for them to just scrap it for no reason.
I think you are missing a part of the picture. Who are the majority of people that watch the tournaments? When I watch a MLG tournament and there are 40,000 viewers, do you really think that those are all tournament players? Do you think they are all Master players or even Diamond players? No… In order for tournaments to pull in 40,000+ viewers you need to pander to all leagues making the best game you can in order to maintain their customer base. If the balance is so out of whack at lower levels, then you lose your customer base which ultimately affects the tournament. no customers = no tournaments = no money.
And maybe I’m speaking for myself here, but as a gold player… I’m here to tell you that if the balance was a complete wreck because they are pandering to higher levels, then odds are I’m going to get so frustrated with the game that I say screw it and play a different game shifting my interest from SC2 to all together to a new game and new tournaments.
On January 26 2012 04:34 NMHU. wrote: ''Terran Can’t Beat Protoss'' ''Ghost EMP is Too Weak''
As a protoss player, I only have to say : ''lol''
- NMHU.
Thank you hmmm Terran cant beat protoss lololol
Emp... Same aoe as storm. Does damage instantly, impossible to dodge also takes energy in aoe / feed back only does 1 unit and costs 2/3rds of the gas. ghosts take 75 gas to tech to. (tech lab n ghost academy) Fuck lets all just play terran!!
On January 26 2012 04:30 architecture wrote: How come only P's can complain about mass muta?
Mass muta is equally annoying and ridiculous in TvZ.
We dont have those 50 mineral units that kill staff really fast when you press "T"
After a certain scale is reached, mutas beat stalkers. 3/3 Marines /w Stim & Medivacs on the other hand can beat mutas at the same numbers as there are marines despite being a 50/0 unit vs a 100/100 unit.
Muta ball in late PvZ is a bit stupid, because you basically just spam single unit and the toss ca't really leave the base unless you miscontrol them. Either add something that holds them in place so archons can molest them with their splash or add another upgrade to Fleet beacon that lets phoenix fight them cost-effectively, probably with splash because any air kiting with phoenixes is really gard with the built in delay and you want something that actively discourages too many mutas while a few is still fine. It also doesn't make them all that stronger vs corruptors.
I'm actually surprised there's no answer about infestor broodlord in PvZ, because countering it with mothership feels really gimmicky, even though it gets the job done.
On January 26 2012 04:34 NMHU. wrote: ''Terran Can’t Beat Protoss'' ''Ghost EMP is Too Weak''
As a protoss player, I only have to say : ''lol''
- NMHU.
Thank you hmmm Terran cant beat protoss lololol
Emp... Same aoe as storm. Does damage instantly, impossible to dodge also takes energy in aoe / feed back only does 1 unit and costs 2/3rds of the gas. ghosts take 75 gas to tech to. (tech lab n ghost academy) Fuck lets all just play terran!!
EMP is a projectile. I think the word you're looking for is possible.
The irony is that storm is instant cast but damage over time and actually is "impossible to dodge" after it's cast, whether or not the toss cast it on units is a different story.
I just hope that they discontinue their "next patch = next Terran nerf" policy as it is incredible hard for current Master players to play consistant and it is a long way to obtain the necessary skill which makes Korean Terrans so strong.
I like the suggestions in the comments for increasing the range of the phoenix so that they would now be able to kite mutas easier thus making them a more viable counter however doing that wouldn't really help the lower level community concerns that Blizzard seems to want to address. The lower level players would benefit much more from an AoE upgrade. It will be interesting to see what direction they choose.
What I like about the AoE change is that it wouldn't change much against smaller groups of muta harass which I feel are exciting and fun to play against but would prevent a Muta Blob from just dominating everything.
I wish he would at least have acknowledged the possibility of changing/removing the colossus. I don't like how the answer to the question of "What to do with the problem of carrier and colossus having the same role?" is to stubbornly keep the colossus.
On January 26 2012 04:34 NMHU. wrote: ''Terran Can’t Beat Protoss'' ''Ghost EMP is Too Weak''
As a protoss player, I only have to say : ''lol''
- NMHU.
Thank you hmmm Terran cant beat protoss lololol
Emp... Same aoe as storm. Does damage instantly, impossible to dodge also takes energy in aoe / feed back only does 1 unit and costs 2/3rds of the gas. ghosts take 75 gas to tech to. (tech lab n ghost academy) Fuck lets all just play terran!!
EMP is a projectile. I think the word you're looking for is possible.
Is that a serious response? Show me a case of someone dodging a sc2 emp projectile or hell just a straight up image of the projectile's flight.
Completely ridiculous to say that emp is not more effective than emp and is "dodgeable" =.=
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
Can you imagine TvP? Phoenix/Colossi isn't that common (it's been used a bit), but that sort of army composition is already one of the hardest to beat. Now you're suggesting to make it even stronger? I'm not going to deny that you're a better player than me, and perhaps that is the appropriate answer to the Mutalisk problem, but it would really mess up TvP. David Kim, while I don't agree with everything he says, has a very good point that changing one thing like that can greatly affect the entire metagame in multiple match-ups.
I think we should revisit IdrA's old solution, but tweak it a bit: + Show Spoiler +
"Remove [Protoss] from the game."
I mean, let's face it, most of these problems deal with Protoss anyways...
But on a more serious note, I think that it's silly to talk about the GSL. I know that this is a hypothetical situation and there's far too many variables to actually account for everything, but seeing as over half of the GSLs have been won by Mvp or NesTea, I think that this argument has some merit:
If NesTea or Mvp were to have played Protoss, Zerg, or Terran. They would be a successful progamer. They are determined, their RTS experience goes back a long time, they have experience playing games on stage, and frankly, they're on a superior level to everyone else.
On January 26 2012 04:30 Sapphire.lux wrote: Looks like mech vs Protoss is not even on their mind, sigh...
HOTS can't come soon enough.
I've thought about this issue a lot and really I'm not sure that I want Mech AND Bio to be options in TvP. In BW you had to mech vs P, HAD to. Aside from very risky strats like the Deep Six Protoss AOE just chewed up Terran Bio making it a death wish to try it in most situations.
TvZ only recently, after 10 years of play, began to have mech appear at regular intervals for BW. I feel like there is a way to mech vs P, or at least incorporate mech, but it just hasn't been figured out yet in SC2. And barring that, like you said, HOTS soon, though a unit specifically designed to make meching viable just feels too contrived and pandering.
-Scrap tempest, give phoenix AtA splash damage like Corsair (possibly as research on Fleet beacon?). Adjust damage/range/other stats as needed to maintain balance. -Rework carriers so they have the microability of BW carriers. -Add a new damage based harass unit instead of Tempest for HOTS to stop the Oracle whiners.
On January 26 2012 04:34 NMHU. wrote: ''Terran Can’t Beat Protoss'' ''Ghost EMP is Too Weak''
As a protoss player, I only have to say : ''lol''
- NMHU.
Thank you hmmm Terran cant beat protoss lololol
Emp... Same aoe as storm. Does damage instantly, impossible to dodge also takes energy in aoe / feed back only does 1 unit and costs 2/3rds of the gas. ghosts take 75 gas to tech to. (tech lab n ghost academy) Fuck lets all just play terran!!
EMP is a projectile. I think the word you're looking for is possible.
Is that a serious response? Show me a case of someone dodging a sc2 emp projectile or hell just a straight up image of the projectile's flight.
Completely ridiculous to say that emp is not more effective than emp and is "dodgeable" =.=
Thanks for putting words in my mouth. Where the fuck did I say "is not more effective?" Please quote that part. Oh wait, you can't. Was pointing out the irony that he's complaining about EMP being undodgeable yet it's more dodgeable than a storm because it has a flight path (even if it's a .2-.5 second flight path).
On January 26 2012 04:22 HaXXspetten wrote: Agree on all points, wouldn't say FFE is a problem PvZ though... and where's the snipe-nerf for lategame TvZ? Thought that was probably the most needed change of all. (I play Toss)
Ghost snipe is not a problem in TvZ, considering you always need tanks against zerg against a competent unit composition and broodlords attacking ghosts with tanks hurting them with friendly fire is always a problem. It's just a micro battle (and its a lot more complex than ghost vs HT, which is just retarded). Also if your ghosts are even slightly out of position in a scenario where both players have equal supply, you just lose the game as Terran.
I think there was a game MVP vs Stephano or some other zerg where he made 50 ghosts, the other guy had broodlord/infestor/ling with similar supplies and the zerg won, even with the terran on the high ground. That's just one game, but it's fucking MVP. There is no problem with ghost snipe.
EDIT: I think it was against darkforce actually. O hai darkforce.
The problem with ghosts and snipe is they literally counter everything zerg has late game.. Infestor broodlord? Bam emp +Snipe Ultras? Snipe! As a protoss player is just seems odd that terran can literally counter every tech choice of the Zerg with one unit. Unlike in TvP where if you go ghost Toss can go collosi and switch back and forth etc.
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
Can you imagine TvP? Phoenix/Colossi isn't that common (it's been used a bit), but that sort of army composition is already one of the hardest to beat. Now you're suggesting to make it even stronger? I'm not going to deny that you're a better player than me, and perhaps that is the appropriate answer to the Mutalisk problem, but it would really mess up TvP. David Kim, while I don't agree with everything he says, has a very good point that changing one thing like that can greatly affect the entire metagame in multiple match-ups.
I think we should revisit IdrA's old solution, but tweak it a bit: + Show Spoiler +
"Remove [Protoss] from the game."
I mean, let's face it, most of these problems deal with Protoss anyways...
But on a more serious note, I think that it's silly to talk about the GSL. I know that this is a hypothetical situation and there's far too many variables to actually account for everything, but seeing as over half of the GSLs have been won by Mvp or NesTea, I think that this argument has some merit:
If NesTea or Mvp were to have played Protoss, Zerg, or Terran. They would be a successful progamer. They are determined, their RTS experience goes back a long time, they have experience playing games on stage, and frankly, they're on a superior level to everyone else.
Im not convinced it would affect pvt that bad. Vikings dont clump up like mutas do. You would just have to be careful about medivac positioning
On January 26 2012 04:34 NMHU. wrote: ''Terran Can’t Beat Protoss'' ''Ghost EMP is Too Weak''
As a protoss player, I only have to say : ''lol''
- NMHU.
Thank you hmmm Terran cant beat protoss lololol
Emp... Same aoe as storm. Does damage instantly, impossible to dodge also takes energy in aoe / feed back only does 1 unit and costs 2/3rds of the gas. ghosts take 75 gas to tech to. (tech lab n ghost academy) Fuck lets all just play terran!!
Ghosts take 40 seconds to build. High Templar take 5.
Ghosts can only build from a Barracks that has a Tech Lab attached to it. High Templar can build anywhere within a pylon radius.
EMP does a good job against HT tech--if you micro better than the Protoss--while Ghosts are much less useful against builds in which the Protoss gets Colossi sooner. If a Terran tries to get Ghosts, and the Protoss gets Colossi, timing attacks off of two bases can be devastating because there's almost no way that the Terran can have Vikings to deal with Colossi and upgrades to deal with the massive army. High Templar, on the other hand, do very well against everything in the Terran arsenal. Against Ghosts, you have to micro better, but Ghosts are not a "hard counter" to HTs; it all comes down to who controls better (unless Protoss makes a mistake, in which case that's their fault). Not only do Storm and Archon deal well with any sort of bio push, but Feedback devastates all Terran tech. Thors, Banshees, Ravens, Battlecruisers, Medivacs. All of them get demolished by Feedback in the same way that Snipe can demolish Zerg tech late game; the difference: Feedback is a one click wonder that takes next to nothing to do.
EMP targets ground, meaning that in an HT vs Ghost 1v1 fight, while the EMP can hit first, for all intents and purposes the Terran has to control far better and control well. The Protoss just has to click to Feedback the Ghost, then it flies to the Ghost and the second it's in range, the Ghost dies. Plus, if the HT has 150+ energy, then the Feedback is near impossible to stop, even if it does not do the killing blow to the Ghost.
Try putting your High Templar in a Warp Prism; it's not the hardest micro, it's not like controlling a big Chargelot/Colossi ball is that difficult, and frankly it almost guarantees that you will get off some storms. Good storms in conjunction with Chargelots will beat Terran.
On January 26 2012 04:34 NMHU. wrote: ''Terran Can’t Beat Protoss'' ''Ghost EMP is Too Weak''
As a protoss player, I only have to say : ''lol''
- NMHU.
Thank you hmmm Terran cant beat protoss lololol
Emp... Same aoe as storm. Does damage instantly, impossible to dodge also takes energy in aoe / feed back only does 1 unit and costs 2/3rds of the gas. ghosts take 75 gas to tech to. (tech lab n ghost academy) Fuck lets all just play terran!!
EMP is a projectile. I think the word you're looking for is possible.
Is that a serious response? Show me a case of someone dodging a sc2 emp projectile or hell just a straight up image of the projectile's flight.
Completely ridiculous to say that emp is not more effective than emp and is "dodgeable" =.=
Thanks for putting words in my mouth. Where the fuck did I say "is not more effective?" Please quote that part. Oh wait, you can't. Was pointing out the irony that he's complaining about EMP being undodgeable yet it's more dodgeable than a storm because it has a flight path (even if it's a .2-.5 second flight path).
Lol more dodgeable then a storm? you can't be serious? EMP is instant, Storm does damage over time its very very easy(Even more so with stim) To run out of a storm and take next to no damage. Mean while EMP is instant it hits and bam mass damage, and as the other guy said give me one example of ANY toss play EVER beign able to dodge the EMP projectile.....
This all being said I think EMP is fairly balanced at the moment and ghosts are fine in the PvT match up, Snipe can be aggravating to deal with but not imba.
Sadly its a joke interview. Hes talking about things from like 2 months ago. 2 months ago, PvZ mutalisks was a big thing... now its not. If it were, we would only see mutalisks in high level korean ZvP every game. And that's not what goes on.... In fact korean protoss' tendancy to do 2base timings makes mutas pretty rare in the GSL. In fact if any changes were made (like this ridiculous aoe suggestion, lol) you would just go back to NEVER seeing mutalisks in pvz ever. Don't think mutalisks are the PvZ winrate problem.
And yet we see ghosts in EVERY SINGLE MATCHUP IN THE ENDGAME, but EMP is too weak.... Terran dominates the top level of the scene still. Like day9 said on his recent daily, you get to the endgame and you start saccing marines to make room for more and more ghosts because they are so awesome.
So not sure if david kim out of touch, or just delayed. Delayed reaction is what I'll go with. The fact is that the game is SO CLOSE TO BALANCED right now.. there just isn't a lot to change that wouldn't have dire consequences.
If they would just chance carrier something like broodlord that would spawn endless ammounts of intercepters which would die in after some time it would be better, now it only drains all mone yand is somewhat useless.
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
Can you imagine TvP? Phoenix/Colossi isn't that common (it's been used a bit), but that sort of army composition is already one of the hardest to beat. Now you're suggesting to make it even stronger? I'm not going to deny that you're a better player than me, and perhaps that is the appropriate answer to the Mutalisk problem, but it would really mess up TvP. David Kim, while I don't agree with everything he says, has a very good point that changing one thing like that can greatly affect the entire metagame in multiple match-ups.
I think we should revisit IdrA's old solution, but tweak it a bit: + Show Spoiler +
"Remove [Protoss] from the game."
I mean, let's face it, most of these problems deal with Protoss anyways...
But on a more serious note, I think that it's silly to talk about the GSL. I know that this is a hypothetical situation and there's far too many variables to actually account for everything, but seeing as over half of the GSLs have been won by Mvp or NesTea, I think that this argument has some merit:
If NesTea or Mvp were to have played Protoss, Zerg, or Terran. They would be a successful progamer. They are determined, their RTS experience goes back a long time, they have experience playing games on stage, and frankly, they're on a superior level to everyone else.
Im not convinced it would affect pvt that bad. Vikings dont clump up like mutas do. You would just have to be careful about medivac positioning
When Vikings are shooting at Colossi, they do. Clearly you haven't played a game of TvP recently. It's the same problem with Archons, except that in the case of Archons it's more difficult to actually have it happen.
And what on earth are you talking about "medivac positioning" ?
On January 26 2012 04:22 HaXXspetten wrote: Agree on all points, wouldn't say FFE is a problem PvZ though... and where's the snipe-nerf for lategame TvZ? Thought that was probably the most needed change of all. (I play Toss)
Ghost snipe is not a problem in TvZ, considering you always need tanks against zerg against a competent unit composition and broodlords attacking ghosts with tanks hurting them with friendly fire is always a problem. It's just a micro battle (and its a lot more complex than ghost vs HT, which is just retarded). Also if your ghosts are even slightly out of position in a scenario where both players have equal supply, you just lose the game as Terran.
I think there was a game MVP vs Stephano or some other zerg where he made 50 ghosts, the other guy had broodlord/infestor/ling with similar supplies and the zerg won, even with the terran on the high ground. That's just one game, but it's fucking MVP. There is no problem with ghost snipe.
EDIT: I think it was against darkforce actually. O hai darkforce.
The problem with ghosts and snipe is they literally counter everything zerg has late game.. Infestor broodlord? Bam emp +Snipe Ultras? Snipe! As a protoss player is just seems odd that terran can literally counter every tech choice of the Zerg with one unit. Unlike in TvP where if you go ghost Toss can go collosi and switch back and forth etc.
It's impossible for Terran to tech switch anywhere close to as fast as Zerg so if we didn't have the ghosts you would never see a smart Terran go lategame vs Z.
On January 26 2012 04:22 HaXXspetten wrote: Agree on all points, wouldn't say FFE is a problem PvZ though... and where's the snipe-nerf for lategame TvZ? Thought that was probably the most needed change of all. (I play Toss)
Ghost snipe is not a problem in TvZ, considering you always need tanks against zerg against a competent unit composition and broodlords attacking ghosts with tanks hurting them with friendly fire is always a problem. It's just a micro battle (and its a lot more complex than ghost vs HT, which is just retarded). Also if your ghosts are even slightly out of position in a scenario where both players have equal supply, you just lose the game as Terran.
I think there was a game MVP vs Stephano or some other zerg where he made 50 ghosts, the other guy had broodlord/infestor/ling with similar supplies and the zerg won, even with the terran on the high ground. That's just one game, but it's fucking MVP. There is no problem with ghost snipe.
EDIT: I think it was against darkforce actually. O hai darkforce.
The problem with ghosts and snipe is they literally counter everything zerg has late game.. Infestor broodlord? Bam emp +Snipe Ultras? Snipe! As a protoss player is just seems odd that terran can literally counter every tech choice of the Zerg with one unit. Unlike in TvP where if you go ghost Toss can go collosi and switch back and forth etc.
It's impossible for Terran to tech switch anywhere close to as fast as Zerg so if we didn't have the ghosts you would never see a smart Terran go lategame vs Z.
That's not true. Mech is still extremely strong late game. You have to know about what sort of composition/what tech they're going for but it's definitely possible.
On January 26 2012 03:05 Treehead wrote: The top level of play in SC2 is certainly a testament to how quickly the human mind can learn to think and adapt in new and abstract environments - which I've always thought is inspiring. Then, I see comments like these:
•Protoss Win Rate is Too Low in Tournaments
•Terran Can’t Beat Protoss
•Forge Fast Expand is Difficult to Stop as Zerg
The fact that these three are all "hot topics" - and mutually exclusive - is a testament to just how idiotic the human mind can be in large groups. I suppose you take the good with the bad, eh?
Haha ya I was just going to say the same thing. Pretty hilarious series of statements.
Master's +: TvP lategame sucks... MMVG is too strong and protoss has to have an unrealistically good economy and a 240/200 food (via warpin) to contest with 200/200 terran.
Below Masters: TvP lategame sucks, protoss tech units are too good and they ball up, a move, and win.
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
I think it would be a good idea to give Phoenix an upgrade that allows splash instead of a slow ass capital ship I would never build because if I had that much money/time I would just add more templar.
\
Do you understand how much splash protoss already has? Phoenix having splash would be the 4th unit, and one that can move-shoot in a way other units cannot. Protoss doesn't need more splash damage -_-- I know it can seem difficult to grasp from a protoss perspective, but the minute zerg has a unit to control the map, it's ''overpowered''. don't even have lurkers in the game.
Also, no one wants to face a protoss in the GSL. There's a reason for that.
Internationally, this seems to be a problem, but not in Korea
Terran Can’t Beat Protoss- lolwut
Ghost EMP is Too Weak-lolwut
Forge Fast Expand is Difficult to Stop as Zerg-please see MLG Providence Finals
So right now, they are concerned Zerg beat protoss too much (which does not seem to be the case internationally and where Protoss are beating zerg in Korea,) And that protoss beat terran (which is not the case either). Then again, these issues may be focused on the entire starcraft 2 scene, not just the pros.
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
I think it would be a good idea to give Phoenix an upgrade that allows splash instead of a slow ass capital ship I would never build because if I had that much money/time I would just add more templar.
\
Do you understand how much splash protoss already has? Phoenix having splash would be the 4th unit, and one that can move-shoot in a way other units cannot. Protoss doesn't need more splash damage -_-- I know it can seem difficult to grasp from a protoss perspective, but the minute zerg has a unit to control the map, it's ''overpowered''. don't even have lurkers in the game.
Also, no one wants to face a protoss in the GSL. There's a reason for that.
Fine then make Protoss units cost 50% of what they cost now and nobody needs to splash.
On January 26 2012 04:39 Kireak wrote: Some fleet beacon uppgrade for phoenixes that made them own mutas harder and problem solved.
oh please not when i get muta harrased im busy doing shit like chronoboost my blink upgrade while i try to chrono my nexus but it does not work because i have no chrono anyway but i do it anyway. then i try to build cannons which they pick up and im to slow to cancel them because i was busy trying to chrono my nexus.
my point is, from my perspective, you have to stop mutas before they reach a critical mass which means you have to kill them before its to late so adding another long tech route besides storm doesnt really help. id like to fight them without having to tech to the max thats why i dont like this idea of the new protoss unit. you know the flying cannon with splash damage thingy.
i like the idea of TT1 because you could fight them and the zerg would have like to split mutas or smth. i heard ppl in broodwar did that shit with 3 controle groups so imagine that skilllevel cap even in pro games.
but im skeptical. protoss getting a buff seems wierd :>
Pretty good interview and responses. If you expected concrete, absolute answers, you don't know Blizzard. I like that they aren't over-reacting to any single concern. I'm glad they are noticed Protoss do ok in tournaments now (as opposed to 3-4 months ago), but still rarely win it. I'm not sure if something needs to done about it or not, but I suspect PvZ might be the big issue there (it is a very inconsistant match-up, extremely map dependent, from a Protoss perspective).
I like they are trying to make the carrier work at least. Muta have never been a real problem for me in PvZ, but giving phoenix a splash UPGRADE that you get at fleet beacon might be an answer. That way muta still forces a big investment from protoss in response.
The carrier could be reworked to be that splash-type damage unit they want out of the tempest, just make it carrier based. Interceptors could have a different attack for air and ground, with the air one being stronger. Maybe a few other adjustments. That would make the carrier big air-to-air damage dealer(with relatively small ground threat), with colossus being the big ground-to-ground damage dealer, could start to see different roles for the units.
On January 26 2012 05:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:38 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
I think it would be a good idea to give Phoenix an upgrade that allows splash instead of a slow ass capital ship I would never build because if I had that much money/time I would just add more templar.
\
Do you understand how much splash protoss already has? Phoenix having splash would be the 4th unit, and one that can move-shoot in a way other units cannot. Protoss doesn't need more splash damage -_-- I know it can seem difficult to grasp from a protoss perspective, but the minute zerg has a unit to control the map, it's ''overpowered''. don't even have lurkers in the game.
Also, no one wants to face a protoss in the GSL. There's a reason for that.
Fine then make Protoss units cost 50% of what they cost now and nobody needs to splash.
Who doesn't want to face P in GSL?
Taeja is one of the top Terran players in the world and he has claimed that he thinks Protoss is the strongest race. Just sayin'... ^^
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
I think it would be a good idea to give Phoenix an upgrade that allows splash instead of a slow ass capital ship I would never build because if I had that much money/time I would just add more templar.
\
Do you understand how much splash protoss already has? Phoenix having splash would be the 4th unit, and one that can move-shoot in a way other units cannot. Protoss doesn't need more splash damage -_-- I know it can seem difficult to grasp from a protoss perspective, but the minute zerg has a unit to control the map, it's ''overpowered''. don't even have lurkers in the game.
Also, no one wants to face a protoss in the GSL. There's a reason for that.
We would not need so much splash damage if Zerg (and Terran for that matter) didn't produce such cost effective units (assuming no splash damage) in such great quantities. That's how Protoss works, our non splash units don't deal that much damage (stalkers for example), and we have to incorporate support units with splash to stay cost effective. I'm sorry but how do you even stop something like plain mutalings without splash? And I'm talking straight up fight, without accounting for the fact that it's the fastest reasonable unit composition in the game... (yeah, pheonix + speed reapers is faster!!)
Terran actually has more splash: hellions, tanks, seeker missile, EMP, thors, marines. We honestly need all the splash we currently have man. However I think that splash on pheonixes would indeed be too strong, you have a point there.
Why not try a +X range upgrade of some sort for pheonixes? But I'm sure the balance team already has considered it.
On January 26 2012 04:34 NMHU. wrote: ''Terran Can’t Beat Protoss'' ''Ghost EMP is Too Weak''
As a protoss player, I only have to say : ''lol''
- NMHU.
Thank you hmmm Terran cant beat protoss lololol
Emp... Same aoe as storm. Does damage instantly, impossible to dodge also takes energy in aoe / feed back only does 1 unit and costs 2/3rds of the gas. ghosts take 75 gas to tech to. (tech lab n ghost academy) Fuck lets all just play terran!!
Ghosts take 40 seconds to build. High Templar take 5.
Ghosts can only build from a Barracks that has a Tech Lab attached to it. High Templar can build anywhere within a pylon radius.
EMP does a good job against HT tech--if you micro better than the Protoss--while Ghosts are much less useful against builds in which the Protoss gets Colossi sooner. If a Terran tries to get Ghosts, and the Protoss gets Colossi, timing attacks off of two bases can be devastating because there's almost no way that the Terran can have Vikings to deal with Colossi and upgrades to deal with the massive army. High Templar, on the other hand, do very well against everything in the Terran arsenal. Against Ghosts, you have to micro better, but Ghosts are not a "hard counter" to HTs; it all comes down to who controls better (unless Protoss makes a mistake, in which case that's their fault). Not only do Storm and Archon deal well with any sort of bio push, but Feedback devastates all Terran tech. Thors, Banshees, Ravens, Battlecruisers, Medivacs. All of them get demolished by Feedback in the same way that Snipe can demolish Zerg tech late game; the difference: Feedback is a one click wonder that takes next to nothing to do.
EMP targets ground, meaning that in an HT vs Ghost 1v1 fight, while the EMP can hit first, for all intents and purposes the Terran has to control far better and control well. The Protoss just has to click to Feedback the Ghost, then it flies to the Ghost and the second it's in range, the Ghost dies. Plus, if the HT has 150+ energy, then the Feedback is near impossible to stop, even if it does not do the killing blow to the Ghost.
Try putting your High Templar in a Warp Prism; it's not the hardest micro, it's not like controlling a big Chargelot/Colossi ball is that difficult, and frankly it almost guarantees that you will get off some storms. Good storms in conjunction with Chargelots will beat Terran.
Sure, it all depends on micro, but the comparison is still ridiculous. Feedback is single use while emp can work on every single one of your High Templar. Snipe against Zerg is better than Feedback against Terran. As a Zerg, you cannot stop Ghosts from sniping you without killing them. There is literally no way to stop them from sniping you unless you kill them. If you lose all of the energy on your Thors/Banshees/Battlescruisers, then Feedback does nothing (obviously Medivacs and Ravens need energy to do anything so Feedback is a good counter to those, but it also means you are microing your Raven poorly if it keeps on getting Feedbacked). See if more Terrans would say EMP their Thors and Battlecruisers, maybe Feedback wouldn't be so powerful against late game Terran tech.
Look at that. I just solved your Feedback problem for half of your race. Try doing the same for Zerg and snipe.
On January 26 2012 05:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:38 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
I think it would be a good idea to give Phoenix an upgrade that allows splash instead of a slow ass capital ship I would never build because if I had that much money/time I would just add more templar.
\
Do you understand how much splash protoss already has? Phoenix having splash would be the 4th unit, and one that can move-shoot in a way other units cannot. Protoss doesn't need more splash damage -_-- I know it can seem difficult to grasp from a protoss perspective, but the minute zerg has a unit to control the map, it's ''overpowered''. don't even have lurkers in the game.
Also, no one wants to face a protoss in the GSL. There's a reason for that.
Fine then make Protoss units cost 50% of what they cost now and nobody needs to splash.
Who doesn't want to face P in GSL?
Taeja is one of the top Terran players in the world and he has claimed that he thinks Protoss is the strongest race. Just sayin'... ^^
This is a ridiculous argument. Many players can have many different opinions, but their expertise does not make their opinions true. The fact that Terrans have won the last 3 GSLs and the Blizzard Cup which consisted of 2 TvTs and 2 TvZs should point to the idea that no, Protoss is not the strongest race. Either that or Protoss players suck, but in either case the other races shouldn't have a problem with this.
On January 26 2012 02:59 Dingodile wrote: "Ghost EMP is Too Weak" Cant believe that this is true, especially at tvp. I saw in every tournament terran always snacked protoss if they used emp very well.
He is not saying its true. All the headlines, like Ghost EMP is Too Weak, are statements/feelings that the community has expressed in one way or another.
So don't worry, I don't think they will buff EMP. Think so even less when I read his answer.
On January 26 2012 03:05 Treehead wrote: The top level of play in SC2 is certainly a testament to how quickly the human mind can learn to think and adapt in new and abstract environments - which I've always thought is inspiring. Then, I see comments like these:
•Protoss Win Rate is Too Low in Tournaments
•Terran Can’t Beat Protoss
•Forge Fast Expand is Difficult to Stop as Zerg
The fact that these three are all "hot topics" - and mutually exclusive - is a testament to just how idiotic the human mind can be in large groups. I suppose you take the good with the bad, eh?
This is kinda like politics. While the topics may make gold leaguers feel happy everyone else has to read into it. Protoss win rate too low in tournies-legit Terran cant beat protoss AT LOWER LEVELS Forge fast expand isnt dynamic but doesnt cause balance probs either
On January 26 2012 02:57 .kv wrote: glad they are aware of Mutas in PvZ but can't believe there are complaints about emp being too weak
That's how I feel on players saying protoss is to weak.
Honestly game balance wise I think the games pretty good. Was an interesting read but not really much was addressed. Sounds like they are probably just going to wait for HOTS for any major changes again.
On January 26 2012 03:00 sotaporo wrote: i knew terran was weakest race below pro level=D finally someone with credit says that
They are "weakest" at lower levels because lower level players can't play terran that great. Its not a balance problem its a skill problem.
You could say the same thing about Terran in Brood War, can't you? Since it is the most mechanically challenging race in BW, most players just play Protoss or Zerg, and Terrans of a certain rank are likely better than P/Zs of the same rank.
I, as a gold player (don't take it too seriously), think the answers were quite spot on. I came to more or less the same conclusions. I am not quite the superb player, but i feel most of the matches i watch of gsl etc are actually quite balanced. I only see some terrans play a lot better then the rest in terms of control and macro, which should be quite decisive factors in my opinion.
On the other hand, protoss matchup win percentages are actually very solid in major tournaments. So while protoss tournament players aren’t winning as many tournaments, their match to match win percentages in the same tournaments look very solid.
That reminds me of Naniwa at MLG. iirc he crushed faces left and right, including Nestea, but unfortunately didn't get the gold.
The thing I want most, that I know will never happen, are actual drastic changes to protoss. Terran are interesting, Zerg are interesting, but protoss just have so many design issues. Cut the colos, make warpgates an agressive choice rather than an obvious first upgrade and chuck the forcefields, then you can actually balance the race instead of relying on what are basically cheap fixes.
Good interview, glad to see that they aren't giving up on balance until HoTS. But... who has been complaining that FFE is too strong? I've never read nor heard that before that interview. And sure it might be a bit of a boring open, but who is worried that it's imbalance?
Also it was really cool the idea of battle hellions coming out in that form instead of regular form, a very interesting insight on how they try to balance the game down without affecting high level balance.
On January 26 2012 05:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:38 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
I think it would be a good idea to give Phoenix an upgrade that allows splash instead of a slow ass capital ship I would never build because if I had that much money/time I would just add more templar.
\
Do you understand how much splash protoss already has? Phoenix having splash would be the 4th unit, and one that can move-shoot in a way other units cannot. Protoss doesn't need more splash damage -_-- I know it can seem difficult to grasp from a protoss perspective, but the minute zerg has a unit to control the map, it's ''overpowered''. don't even have lurkers in the game.
Also, no one wants to face a protoss in the GSL. There's a reason for that.
Fine then make Protoss units cost 50% of what they cost now and nobody needs to splash.
Who doesn't want to face P in GSL?
You clearly didn't watch the Code S Ro16 group nominations. No one wants to face toss right now.
Interesting, however he didn't say anything about the mothership. If they remove it PvZ lategame will be completely different than it is now, maybe for the the greater or maybe not. I guess time will tell us what Blizzards intentions are with the mothership.
I've been reading and listening to every interview with Blizzard about the state of the game and they have never addressed the fact that so many people consider the colossous to be incredibly boring and is in dire need of a change of design :/
Other than that I really admire their work! Blizzard has done an incredibly job. I can't believe lower level players are actually complaining about game balance and talking like the lower level imbalance is gonna be the end of the game. You realise that this game is pretty darn well balanced at all levels, right? When we talk about imbalance it's litterally because there might be slightly more than a measly 5% difference in one mu.
The difference is those 5 % can mean the difference between winning 5 000 $ or winning 50 000 $ from a tournament at pro level, whereas for the rest of us it's the difference between being number 20 or number 15 in your randomly assigned division.
edit:
On January 26 2012 05:38 Osmoses wrote: The thing I want most, that I know will never happen, are actual drastic changes to protoss. Terran are interesting, Zerg are interesting, but protoss just have so many design issues. Cut the colos, make warpgates an agressive choice rather than an obvious first upgrade and chuck the forcefields, then you can actually balance the race instead of relying on what are basically cheap fixes.
Words of wisdom!!! There is a reason why zvt is by far the most popular mu!
On January 26 2012 05:48 eYeball wrote: Interesting, however he didn't say anything about the mothership. If they remove it PvZ lategame will be completely different than it is now, maybe for the the greater or maybe not. I guess time will tell us what Blizzards intentions are with the mothership.
I don't see how it wouldn't be for the better, without a gimmick that causes a maxed BL/corruptor/infestor army to die in a matter of 1-2 seconds to an inferior army.
On January 26 2012 05:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:38 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
I think it would be a good idea to give Phoenix an upgrade that allows splash instead of a slow ass capital ship I would never build because if I had that much money/time I would just add more templar.
\
Do you understand how much splash protoss already has? Phoenix having splash would be the 4th unit, and one that can move-shoot in a way other units cannot. Protoss doesn't need more splash damage -_-- I know it can seem difficult to grasp from a protoss perspective, but the minute zerg has a unit to control the map, it's ''overpowered''. don't even have lurkers in the game.
Also, no one wants to face a protoss in the GSL. There's a reason for that.
Fine then make Protoss units cost 50% of what they cost now and nobody needs to splash.
Who doesn't want to face P in GSL?
You clearly didn't watch the Code S Ro16 group nominations. No one wants to face toss right now.
Again, this isn't a good argument. It is very possible that playing against Protoss just causes players to have a lot of anxiety rather than meaning that Protoss is better. Playing against Protoss is more stressful than the idea that they cannot be beaten. A good example of this is Nestea saying he hates playing Protoss but he manages to beat them anyways. Or DRG losing to Genius but beating JYP despite JYP supposedly having one of the PvZs and despite Genius admitting in the Ro16 that he loses to DRG most of the time during practice games.
He´s spot on with a lot of the questions. Makes me feel more comfortable with the direction of the game knowing one of the main developers knows what he´s talking about.
Seriously, I play Protoss and I just hate this unit. Its not a siege unit at all, its an a-move unit with horrid design. Get this unit out of here. Carriers are 100000x more appealing.
On January 26 2012 05:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:38 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
I think it would be a good idea to give Phoenix an upgrade that allows splash instead of a slow ass capital ship I would never build because if I had that much money/time I would just add more templar.
\
Do you understand how much splash protoss already has? Phoenix having splash would be the 4th unit, and one that can move-shoot in a way other units cannot. Protoss doesn't need more splash damage -_-- I know it can seem difficult to grasp from a protoss perspective, but the minute zerg has a unit to control the map, it's ''overpowered''. don't even have lurkers in the game.
Also, no one wants to face a protoss in the GSL. There's a reason for that.
Fine then make Protoss units cost 50% of what they cost now and nobody needs to splash.
Who doesn't want to face P in GSL?
You clearly didn't watch the Code S Ro16 group nominations. No one wants to face toss right now.
You're right I didn't watch group nominations, I watch the actual games.
On January 26 2012 04:34 NMHU. wrote: ''Terran Can’t Beat Protoss'' ''Ghost EMP is Too Weak''
As a protoss player, I only have to say : ''lol''
- NMHU.
Thank you hmmm Terran cant beat protoss lololol
Emp... Same aoe as storm. Does damage instantly, impossible to dodge also takes energy in aoe / feed back only does 1 unit and costs 2/3rds of the gas. ghosts take 75 gas to tech to. (tech lab n ghost academy) Fuck lets all just play terran!!
Ghosts take 40 seconds to build. High Templar take 5.
Ghosts can only build from a Barracks that has a Tech Lab attached to it. High Templar can build anywhere within a pylon radius.
EMP does a good job against HT tech--if you micro better than the Protoss--while Ghosts are much less useful against builds in which the Protoss gets Colossi sooner. If a Terran tries to get Ghosts, and the Protoss gets Colossi, timing attacks off of two bases can be devastating because there's almost no way that the Terran can have Vikings to deal with Colossi and upgrades to deal with the massive army. High Templar, on the other hand, do very well against everything in the Terran arsenal. Against Ghosts, you have to micro better, but Ghosts are not a "hard counter" to HTs; it all comes down to who controls better (unless Protoss makes a mistake, in which case that's their fault). Not only do Storm and Archon deal well with any sort of bio push, but Feedback devastates all Terran tech. Thors, Banshees, Ravens, Battlecruisers, Medivacs. All of them get demolished by Feedback in the same way that Snipe can demolish Zerg tech late game; the difference: Feedback is a one click wonder that takes next to nothing to do.
EMP targets ground, meaning that in an HT vs Ghost 1v1 fight, while the EMP can hit first, for all intents and purposes the Terran has to control far better and control well. The Protoss just has to click to Feedback the Ghost, then it flies to the Ghost and the second it's in range, the Ghost dies. Plus, if the HT has 150+ energy, then the Feedback is near impossible to stop, even if it does not do the killing blow to the Ghost.
Try putting your High Templar in a Warp Prism; it's not the hardest micro, it's not like controlling a big Chargelot/Colossi ball is that difficult, and frankly it almost guarantees that you will get off some storms. Good storms in conjunction with Chargelots will beat Terran.
Sure, it all depends on micro, but the comparison is still ridiculous. Feedback is single use while emp can work on every single one of your High Templar. Snipe against Zerg is better than Feedback against Terran. As a Zerg, you cannot stop Ghosts from sniping you without killing them. There is literally no way to stop them from sniping you unless you kill them. If you lose all of the energy on your Thors/Banshees/Battlescruisers, then Feedback does nothing (obviously Medivacs and Ravens need energy to do anything so Feedback is a good counter to those, but it also means you are microing your Raven poorly if it keeps on getting Feedbacked). See if more Terrans would say EMP their Thors and Battlecruisers, maybe Feedback wouldn't be so powerful against late game Terran tech.
Look at that. I just solved your Feedback problem for half of your race. Try doing the same for Zerg and snipe.
On January 26 2012 05:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:38 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
I think it would be a good idea to give Phoenix an upgrade that allows splash instead of a slow ass capital ship I would never build because if I had that much money/time I would just add more templar.
\
Do you understand how much splash protoss already has? Phoenix having splash would be the 4th unit, and one that can move-shoot in a way other units cannot. Protoss doesn't need more splash damage -_-- I know it can seem difficult to grasp from a protoss perspective, but the minute zerg has a unit to control the map, it's ''overpowered''. don't even have lurkers in the game.
Also, no one wants to face a protoss in the GSL. There's a reason for that.
Fine then make Protoss units cost 50% of what they cost now and nobody needs to splash.
Who doesn't want to face P in GSL?
Taeja is one of the top Terran players in the world and he has claimed that he thinks Protoss is the strongest race. Just sayin'... ^^
This is a ridiculous argument. Many players can have many different opinions, but their expertise does not make their opinions true. The fact that Terrans have won the last 3 GSLs and the Blizzard Cup which consisted of 2 TvTs and 2 TvZs should point to the idea that no, Protoss is not the strongest race. Either that or Protoss players suck, but in either case the other races shouldn't have a problem with this.
Banshees need their energy or else they'll get picked out of the sky in no time. And honestly, I understand that you can do that, except that: 1. Thors, Banshees, Ravens, Battlecrusiers, and other tech all happen to be extremely gas intensive. 2. Ghosts cost a lot of gas 3. EMPing Thors is going to take a lot of EMPs since the radius got decreased and Thors happen to be huge. The fact that Terran can do that is different than what I'm saying. I'm merely pointing out that High Templar happen to be extremely good against both Terran bio and Terran tech, while Ghosts are not. I'm not saying that it's some impossible feat to counter, there are plenty of ways (Jjakji used cannons on rocks, which I thought was really clever since most Thor builds result in only a single attack anyways). In the same way, Protoss can just load their High Templar into a Warp Prism and drop them to Storm/Feedback without having to risk getting EMPed. Look at that, I just solved your whole EMP problem (wow that sounded really dumb, just like your post).
Maybe you should read what I was quoting instead of blindly writing something. It wasn't an argument, it was an answer to the question. The guy asked who doesn't want to play Protoss players in the GSL, Taeja doesn't... nice job writing that cute paragraph about how "stupid" I am while making an ass out of yourself.
A little bit off-topic: from a game design's point of view, isn't it kind of stupid that a player is using offensive spells on their own units? Maybe it's just me but that seems like a really stupid thing to have happen.
Internationally, this seems to be a problem, but not in Korea
Terran Can’t Beat Protoss- lolwut
Ghost EMP is Too Weak-lolwut
Forge Fast Expand is Difficult to Stop as Zerg-please see MLG Providence Finals
So right now, they are concerned Zerg beat protoss too much (which does not seem to be the case internationally and where Protoss are beating zerg in Korea,) And that protoss beat terran (which is not the case either). Then again, these issues may be focused on the entire starcraft 2 scene, not just the pros.
I agree with everything you said except number 1. and only because they didn't say Protss win rate in tournaments is too low, they say the number of tournaments won by protoss is too low, he said they only reason they haven't changed much is because even though Toss doesn't normally win the whole tournament their win rate during the tournament is good.
On January 26 2012 05:45 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On January 26 2012 05:10 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 05:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:38 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
I think it would be a good idea to give Phoenix an upgrade that allows splash instead of a slow ass capital ship I would never build because if I had that much money/time I would just add more templar.
\
Do you understand how much splash protoss already has? Phoenix having splash would be the 4th unit, and one that can move-shoot in a way other units cannot. Protoss doesn't need more splash damage -_-- I know it can seem difficult to grasp from a protoss perspective, but the minute zerg has a unit to control the map, it's ''overpowered''. don't even have lurkers in the game.
Also, no one wants to face a protoss in the GSL. There's a reason for that.
Fine then make Protoss units cost 50% of what they cost now and nobody needs to splash.
Who doesn't want to face P in GSL?
You clearly didn't watch the Code S Ro16 group nominations. No one wants to face toss right now.
You're right I didn't watch group nominations, I watch the actual games.
Then you clearly don't have the information to formulate an argument, while the other person does.
On January 26 2012 05:45 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On January 26 2012 05:10 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 05:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:38 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
I think it would be a good idea to give Phoenix an upgrade that allows splash instead of a slow ass capital ship I would never build because if I had that much money/time I would just add more templar.
\
Do you understand how much splash protoss already has? Phoenix having splash would be the 4th unit, and one that can move-shoot in a way other units cannot. Protoss doesn't need more splash damage -_-- I know it can seem difficult to grasp from a protoss perspective, but the minute zerg has a unit to control the map, it's ''overpowered''. don't even have lurkers in the game.
Also, no one wants to face a protoss in the GSL. There's a reason for that.
Fine then make Protoss units cost 50% of what they cost now and nobody needs to splash.
Who doesn't want to face P in GSL?
You clearly didn't watch the Code S Ro16 group nominations. No one wants to face toss right now.
You're right I didn't watch group nominations, I watch the actual games.
Then you clearly don't have the information to formulate an argument, while the other person does.
What? How does watching the nominations mean he can make an argument... the results of the games is what matters... People always claim other races are stronger and that they feel weak etc. The main point is which race actually wins. so imo what players said during the nominations means jack shit the games are the important thing to base an argument off of.
So the guy watching the games imo has more information to form an argument then the guy watching the nominations....
On January 26 2012 04:29 Klonere wrote: Its cool that they are listening to the community on current balance issues and FoTM build problems but are Blizzard ever going to tackle the issue of P needing a from the ground up redesign? People in this thread have already pointed out colossus as a badly designed unit and the whole concept of warp-gates is still pretty terrible.
TvP is annoying as hell to play, Terran can crush early-mid game while toss can either go for some all-in or be super passive till they hit three base. Terran can hang outside Tosses natural, splitting armies and dropping while delaying the toss 3rd. Once again we are presented with the scenario where the toss can't do much but defend and keep their colossus/templars and tech buildings alive.
Terran has to go Vikings when they see Colossus and are inevitably going to add ghosts later while toss has nearly zero harass options apart from some surprise DTs or blink-stalkers both of which usually are part of an all-in. Chargelots are boring, minimal micro damage sponges, which lead to the comical situation of a terran player kiting at 300apm while the toss can't actually do anything other than make sure their core ball doesn't fall too far behind the chargelots. I could go on but suffice to say the matchup is flawed and not fun to watch or play.
TvZ is a ridiculous amount of fun though ^^
You make it sound like it's bad thing that protoss don't have to micro their army compared to terran. I'd say that's really good for the protoss, because it's much harder to micro terran units. That is the reason terran is weaker at the low levels. Not balance, terran is just simply harder to play than both other races.
If there was ever a thread that blizzard my read my opinions, this is probably it (given they stated they do browse some non-blizzard forums once in a while.
I probably got a little carried away, but I had fun doing it. These are some changes that I think could make the game more interesting and dynamic. i know it wont happen, but indulge me
General: I think upgrade combinations would be very nice. Say, combining the (neosteel/bunker upg. 150/150), (overlord speed/drop 150/150), (observer/prism speed 150/150)
Protoss:
Protoss needs a unit that can deal with heavy early game aggression from Zerg/Terran. - I propose this unit cost enough gas to be used INSTEAD of, not in addition to sentries - I propose this unti cost enough food to not be used in addition to the death ball (as the death ball as a whole would be weaker because of supply factors) - It may very well be justified that this unit only be possible out of a gateway (not warp gate) - This unit should be strong and cost effective. Potentially require gas, but not cyber core.
Zealot - Move charge to cyber core - Charge upgrade should allow zealot to move 0.05 faster than stalker - Make it either take longer or require a twilight/robo/stargate
Stalker - Stalker should be able to kite non-stimmed marines indefinitely if micro’d perfectly. A 6 range unit should never get a shot off after a 5 range unit. - Does not scale well in late game. I suggest +1 vs armor per upgrade.
Observer - Require twilight/robo/stargate - Build from nexus - Speed upgrade from cyber core
Pheonix - Should splash air units (small) - Add researchable disruption web (smaller area than BW one because phoenix have other utility than corsair) - Add energy upgrade for pheonix
High Templar - Given 7 range attack/ability that does 7 (+3 damage to light) - (chain lightning to 4 units) - Attack is an autocast spell that attacks as any attack from other units would. - It costs 10 energy per shot. - It ignores all shields but does not get bonuses from upgrades. - Researchable from Templar archives (100/100) - HT received movement speed buff if charge is researched. - Archon merge time reduced to same as warp in time. This will allow it to actually be used in battle instead of after.
Sentry - increase range to 7(casters should be in back)
Nexus - Abiltiy within 20 range to be used as a shield battery. - 1 energy = 2 sheild
DT - Receive a researchable upgrade for 1 of these 2 abilities (can not research both.) - Can sprint. Is not cloaked while sprinting. Timed ability lasts for 10 seconds. 50% increase move speed. 1 minute cooldown. - Can phase out for 10 seconds. Immobilized for 5 seconds after phasing back in. still cloaked.
Carrier - Comes with graviton catapult whatever it is called already researched - Allow it to research attack while moving ability. - Reduce cost - Give extra starting armor (marine should not > carrier)
Immortal - Researchable siege mode that changes it from anti-ground to anti-air. Cannot move while in siege mode. Same deployment time as siege tank. No splash. 9 range. No hardened shield.
Mothership - Remove vortex. Archon toilet is lame. - probably just remove this unit. mega units liek this are dumb.
Terran: Tech switching against terran can be pretty deadly. I really think that terran should be able to get those reactor things from the campaign to be able to produce double of any unit they like. - I think it should require armory - I think it should cost 50/50 - I think it should disable building untis for 45 seconds while it is upgrading - I think it should upgrade from a tech lab or a reactor. Terran repair is really strong. I propose that each scv should have 90% of the repair effectiveness of the last one told to repair. I think it is unreasonable for someone to have to bring their entire army to kill an otherwise undefended expansion (planetary).
Mule - Replace with SCV calldown. No term of life.
Marauder: - These units are not good against zealots. Concussion shell is necessary or early terran would just lose to all-zealot pressure. - I do have a problem with concussion against non-bio units (particularly stalker). I think protoss should be able to poke around with a stalker for scouting intel in the early game without losing it because it takes 1 hit from a marauder. - Researchable ability on tech lab. Requires armory. Can lay 1 spider mine.
Medivac - I think a very interesting dynamic for this would for it to have a speed boost that uses up energy. - This reduces its ability to heal, but may very well save its life. - Make it fast enough to get away from mutalisks. Perhaps the same speed as phoenix.
Raven - Raven sucks. I don’t think it is just unexplored, I think it is just bad. - I recommend replacing raven with science vessel abilities (irradiate/emp/ppd) - EMP on raven instead of ghost (huge buff. 1 more range than feedback, double the size of current emp, fully deplete all energy and shield)
Ghost - EMP should be moved to raven (See above) - As replacement for emp, ti should have something similar to lockdown. Affects mech units and reduces their attack speed by 50% for 3 seconds. (alternative to going Viking vs colo). - Stun ability should require research - Ghost should come with cloak
Thor - Max energy should be 125 (can use its ability once), to reduce feedback effectiveness
Multiple SCV to build a building - Engine Bay Upgrade - Require armory
Viking Air mode is good vs broodlord and colossus. Ground mode sucks whent hey tech swtich. Likeley tech switch is either ling/ultra or zealot/archon Either (not sure, perhaps a terran could shed more light): - +dmg to bio (vs zealots/ultra in landed mode) - +Pierce to bio (ignore armor/shield of bio units in landed mode)
Zerg: I really think zerg should be more about evolution. As such, they should get small bonuses for having lair or hive tech.
Infestor - stun is bad mechanics. fungal should slow units similar to marauder. - Taking control of other units is bad game design. Remove neural. Add dark swarm for sam AOE as fungal would be. - Re-think the viper as it would be redundant. - Can research increased move speed for infested terrans
Hive/Lair - If you possess these, your creep should spread faster (+20% if lair and another +20% compounded with hive). - If you possess these, your untis move faster on creep (+extra 5% for lair, and compounded 5% for hive). - If you possess these, your untis regen faster on creep (+extra 20% for lair, and compounded 20% for hive).
- Hive now requires either hydra den, spire, or infestation pit - Hive should allow overlords to drop creep while moving. Move at reduced rate when activated. - Hive upgrade 100/100. Muta get 1 extra glaive bounce - Increase hive and lair cost each by 50/50 and increase time by 40 seconds
Queen - Ability to upgrade to massive unit - Require lair - Spreads creep as it moves (always moves as if on creep as well) - Same speed as hydra on creep. - 45 second morph time - No AA
Zergling - Auto upgraded for free if you are on lair tech - If a zergling kills a unit, its attack speed increases by 20% for the rest of its life.
Roach - Given on lair tech ability (no research required) to have acid stay on ground for 3 seconds. Deal 1 dps to anything standing on it - Hive upgrade 200/200– reduce roach psi cost to 1.
Hydralisk - Upgrade 100/100 to have 25% to knock back unit 1 space when hit
Corrupter - Receives 2 new abilities. All affected by same cooldown time (you can only use 1 of the 3 each 10 seconds) - Corruption – target takes 25% more damage for 10 seconds - Reduces range of target by 50% for 10 seconds - Prevents unit from activating abilities or casting spells for 10 seconds - Units affected by these are identified in the unit selection bar (lets say they turn purple)
Brood Lord - All non-light units can push broodlings out of the way as they move. - Gets ability to turn into a cocoon. Raises armor by 10. Can not attack or move. Loses attack priority in case someone is a-moving. 3 seconds to undo cocoon (activated same as burrow)
Ultralisk - Can walk over units similar to colossus. - Can not walk up cliffs - Researchable ability to do reverse graviton beam (jump up and grab non-massive air unit and bring to ground)
UI/general Suggestions: - whenever a unit is killed holding minerals or gas, those resources drop onto the ground campaign style. can be picked up by anyone. - separate rally point for overlords - main base should show how many workers you currently have. - a timer (larva inject/mule style) for chronoboost. - a timer on warpgates (same style as above, in the selection bar). - ability to inject and chronoboost from the control(selected unit) panel - range being displayed on all spellcasters (some show range, some dont. be consistent). - idle creep tumor button - attack/rally points - a button you can press that drops 1 unit from your army (for ling/baneling micro, and transfering workers to each mineral patch/gas) - click on your main building and have it show you your income. - resource/unit counting bar position above minimap - option of hiding hitpoint bars of full/health allied units - fix ultralisk pathing (imo all massive units should push non-massive units out of the way – particularly issue with ultra and archon.. sometimes thor. Broodlings should not stop these massive units from moving.) - stalker warpin size should actually reflect the size of the unit - fix colossus pathing over the mineral lines and ramps - pylon power radius back to what it used to be - pylon does not power high ground. (think of it powering like a hose would leak water) - can warp units in on ramps again. - if you have a PF and OC selected, they create SCV evenly. -burrow/unburrow / supply depot up/down is different hotkey. - Ability to rebind ctrl key to the ` key. - ability to hotkey the team tab so you can quickly see what race your opponent is when you weren’t paying attention in loading screen.
Complaints of mass Muta vs. Protoss is confusing to me. Templar tech shreds Mutas. Quit massing stalker.
I'm also confused by the want to buff Terran at lower levels... The concept of Terran seems easiest to grasp by new players, and they're extremely versatile.
Whether you agree or disagree with the things Kim or Browder say, I freaking love their new approach to the community.
These semi-regular insights into their thought process and their vision of the current trends plus the way they simply just answer the questions and not dance around them is awesome. And their regularity is spot on as well, it would really be meaningless if it was more frequent.
On January 26 2012 04:34 NMHU. wrote: ''Terran Can’t Beat Protoss'' ''Ghost EMP is Too Weak''
As a protoss player, I only have to say : ''lol''
- NMHU.
Thank you hmmm Terran cant beat protoss lololol
Emp... Same aoe as storm. Does damage instantly, impossible to dodge also takes energy in aoe / feed back only does 1 unit and costs 2/3rds of the gas. ghosts take 75 gas to tech to. (tech lab n ghost academy) Fuck lets all just play terran!!
Ghosts take 40 seconds to build. High Templar take 5.
Ghosts can only build from a Barracks that has a Tech Lab attached to it. High Templar can build anywhere within a pylon radius.
EMP does a good job against HT tech--if you micro better than the Protoss--while Ghosts are much less useful against builds in which the Protoss gets Colossi sooner. If a Terran tries to get Ghosts, and the Protoss gets Colossi, timing attacks off of two bases can be devastating because there's almost no way that the Terran can have Vikings to deal with Colossi and upgrades to deal with the massive army. High Templar, on the other hand, do very well against everything in the Terran arsenal. Against Ghosts, you have to micro better, but Ghosts are not a "hard counter" to HTs; it all comes down to who controls better (unless Protoss makes a mistake, in which case that's their fault). Not only do Storm and Archon deal well with any sort of bio push, but Feedback devastates all Terran tech. Thors, Banshees, Ravens, Battlecruisers, Medivacs. All of them get demolished by Feedback in the same way that Snipe can demolish Zerg tech late game; the difference: Feedback is a one click wonder that takes next to nothing to do.
EMP targets ground, meaning that in an HT vs Ghost 1v1 fight, while the EMP can hit first, for all intents and purposes the Terran has to control far better and control well. The Protoss just has to click to Feedback the Ghost, then it flies to the Ghost and the second it's in range, the Ghost dies. Plus, if the HT has 150+ energy, then the Feedback is near impossible to stop, even if it does not do the killing blow to the Ghost.
Try putting your High Templar in a Warp Prism; it's not the hardest micro, it's not like controlling a big Chargelot/Colossi ball is that difficult, and frankly it almost guarantees that you will get off some storms. Good storms in conjunction with Chargelots will beat Terran.
Sure, it all depends on micro, but the comparison is still ridiculous. Feedback is single use while emp can work on every single one of your High Templar. Snipe against Zerg is better than Feedback against Terran. As a Zerg, you cannot stop Ghosts from sniping you without killing them. There is literally no way to stop them from sniping you unless you kill them. If you lose all of the energy on your Thors/Banshees/Battlescruisers, then Feedback does nothing (obviously Medivacs and Ravens need energy to do anything so Feedback is a good counter to those, but it also means you are microing your Raven poorly if it keeps on getting Feedbacked). See if more Terrans would say EMP their Thors and Battlecruisers, maybe Feedback wouldn't be so powerful against late game Terran tech.
Look at that. I just solved your Feedback problem for half of your race. Try doing the same for Zerg and snipe.
On January 26 2012 05:14 The Final Boss wrote:
On January 26 2012 05:10 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 05:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:38 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
I think it would be a good idea to give Phoenix an upgrade that allows splash instead of a slow ass capital ship I would never build because if I had that much money/time I would just add more templar.
\
Do you understand how much splash protoss already has? Phoenix having splash would be the 4th unit, and one that can move-shoot in a way other units cannot. Protoss doesn't need more splash damage -_-- I know it can seem difficult to grasp from a protoss perspective, but the minute zerg has a unit to control the map, it's ''overpowered''. don't even have lurkers in the game.
Also, no one wants to face a protoss in the GSL. There's a reason for that.
Fine then make Protoss units cost 50% of what they cost now and nobody needs to splash.
Who doesn't want to face P in GSL?
Taeja is one of the top Terran players in the world and he has claimed that he thinks Protoss is the strongest race. Just sayin'... ^^
This is a ridiculous argument. Many players can have many different opinions, but their expertise does not make their opinions true. The fact that Terrans have won the last 3 GSLs and the Blizzard Cup which consisted of 2 TvTs and 2 TvZs should point to the idea that no, Protoss is not the strongest race. Either that or Protoss players suck, but in either case the other races shouldn't have a problem with this.
Banshees need their energy or else they'll get picked out of the sky in no time. And honestly, I understand that you can do that, except that: 1. Thors, Banshees, Ravens, Battlecrusiers, and other tech all happen to be extremely gas intensive. 2. Ghosts cost a lot of gas 3. EMPing Thors is going to take a lot of EMPs since the radius got decreased and Thors happen to be huge. The fact that Terran can do that is different than what I'm saying. I'm merely pointing out that High Templar happen to be extremely good against both Terran bio and Terran tech, while Ghosts are not. I'm not saying that it's some impossible feat to counter, there are plenty of ways (Jjakji used cannons on rocks, which I thought was really clever since most Thor builds result in only a single attack anyways). In the same way, Protoss can just load their High Templar into a Warp Prism and drop them to Storm/Feedback without having to risk getting EMPed. Look at that, I just solved your whole EMP problem (wow that sounded really dumb, just like your post).
Maybe you should read what I was quoting instead of blindly writing something. It wasn't an argument, it was an answer to the question. The guy asked who doesn't want to play Protoss players in the GSL, Taeja doesn't... nice job writing that cute paragraph about how "stupid" I am while making an ass out of yourself.
A little bit off-topic: from a game design's point of view, isn't it kind of stupid that a player is using offensive spells on their own units? Maybe it's just me but that seems like a really stupid thing to have happen.
Depending on how they are used, Banshees can be used effectively without cloak. As well, Banshees with cloak will not be Feedbacked if all of the observers are killed beforehand, which with a large end game Terran army that will have some Vikings should be possible, even if difficult. (Also, I believe Nada was the one to use that on the Rocks, but I could be wrong. It definitely wasn't Jjakji though since he didn't have Protoss in his group.)
As for you solving my EMP problem, that would be nice except for EMP still being effective against the rest of the Protoss army, such as the Zealots, Stalkers, Sentries, and Archons. And certainly I agree that as Protoss get better at multitasking they will be using Warp Prismed High Templar more often. But that is not addressing the point I made.
Here is what you said
All of them get demolished by Feedback in the same way that Snipe can demolish Zerg tech late game; the difference: Feedback is a one click wonder that takes next to nothing to do.
Here is what I said
Snipe against Zerg is better than Feedback against Terran. As a Zerg, you cannot stop Ghosts from sniping you without killing them.
You chose to compare Snipe with Feedback and made the conclusion that Feedback against Terran is better than Snipe against Zerg, which was ridiculous and why I responded to you. I didn't respond to the guy before you because you can actually write in full sentences and seem to have a generally good idea of what you are talking about, but that comparison annoyed me. I also never called you stupid, although it seems like now I should since your reading comprehension isn't very good.
Look, I don't play Zerg or Protoss. I play Terran, and my favorite players are Terran and Protoss, with Zerg being my least favorite. But Snipe has got to be the most ridiculous spell in the game with how easy it is to use and how much damage it does to Zerg late game tech. Do I think it is overpowered? Not necessarily. Maybe, but probably not. The only real spell I hate is Forcefields because I think they unnecessarily weaken Protoss, and I am not a fan of any spell in general that is anti-micro (like Fungals and Forcefield) but I don't think they are overpowered.
I replied to you because you made a stupid comparison to Snipe with Feedback. And yes, you were making an argument hence your last sentence:
Good storms in conjunction with Chargelots will beat Terran
EDIT: Ignore that last sentence, I realize I replied to you twice just now and it was the second response that you were saying you weren't making an argument in. My bad.
For PvT, Feedback COUNTERS drops. You're right, Feedback doesn't stack up in HT vs Ghost. But that DOESN'T matter, because the PRIMARY usage is to shut down Medivacs, which let me remind you are nearly as expensive as any caster.
It's like saying why does EMP suck, it can't kill units like Storm. That's because that's not its usage. The PURPOSE of ghost is to nullify templar.
On January 26 2012 06:26 redechelon wrote: Complaints of mass Muta vs. Protoss is confusing to me. Templar tech shreds Mutas. Quit massing stalker.
I'm also confused by the want to buff Terran at lower levels... The concept of Terran seems easiest to grasp by new players, and they're extremely versatile.
the problem is that you have to go 2-base templar while maintaining enough production of stalkers to fend off mutalisks.
he is expanding. probably takign a 4th base.
the mutas either hit you without scouting OR you invested in robo and got an obs (that is a ton of money just to create 1 obs).
On January 26 2012 06:26 redechelon wrote: Complaints of mass Muta vs. Protoss is confusing to me. Templar tech shreds Mutas. Quit massing stalker.
I'm also confused by the want to buff Terran at lower levels... The concept of Terran seems easiest to grasp by new players, and they're extremely versatile.
Templar tech shreds mutas if the zerg is stupid enough to clump mutas and fly them over archons/templar... Archons are way to slow/low ranged to deal with muta harras, and if Templars all zerg player has to do is sit them over top mineral line, Toss isn't going to storm and kill all his own probes.. I'm not saying Mutas are super OP its just that Toss really doesn't have a good way to properly deal with mass mutas. Templar tech is too immobile and blink stalkers are way to weak/inefficient
To fix mutas vs protoss I would give either +1 range or very small splash damage to phoenixes. Phoenixes just aren't able to kill clumped up mutas well enough.
Buffing phoenix to defeat mass muta does not seem like the best idea to me. If Blizzard did, then more situations would occur where Protoss had enough Phoenix to cut through his opponent's Mutalisks. When this happens, Zerg can't do anything with his mutalisks because one wrong flight pattern and they're all dead. Because of this huge cost, he would keep them at home this game, and simply not make them the next.
I think the best solution would be to make guardian shield extremely effective against air attacks. Even though the glave worm bounces, and guardian shield does negate quite a bit of damage already, it's not enough damage that Protoss can leave a contingent of Stalkers and Sentries in his main, while at the same time having enough troops to seriously assault an entrenched Zerg force.
Frankly, there are not many air to ground situations in vs P matchups. I think guardian shield is an interesting spell, but it's not efficacious enough to where a Protoss player can rationalize spending time moving a sentry to specific position in his army in order to maximize the buff. Increasing its power against air would have not serious effect in big battles in TvP (unless TLO is playing an air terran build) or ZvP (with the exception of making Broodlord air to ground slightly weaker, which would have a minimal effect on the BL's dps considering most of it comes from Broodlings).
Additionally, buffing air to ground guardian shield might make the 1-1-1 banshee variation easier to stop.
On January 26 2012 06:29 architecture wrote: Why are people such idiots about Feedback?
For PvT, Feedback COUNTERS drops. You're right, Feedback doesn't stack up in HT vs Ghost. But that DOESN'T matter, because the PRIMARY usage is to shut down Medivacs, which let me remind you are nearly as expensive as any caster.
It's like saying why does EMP suck, it can't kill units like Storm. That's because that's not its usage. The PURPOSE of ghost is to nullify templar.
Feedback only counters drops if the Medivacs have full energy. If they have less than full, then you need other units there like Stalkers and Zealots.
Also, how do you know what the primary usage of Feedback is? Was there a memo from Blizzard and the pro players on how Feedback is primarily supposed to be used on drops and not on Ghosts? Because I missed that one obviously.
David Kim always makes a lot if sense when it comes to balance, he is a high level player himself, he has concerns much like we do on TL. Most of the things he mentioned are pretty much what I have been hearing for the last few months and I am glad to hear they are thinking about a Nydus change to make it most viable as Zerg. Also I am glad to hear about the Carrier too, I wouldn't want to see it go without them trying to make it work with a few changes, if they can't find a way I guess it's for the best that they find a different unit in HotS. I know they are doing a great job searching through all the positive and negative feedback and ignoring the trolls and whiners you find through various community's out there.
On January 26 2012 06:24 Roxy wrote: If there was ever a thread that blizzard my read my opinions, this is probably it (given they stated they do browse some non-blizzard forums once in a while.
I probably got a little carried away, but I had fun doing it. These are some changes that I think could make the game more interesting and dynamic. i know it wont happen, but indulge me
General: I think upgrade combinations would be very nice. Say, combining the (neosteel/bunker upg. 150/150), (overlord speed/drop 150/150), (observer/prism speed 150/150)
Protoss:
Protoss needs a unit that can deal with heavy early game aggression from Zerg/Terran. - I propose this unit cost enough gas to be used INSTEAD of, not in addition to sentries - I propose this unti cost enough food to not be used in addition to the death ball (as the death ball as a whole would be weaker because of supply factors) - It may very well be justified that this unit only be possible out of a gateway (not warp gate) - This unit should be strong and cost effective. Potentially require gas, but not cyber core.
Zealot - Move charge to cyber core - Charge upgrade should allow zealot to move 0.05 faster than stalker - Make it either take longer or require a twilight/robo/stargate
Stalker - Stalker should be able to kite non-stimmed marines indefinitely if micro’d perfectly. A 6 range unit should never get a shot off after a 5 range unit. - Does not scale well in late game. I suggest +1 vs armor per upgrade.
Observer - Require twilight/robo/stargate - Build from nexus - Speed upgrade from cyber core
Pheonix - Should splash air units (small) - Add researchable disruption web (smaller area than BW one because phoenix have other utility than corsair) - Add energy upgrade for pheonix
High Templar - Given 7 range attack/ability that does 7 (+3 damage to light) - (chain lightning to 4 units) - Attack is an autocast spell that attacks as any attack from other units would. - It costs 10 energy per shot. - It ignores all shields but does not get bonuses from upgrades. - Researchable from Templar archives (100/100) - HT received movement speed buff if charge is researched. - Archon merge time reduced to same as warp in time. This will allow it to actually be used in battle instead of after.
Sentry - increase range to 7(casters should be in back)
Nexus - Abiltiy within 20 range to be used as a shield battery. - 1 energy = 2 sheild
DT - Receive a researchable upgrade for 1 of these 2 abilities (can not research both.) - Can sprint. Is not cloaked while sprinting. Timed ability lasts for 10 seconds. 50% increase move speed. 1 minute cooldown. - Can phase out for 10 seconds. Immobilized for 5 seconds after phasing back in. still cloaked.
Carrier - Comes with graviton catapult whatever it is called already researched - Allow it to research attack while moving ability. - Reduce cost - Give extra starting armor (marine should not > carrier)
Immortal - Researchable siege mode that changes it from anti-ground to anti-air. Cannot move while in siege mode. Same deployment time as siege tank. No splash. 9 range. No hardened shield.
Mothership - Remove vortex. Archon toilet is lame. - probably just remove this unit. mega units liek this are dumb.
Terran: Tech switching against terran can be pretty deadly. I really think that terran should be able to get those reactor things from the campaign to be able to produce double of any unit they like. - I think it should require armory - I think it should cost 50/50 - I think it should disable building untis for 45 seconds while it is upgrading - I think it should upgrade from a tech lab or a reactor. Terran repair is really strong. I propose that each scv should have 90% of the repair effectiveness of the last one told to repair. I think it is unreasonable for someone to have to bring their entire army to kill an otherwise undefended expansion (planetary).
Mule - Replace with SCV calldown. No term of life.
Marauder: - These units are not good against zealots. Concussion shell is necessary or early terran would just lose to all-zealot pressure. - I do have a problem with concussion against non-bio units (particularly stalker). I think protoss should be able to poke around with a stalker for scouting intel in the early game without losing it because it takes 1 hit from a marauder. - Researchable ability on tech lab. Requires armory. Can lay 1 spider mine.
Medivac - I think a very interesting dynamic for this would for it to have a speed boost that uses up energy. - This reduces its ability to heal, but may very well save its life. - Make it fast enough to get away from mutalisks. Perhaps the same speed as phoenix.
Raven - Raven sucks. I don’t think it is just unexplored, I think it is just bad. - I recommend replacing raven with science vessel abilities (irradiate/emp/ppd) - EMP on raven instead of ghost (huge buff. 1 more range than feedback, double the size of current emp, fully deplete all energy and shield)
Ghost - EMP should be moved to raven (See above) - As replacement for emp, ti should have something similar to lockdown. Affects mech units and reduces their attack speed by 50% for 3 seconds. (alternative to going Viking vs colo). - Stun ability should require research - Ghost should come with cloak
Thor - Max energy should be 125 (can use its ability once), to reduce feedback effectiveness
Multiple SCV to build a building - Engine Bay Upgrade - Require armory
Viking Air mode is good vs broodlord and colossus. Ground mode sucks whent hey tech swtich. Likeley tech switch is either ling/ultra or zealot/archon Either (not sure, perhaps a terran could shed more light): - +dmg to bio (vs zealots/ultra in landed mode) - +Pierce to bio (ignore armor/shield of bio units in landed mode)
Zerg: I really think zerg should be more about evolution. As such, they should get small bonuses for having lair or hive tech.
Infestor - stun is bad mechanics. fungal should slow units similar to marauder. - Taking control of other units is bad game design. Remove neural. Add dark swarm for sam AOE as fungal would be. - Re-think the viper as it would be redundant. - Can research increased move speed for infested terrans
Hive/Lair - If you possess these, your creep should spread faster (+20% if lair and another +20% compounded with hive). - If you possess these, your untis move faster on creep (+extra 5% for lair, and compounded 5% for hive). - If you possess these, your untis regen faster on creep (+extra 20% for lair, and compounded 20% for hive).
- Hive now requires either hydra den, spire, or infestation pit - Hive should allow overlords to drop creep while moving. Move at reduced rate when activated. - Hive upgrade 100/100. Muta get 1 extra glaive bounce - Increase hive and lair cost each by 50/50 and increase time by 40 seconds
Queen - Ability to upgrade to massive unit - Require lair - Spreads creep as it moves (always moves as if on creep as well) - Same speed as hydra on creep. - 45 second morph time - No AA
Zergling - Auto upgraded for free if you are on lair tech - If a zergling kills a unit, its attack speed increases by 20% for the rest of its life.
Roach - Given on lair tech ability (no research required) to have acid stay on ground for 3 seconds. Deal 1 dps to anything standing on it - Hive upgrade 200/200– reduce roach psi cost to 1.
Hydralisk - Upgrade 100/100 to have 25% to knock back unit 1 space when hit
Corrupter - Receives 2 new abilities. All affected by same cooldown time (you can only use 1 of the 3 each 10 seconds) - Corruption – target takes 25% more damage for 10 seconds - Reduces range of target by 50% for 10 seconds - Prevents unit from activating abilities or casting spells for 10 seconds - Units affected by these are identified in the unit selection bar (lets say they turn purple)
Brood Lord - All non-light units can push broodlings out of the way as they move. - Gets ability to turn into a cocoon. Raises armor by 10. Can not attack or move. Loses attack priority in case someone is a-moving. 3 seconds to undo cocoon (activated same as burrow)
Ultralisk - Can walk over units similar to colossus. - Can not walk up cliffs - Researchable ability to do reverse graviton beam (jump up and grab non-massive air unit and bring to ground)
UI/general Suggestions: - whenever a unit is killed holding minerals or gas, those resources drop onto the ground campaign style. can be picked up by anyone. - separate rally point for overlords - main base should show how many workers you currently have. - a timer (larva inject/mule style) for chronoboost. - a timer on warpgates (same style as above, in the selection bar). - ability to inject and chronoboost from the control(selected unit) panel - range being displayed on all spellcasters (some show range, some dont. be consistent). - idle creep tumor button - attack/rally points - a button you can press that drops 1 unit from your army (for ling/baneling micro, and transfering workers to each mineral patch/gas) - click on your main building and have it show you your income. - resource/unit counting bar position above minimap - option of hiding hitpoint bars of full/health allied units - fix ultralisk pathing (imo all massive units should push non-massive units out of the way – particularly issue with ultra and archon.. sometimes thor. Broodlings should not stop these massive units from moving.) - stalker warpin size should actually reflect the size of the unit - fix colossus pathing over the mineral lines and ramps - pylon power radius back to what it used to be - pylon does not power high ground. (think of it powering like a hose would leak water) - can warp units in on ramps again. - if you have a PF and OC selected, they create SCV evenly. -burrow/unburrow / supply depot up/down is different hotkey. - Ability to rebind ctrl key to the ` key. - ability to hotkey the team tab so you can quickly see what race your opponent is when you weren’t paying attention in loading screen.
Some really cool ideas in here, would love to play your version of the game. Disagree with the terran tech switching though, as that's an intended weakness of the race. Wish upgrades would be more forgiving though.
The reason that Z couldn't just always mass mutas in BW was because
1. irradiate + firebats (so that MM would shit on mass ling so hard that lurkers were necessary) 2. corsairs
Flying around with 20-30 fast units, ignoring terrain is NOT good game design. The entire purpose of a flying unit is to trade strength for mobility. But somehow Blizzard forgot all about how the original game worked.
On January 26 2012 06:35 Garth wrote: who the fuck said emp was weak
And I quote “pro players at the G Star event in Korea via a Q & A.”
as in what pro players, what where they smoking, and g star? can you direct me to an informational thread on it because I Can't find it :O.
If tt1 says that voidrays were wayyyy too strong, doesn't mean he's even close to right despite being a proffesional player. Same with lower tiered korean pros.
edit: Even then some of these responses couldn't have possibly been form established KOREAN pros. Terran can't beat protoss? Really, terrans fucking annihlate protosses in korea specifically, and the carrier comment I also don't believe would come form a pro.
On January 26 2012 06:31 ampson wrote: To fix mutas vs protoss I would give either +1 range or very small splash damage to phoenixes. Phoenixes just aren't able to kill clumped up mutas well enough.
+1 Range would do it I think, much easier to micro but still you can't just a-move or something like that. It will still be difficult and if you are not paying attention to a big mutalisk cloud they can one-two shot you.
On January 26 2012 06:36 architecture wrote: The reason that Z couldn't just always mass mutas in BW was because
1. irradiate + firebats (so that MM would shit on mass ling so hard that lurkers were necessary) 2. corsairs
Flying around with 20-30 fast units, ignoring terrain is NOT good game design. The entire purpose of a flying unit is to trade strength for mobility. But somehow Blizzard forgot all about how the original game worked.
I deal with Mutas fine right now but my problem with it is that Phoenix is supposed to be a hard counter but they are so bad at killing Mutas.
This is a major issue because both in SC2 and BW the same dynamic exists where Protoss (being the slow and costly race) can CHOOSE to hard counter either air or ground but this is offset by Zerg's ability to tech switch seamlessly. As I see it in SC2 Protoss cannot hard counter Zerg air. Blizz tried to make Phoenix more versatile and cooler than the Corsair (which they largely succeeded with) but they forgot WHY the Corsair even existed, to hard counter light air.
No race is slow and costly. All army values converge to be about the same in engagements. The only differences are timings. It takes protoss 2-4m per complete tech switch. It takes Z 1-3m.
Corsairs didn't prevent mutas from being made, it simply prevented 40 mutas from being more effective than 15.
On January 26 2012 04:34 NMHU. wrote: ''Terran Can’t Beat Protoss'' ''Ghost EMP is Too Weak''
As a protoss player, I only have to say : ''lol''
- NMHU.
Thank you hmmm Terran cant beat protoss lololol
Emp... Same aoe as storm. Does damage instantly, impossible to dodge also takes energy in aoe / feed back only does 1 unit and costs 2/3rds of the gas. ghosts take 75 gas to tech to. (tech lab n ghost academy) Fuck lets all just play terran!!
Ghosts take 40 seconds to build. High Templar take 5.
Ghosts can only build from a Barracks that has a Tech Lab attached to it. High Templar can build anywhere within a pylon radius.
EMP does a good job against HT tech--if you micro better than the Protoss--while Ghosts are much less useful against builds in which the Protoss gets Colossi sooner. If a Terran tries to get Ghosts, and the Protoss gets Colossi, timing attacks off of two bases can be devastating because there's almost no way that the Terran can have Vikings to deal with Colossi and upgrades to deal with the massive army. High Templar, on the other hand, do very well against everything in the Terran arsenal. Against Ghosts, you have to micro better, but Ghosts are not a "hard counter" to HTs; it all comes down to who controls better (unless Protoss makes a mistake, in which case that's their fault). Not only do Storm and Archon deal well with any sort of bio push, but Feedback devastates all Terran tech. Thors, Banshees, Ravens, Battlecruisers, Medivacs. All of them get demolished by Feedback in the same way that Snipe can demolish Zerg tech late game; the difference: Feedback is a one click wonder that takes next to nothing to do.
EMP targets ground, meaning that in an HT vs Ghost 1v1 fight, while the EMP can hit first, for all intents and purposes the Terran has to control far better and control well. The Protoss just has to click to Feedback the Ghost, then it flies to the Ghost and the second it's in range, the Ghost dies. Plus, if the HT has 150+ energy, then the Feedback is near impossible to stop, even if it does not do the killing blow to the Ghost.
Try putting your High Templar in a Warp Prism; it's not the hardest micro, it's not like controlling a big Chargelot/Colossi ball is that difficult, and frankly it almost guarantees that you will get off some storms. Good storms in conjunction with Chargelots will beat Terran.
LOL high templar take 5 seconds to build MYBIG FAT HAIRY ANUS!... u know protoss have the reverse build time mechanic right???? U still have to macro correctly and wait for your warp ins and cool downs. Yes, ghosts are much less useful against collosi But they require a commitment of 50 gas and 150 minerals to tech to. It is extremely easy to outmicro templar with ghosts if they clump up and if u see weakness emp. If they are being smart and putting an obs over ur army sending out 1 or 2 templar at a time? just snipe or send tiny bits of your army to kill those templar. It's extremely easy to snipe templar without getting fed back u just gotta micro as well as a plat but have diamondish game awareness. ur argument about feed back is invalid... the feed back barely does anything against thors and battle cruisers, but if you're going mass banshee or raven, of course im gonna get templar to counter them... What kind of idiot wouldnt get templar or pheonix to counter mass banshee? thats the point of a counter... And you're saying shit about controlling a chargelot colossi ball being easy.. u know.. protoss and zerg units are much harder to micro than marine marauder ghost viking... 1 marine marauder medivacs, 2 ghosts, 3 vikings. The late game protoss go something like this 1. zeal sentry 2. ht 3. collosus. 4. stalkers. We have to cast forcefields, storms, micro the collosus back run the zealots back when u start kiting. while all u do is scan. emp a move w/ stim step shoot step shoot step shoot step shoot step shoot. You're fuckin conclusion to your post is so stupid as well... Good storms in conjunction with chargelots will beat terran... THANK YOU CAPTAIN FUCKING OBVIOUS. Hmm I bet good macro with good micro and just overall superior mechanics will beat an opponent and I guess good emps with good viking control will also rape a protoss anally. you're a f ucking stupid piece of shit. just saying... last 2 seasons i was top 25 masters toss (this season have been slacking on sc2 because of college so about 50ish). Also mid masters terran and mid masters zerg.
On January 26 2012 04:34 NMHU. wrote: ''Terran Can’t Beat Protoss'' ''Ghost EMP is Too Weak''
As a protoss player, I only have to say : ''lol''
- NMHU.
Thank you hmmm Terran cant beat protoss lololol
Emp... Same aoe as storm. Does damage instantly, impossible to dodge also takes energy in aoe / feed back only does 1 unit and costs 2/3rds of the gas. ghosts take 75 gas to tech to. (tech lab n ghost academy) Fuck lets all just play terran!!
Ghosts take 40 seconds to build. High Templar take 5.
Ghosts can only build from a Barracks that has a Tech Lab attached to it. High Templar can build anywhere within a pylon radius.
EMP does a good job against HT tech--if you micro better than the Protoss--while Ghosts are much less useful against builds in which the Protoss gets Colossi sooner. If a Terran tries to get Ghosts, and the Protoss gets Colossi, timing attacks off of two bases can be devastating because there's almost no way that the Terran can have Vikings to deal with Colossi and upgrades to deal with the massive army. High Templar, on the other hand, do very well against everything in the Terran arsenal. Against Ghosts, you have to micro better, but Ghosts are not a "hard counter" to HTs; it all comes down to who controls better (unless Protoss makes a mistake, in which case that's their fault). Not only do Storm and Archon deal well with any sort of bio push, but Feedback devastates all Terran tech. Thors, Banshees, Ravens, Battlecruisers, Medivacs. All of them get demolished by Feedback in the same way that Snipe can demolish Zerg tech late game; the difference: Feedback is a one click wonder that takes next to nothing to do.
EMP targets ground, meaning that in an HT vs Ghost 1v1 fight, while the EMP can hit first, for all intents and purposes the Terran has to control far better and control well. The Protoss just has to click to Feedback the Ghost, then it flies to the Ghost and the second it's in range, the Ghost dies. Plus, if the HT has 150+ energy, then the Feedback is near impossible to stop, even if it does not do the killing blow to the Ghost.
Try putting your High Templar in a Warp Prism; it's not the hardest micro, it's not like controlling a big Chargelot/Colossi ball is that difficult, and frankly it almost guarantees that you will get off some storms. Good storms in conjunction with Chargelots will beat Terran.
Sure, it all depends on micro, but the comparison is still ridiculous. Feedback is single use while emp can work on every single one of your High Templar. Snipe against Zerg is better than Feedback against Terran. As a Zerg, you cannot stop Ghosts from sniping you without killing them. There is literally no way to stop them from sniping you unless you kill them. If you lose all of the energy on your Thors/Banshees/Battlescruisers, then Feedback does nothing (obviously Medivacs and Ravens need energy to do anything so Feedback is a good counter to those, but it also means you are microing your Raven poorly if it keeps on getting Feedbacked). See if more Terrans would say EMP their Thors and Battlecruisers, maybe Feedback wouldn't be so powerful against late game Terran tech.
Look at that. I just solved your Feedback problem for half of your race. Try doing the same for Zerg and snipe.
On January 26 2012 05:14 The Final Boss wrote:
On January 26 2012 05:10 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 05:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:38 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
I think it would be a good idea to give Phoenix an upgrade that allows splash instead of a slow ass capital ship I would never build because if I had that much money/time I would just add more templar.
\
Do you understand how much splash protoss already has? Phoenix having splash would be the 4th unit, and one that can move-shoot in a way other units cannot. Protoss doesn't need more splash damage -_-- I know it can seem difficult to grasp from a protoss perspective, but the minute zerg has a unit to control the map, it's ''overpowered''. don't even have lurkers in the game.
Also, no one wants to face a protoss in the GSL. There's a reason for that.
Fine then make Protoss units cost 50% of what they cost now and nobody needs to splash.
Who doesn't want to face P in GSL?
Taeja is one of the top Terran players in the world and he has claimed that he thinks Protoss is the strongest race. Just sayin'... ^^
This is a ridiculous argument. Many players can have many different opinions, but their expertise does not make their opinions true. The fact that Terrans have won the last 3 GSLs and the Blizzard Cup which consisted of 2 TvTs and 2 TvZs should point to the idea that no, Protoss is not the strongest race. Either that or Protoss players suck, but in either case the other races shouldn't have a problem with this.
Banshees need their energy or else they'll get picked out of the sky in no time. And honestly, I understand that you can do that, except that: 1. Thors, Banshees, Ravens, Battlecrusiers, and other tech all happen to be extremely gas intensive. 2. Ghosts cost a lot of gas 3. EMPing Thors is going to take a lot of EMPs since the radius got decreased and Thors happen to be huge. The fact that Terran can do that is different than what I'm saying. I'm merely pointing out that High Templar happen to be extremely good against both Terran bio and Terran tech, while Ghosts are not. I'm not saying that it's some impossible feat to counter, there are plenty of ways (Jjakji used cannons on rocks, which I thought was really clever since most Thor builds result in only a single attack anyways). In the same way, Protoss can just load their High Templar into a Warp Prism and drop them to Storm/Feedback without having to risk getting EMPed. Look at that, I just solved your whole EMP problem (wow that sounded really dumb, just like your post).
Maybe you should read what I was quoting instead of blindly writing something. It wasn't an argument, it was an answer to the question. The guy asked who doesn't want to play Protoss players in the GSL, Taeja doesn't... nice job writing that cute paragraph about how "stupid" I am while making an ass out of yourself.
A little bit off-topic: from a game design's point of view, isn't it kind of stupid that a player is using offensive spells on their own units? Maybe it's just me but that seems like a really stupid thing to have happen.
Banshees and thors will trade cost efficiently with any protoss army unless there is storm and feedback and even then the thor army can trade equally. emping thors is stupid i gotta agree w/ u there. your argument for high templar into a warp prism is fucking awful too... no risk ofgetting empd? oh just risk losing a warp prism and 2-4 high templars without even getting 1 storm off.
Mutas arent over powered.. just accept that you're bad at the game and learn from there... If u cant deal with mutas figure out a way to prevent it. double stargate is really really easy to prevent a quick 3rd be safe from most all ins and force hydras (at least against shitty mid to high masters players). And w/ sentries the void rays will rape the hydras, u just gotta know when and how to transition and that just comes from playing.
pheonix w/ splash is stupid op.. Collosus pheonix balls would be the only thing played in pvt.
just bring the corsair back lol. It would totaly break zergs like stephano that play heavy static defense + muta until broodlord infestor ling mass upgrades comes out.
Yeah, maybe it would be a terrible unit in pvp, now that fenix is getting some space in the matchup... but I dont know, the whole concept of the fenix is not working that well in the game right now.
On January 26 2012 06:35 -_- wrote: Buffing phoenix to defeat mass muta does not seem like the best idea to me. If Blizzard did, then more situations would occur where Protoss had enough Phoenix to cut through his opponent's Mutalisks. When this happens, Zerg can't do anything with his mutalisks because one wrong flight pattern and they're all dead. Because of this huge cost, he would keep them at home this game, and simply not make them the next.
I think the best solution would be to make guardian shield extremely effective against air attacks. Even though the glave worm bounces, and guardian shield does negate quite a bit of damage already, it's not enough damage that Protoss can leave a contingent of Stalkers and Sentries in his main, while at the same time having enough troops to seriously assault an entrenched Zerg force.
Frankly, there are not many air to ground situations in vs P matchups. I think guardian shield is an interesting spell, but it's not efficacious enough to where a Protoss player can rationalize spending time moving a sentry to specific position in his army in order to maximize the buff. Increasing its power against air would have not serious effect in big battles in TvP (unless TLO is playing an air terran build) or ZvP (with the exception of making Broodlord air to ground slightly weaker, which would have a minimal effect on the BL's dps considering most of it comes from Broodlings).
Additionally, buffing air to ground guardian shield might make the 1-1-1 banshee variation easier to stop.
While it sounds really nice I think it would really change the collossus vs viking dynamic which completely changes the way bio works in larger battles. The most efficient way to kill collossus then goes out the window, requiring even more vikings and making collossus stronger in a timing attack in the early mid game and making them even more powerful in the lategame when less supply is on the ground. Reducing ground units makes drops harder, defending attacks a little more difficult, makes mech even less viable than it is currently as well.
On January 26 2012 04:34 NMHU. wrote: ''Terran Can’t Beat Protoss'' ''Ghost EMP is Too Weak''
As a protoss player, I only have to say : ''lol''
- NMHU.
Thank you hmmm Terran cant beat protoss lololol
Emp... Same aoe as storm. Does damage instantly, impossible to dodge also takes energy in aoe / feed back only does 1 unit and costs 2/3rds of the gas. ghosts take 75 gas to tech to. (tech lab n ghost academy) Fuck lets all just play terran!!
Ghosts take 40 seconds to build. High Templar take 5.
Ghosts can only build from a Barracks that has a Tech Lab attached to it. High Templar can build anywhere within a pylon radius.
EMP does a good job against HT tech--if you micro better than the Protoss--while Ghosts are much less useful against builds in which the Protoss gets Colossi sooner. If a Terran tries to get Ghosts, and the Protoss gets Colossi, timing attacks off of two bases can be devastating because there's almost no way that the Terran can have Vikings to deal with Colossi and upgrades to deal with the massive army. High Templar, on the other hand, do very well against everything in the Terran arsenal. Against Ghosts, you have to micro better, but Ghosts are not a "hard counter" to HTs; it all comes down to who controls better (unless Protoss makes a mistake, in which case that's their fault). Not only do Storm and Archon deal well with any sort of bio push, but Feedback devastates all Terran tech. Thors, Banshees, Ravens, Battlecruisers, Medivacs. All of them get demolished by Feedback in the same way that Snipe can demolish Zerg tech late game; the difference: Feedback is a one click wonder that takes next to nothing to do.
EMP targets ground, meaning that in an HT vs Ghost 1v1 fight, while the EMP can hit first, for all intents and purposes the Terran has to control far better and control well. The Protoss just has to click to Feedback the Ghost, then it flies to the Ghost and the second it's in range, the Ghost dies. Plus, if the HT has 150+ energy, then the Feedback is near impossible to stop, even if it does not do the killing blow to the Ghost.
Try putting your High Templar in a Warp Prism; it's not the hardest micro, it's not like controlling a big Chargelot/Colossi ball is that difficult, and frankly it almost guarantees that you will get off some storms. Good storms in conjunction with Chargelots will beat Terran.
LOL high templar take 5 seconds to build MYBIG FAT HAIRY ANUS!... u know protoss have the reverse build time mechanic right???? U still have to macro correctly and wait for your warp ins and cool downs. Yes, ghosts are much less useful against collosi But they require a commitment of 50 gas and 150 minerals to tech to. It is extremely easy to outmicro templar with ghosts if they clump up and if u see weakness emp. If they are being smart and putting an obs over ur army sending out 1 or 2 templar at a time? just snipe or send tiny bits of your army to kill those templar. It's extremely easy to snipe templar without getting fed back u just gotta micro as well as a plat but have diamondish game awareness. ur argument about feed back is invalid... the feed back barely does anything against thors and battle cruisers, but if you're going mass banshee or raven, of course im gonna get templar to counter them... What kind of idiot wouldnt get templar or pheonix to counter mass banshee? thats the point of a counter... And you're saying shit about controlling a chargelot colossi ball being easy.. u know.. protoss and zerg units are much harder to micro than marine marauder ghost viking... 1 marine marauder medivacs, 2 ghosts, 3 vikings. The late game protoss go something like this 1. zeal sentry 2. ht 3. collosus. 4. stalkers. We have to cast forcefields, storms, micro the collosus back run the zealots back when u start kiting. while all u do is scan. emp a move w/ stim step shoot step shoot step shoot step shoot step shoot. You're fuckin conclusion to your post is so stupid as well... Good storms in conjunction with chargelots will beat terran... THANK YOU CAPTAIN FUCKING OBVIOUS. Hmm I bet good macro with good micro and just overall superior mechanics will beat an opponent and I guess good emps with good viking control will also rape a protoss anally. you're a f ucking stupid piece of shit. just saying... last 2 seasons i was top 25 masters toss (this season have been slacking on sc2 because of college so about 50ish). Also mid masters terran and mid masters zerg.
On January 26 2012 04:34 NMHU. wrote: ''Terran Can’t Beat Protoss'' ''Ghost EMP is Too Weak''
As a protoss player, I only have to say : ''lol''
- NMHU.
Thank you hmmm Terran cant beat protoss lololol
Emp... Same aoe as storm. Does damage instantly, impossible to dodge also takes energy in aoe / feed back only does 1 unit and costs 2/3rds of the gas. ghosts take 75 gas to tech to. (tech lab n ghost academy) Fuck lets all just play terran!!
Ghosts take 40 seconds to build. High Templar take 5.
Ghosts can only build from a Barracks that has a Tech Lab attached to it. High Templar can build anywhere within a pylon radius.
EMP does a good job against HT tech--if you micro better than the Protoss--while Ghosts are much less useful against builds in which the Protoss gets Colossi sooner. If a Terran tries to get Ghosts, and the Protoss gets Colossi, timing attacks off of two bases can be devastating because there's almost no way that the Terran can have Vikings to deal with Colossi and upgrades to deal with the massive army. High Templar, on the other hand, do very well against everything in the Terran arsenal. Against Ghosts, you have to micro better, but Ghosts are not a "hard counter" to HTs; it all comes down to who controls better (unless Protoss makes a mistake, in which case that's their fault). Not only do Storm and Archon deal well with any sort of bio push, but Feedback devastates all Terran tech. Thors, Banshees, Ravens, Battlecruisers, Medivacs. All of them get demolished by Feedback in the same way that Snipe can demolish Zerg tech late game; the difference: Feedback is a one click wonder that takes next to nothing to do.
EMP targets ground, meaning that in an HT vs Ghost 1v1 fight, while the EMP can hit first, for all intents and purposes the Terran has to control far better and control well. The Protoss just has to click to Feedback the Ghost, then it flies to the Ghost and the second it's in range, the Ghost dies. Plus, if the HT has 150+ energy, then the Feedback is near impossible to stop, even if it does not do the killing blow to the Ghost.
Try putting your High Templar in a Warp Prism; it's not the hardest micro, it's not like controlling a big Chargelot/Colossi ball is that difficult, and frankly it almost guarantees that you will get off some storms. Good storms in conjunction with Chargelots will beat Terran.
Sure, it all depends on micro, but the comparison is still ridiculous. Feedback is single use while emp can work on every single one of your High Templar. Snipe against Zerg is better than Feedback against Terran. As a Zerg, you cannot stop Ghosts from sniping you without killing them. There is literally no way to stop them from sniping you unless you kill them. If you lose all of the energy on your Thors/Banshees/Battlescruisers, then Feedback does nothing (obviously Medivacs and Ravens need energy to do anything so Feedback is a good counter to those, but it also means you are microing your Raven poorly if it keeps on getting Feedbacked). See if more Terrans would say EMP their Thors and Battlecruisers, maybe Feedback wouldn't be so powerful against late game Terran tech.
Look at that. I just solved your Feedback problem for half of your race. Try doing the same for Zerg and snipe.
On January 26 2012 05:14 The Final Boss wrote:
On January 26 2012 05:10 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 05:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:38 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
I think it would be a good idea to give Phoenix an upgrade that allows splash instead of a slow ass capital ship I would never build because if I had that much money/time I would just add more templar.
\
Do you understand how much splash protoss already has? Phoenix having splash would be the 4th unit, and one that can move-shoot in a way other units cannot. Protoss doesn't need more splash damage -_-- I know it can seem difficult to grasp from a protoss perspective, but the minute zerg has a unit to control the map, it's ''overpowered''. don't even have lurkers in the game.
Also, no one wants to face a protoss in the GSL. There's a reason for that.
Fine then make Protoss units cost 50% of what they cost now and nobody needs to splash.
Who doesn't want to face P in GSL?
Taeja is one of the top Terran players in the world and he has claimed that he thinks Protoss is the strongest race. Just sayin'... ^^
This is a ridiculous argument. Many players can have many different opinions, but their expertise does not make their opinions true. The fact that Terrans have won the last 3 GSLs and the Blizzard Cup which consisted of 2 TvTs and 2 TvZs should point to the idea that no, Protoss is not the strongest race. Either that or Protoss players suck, but in either case the other races shouldn't have a problem with this.
Banshees need their energy or else they'll get picked out of the sky in no time. And honestly, I understand that you can do that, except that: 1. Thors, Banshees, Ravens, Battlecrusiers, and other tech all happen to be extremely gas intensive. 2. Ghosts cost a lot of gas 3. EMPing Thors is going to take a lot of EMPs since the radius got decreased and Thors happen to be huge. The fact that Terran can do that is different than what I'm saying. I'm merely pointing out that High Templar happen to be extremely good against both Terran bio and Terran tech, while Ghosts are not. I'm not saying that it's some impossible feat to counter, there are plenty of ways (Jjakji used cannons on rocks, which I thought was really clever since most Thor builds result in only a single attack anyways). In the same way, Protoss can just load their High Templar into a Warp Prism and drop them to Storm/Feedback without having to risk getting EMPed. Look at that, I just solved your whole EMP problem (wow that sounded really dumb, just like your post).
Maybe you should read what I was quoting instead of blindly writing something. It wasn't an argument, it was an answer to the question. The guy asked who doesn't want to play Protoss players in the GSL, Taeja doesn't... nice job writing that cute paragraph about how "stupid" I am while making an ass out of yourself.
A little bit off-topic: from a game design's point of view, isn't it kind of stupid that a player is using offensive spells on their own units? Maybe it's just me but that seems like a really stupid thing to have happen.
Banshees and thors will trade cost efficiently with any protoss army unless there is storm and feedback and even then the thor army can trade equally. emping thors is stupid i gotta agree w/ u there. your argument for high templar into a warp prism is fucking awful too... no risk ofgetting empd? oh just risk losing a warp prism and 2-4 high templars without even getting 1 storm off.
Mutas arent over powered.. just accept that you're bad at the game and learn from there... If u cant deal with mutas figure out a way to prevent it. double stargate is really really easy to prevent a quick 3rd be safe from most all ins and force hydras (at least against shitty mid to high masters players). And w/ sentries the void rays will rape the hydras, u just gotta know when and how to transition and that just comes from playing.
pheonix w/ splash is stupid op.. Collosus pheonix balls would be the only thing played in pvt.
You, sir, should be awarded the TASSADAR PRIZE FOR MOST HONORABLE BROTOSS ALIVE.
On January 26 2012 06:35 -_- wrote: Buffing phoenix to defeat mass muta does not seem like the best idea to me. If Blizzard did, then more situations would occur where Protoss had enough Phoenix to cut through his opponent's Mutalisks. When this happens, Zerg can't do anything with his mutalisks because one wrong flight pattern and they're all dead. Because of this huge cost, he would keep them at home this game, and simply not make them the next.
I think the best solution would be to make guardian shield extremely effective against air attacks. Even though the glave worm bounces, and guardian shield does negate quite a bit of damage already, it's not enough damage that Protoss can leave a contingent of Stalkers and Sentries in his main, while at the same time having enough troops to seriously assault an entrenched Zerg force.
Frankly, there are not many air to ground situations in vs P matchups. I think guardian shield is an interesting spell, but it's not efficacious enough to where a Protoss player can rationalize spending time moving a sentry to specific position in his army in order to maximize the buff. Increasing its power against air would have not serious effect in big battles in TvP (unless TLO is playing an air terran build) or ZvP (with the exception of making Broodlord air to ground slightly weaker, which would have a minimal effect on the BL's dps considering most of it comes from Broodlings).
Additionally, buffing air to ground guardian shield might make the 1-1-1 banshee variation easier to stop.
While it sounds really nice I think it would really change the collossus vs viking dynamic which completely changes the way bio works in larger battles. The most efficient way to kill collossus then goes out the window, requiring even more vikings and making collossus stronger in a timing attack in the early mid game and making them even more powerful in the lategame when less supply is on the ground. Reducing ground units makes drops harder, defending attacks a little more difficult, makes mech even less viable than it is currently as well.
Great points. But what I was thinking was air to ground would be reduced, but not air to air. However, considering I wasn't able to make that clear, it might be too complicated for blizzard, considering they've said they don't like big tooltips.
On January 26 2012 06:35 -_- wrote: Buffing phoenix to defeat mass muta does not seem like the best idea to me. If Blizzard did, then more situations would occur where Protoss had enough Phoenix to cut through his opponent's Mutalisks. When this happens, Zerg can't do anything with his mutalisks because one wrong flight pattern and they're all dead. Because of this huge cost, he would keep them at home this game, and simply not make them the next.
I think the best solution would be to make guardian shield extremely effective against air attacks. Even though the glave worm bounces, and guardian shield does negate quite a bit of damage already, it's not enough damage that Protoss can leave a contingent of Stalkers and Sentries in his main, while at the same time having enough troops to seriously assault an entrenched Zerg force.
Frankly, there are not many air to ground situations in vs P matchups. I think guardian shield is an interesting spell, but it's not efficacious enough to where a Protoss player can rationalize spending time moving a sentry to specific position in his army in order to maximize the buff. Increasing its power against air would have not serious effect in big battles in TvP (unless TLO is playing an air terran build) or ZvP (with the exception of making Broodlord air to ground slightly weaker, which would have a minimal effect on the BL's dps considering most of it comes from Broodlings).
Additionally, buffing air to ground guardian shield might make the 1-1-1 banshee variation easier to stop.
While it sounds really nice I think it would really change the collossus vs viking dynamic which completely changes the way bio works in larger battles. The most efficient way to kill collossus then goes out the window, requiring even more vikings and making collossus stronger in a timing attack in the early mid game and making them even more powerful in the lategame when less supply is on the ground. Reducing ground units makes drops harder, defending attacks a little more difficult, makes mech even less viable than it is currently as well.
Great points. But what I was thinking was air to ground would be reduced, but not air to air. However, considering I wasn't able to make that clear, it might be too complicated for blizzard, considering they've said they don't like big tooltips.
The problem is that collossi are still ground units that happen to be targettable by air. Not only would it be completely counter intuitive and confusing the mechanic would technically reduce damage from vikings on collossus because of their classification as ground.
On January 26 2012 06:35 Garth wrote: who the fuck said emp was weak
And I quote “pro players at the G Star event in Korea via a Q & A.”
as in what pro players, what where they smoking, and g star? can you direct me to an informational thread on it because I Can't find it :O.
If tt1 says that voidrays were wayyyy too strong, doesn't mean he's even close to right despite being a proffesional player. Same with lower tiered korean pros.
edit: Even then some of these responses couldn't have possibly been form established KOREAN pros. Terran can't beat protoss? Really, terrans fucking annihlate protosses in korea specifically, and the carrier comment I also don't believe would come form a pro.
I'm not saying is comments were right or wrong only that that's where he got his info. Link is below from his original post. But I will add, that when he was referring to Terran not being able to beat Protoss Kim clearly disagreed this isn't the case at higher levels. This is only visible at the lower levels which are indicative of the win/loss ratio’s for silver, gold, platinum and diamond. Once you master Terran the Skill cap is extremely high, but they are difficult to master.
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/4135187/Q__A_With_David_Kim-12_15_2011#blog "At the recent G-Star event in Korea, we had an opportunity to talk to some of the GSL’s top competitors and get their feedback on the current state of StarCraft II. This was also a good opportunity to show our players around the world how pro player feedback influences the act of balancing StarCraft II. "
The new post from what I gather given some of the points he made in his last blog is a combination of pros from Korea and some of the comments in the forums.
On January 26 2012 05:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:38 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
I think it would be a good idea to give Phoenix an upgrade that allows splash instead of a slow ass capital ship I would never build because if I had that much money/time I would just add more templar.
\
Do you understand how much splash protoss already has? Phoenix having splash would be the 4th unit, and one that can move-shoot in a way other units cannot. Protoss doesn't need more splash damage -_-- I know it can seem difficult to grasp from a protoss perspective, but the minute zerg has a unit to control the map, it's ''overpowered''. don't even have lurkers in the game.
Also, no one wants to face a protoss in the GSL. There's a reason for that.
Fine then make Protoss units cost 50% of what they cost now and nobody needs to splash.
Who doesn't want to face P in GSL?
You clearly didn't watch the Code S Ro16 group nominations. No one wants to face toss right now.
Wasn't it also MarineKing during the Group Nominations that said that any Terran that thinks Protoss is imba is just an average Terran? That was a fairly confident statement.
On January 26 2012 04:34 NMHU. wrote: ''Terran Can’t Beat Protoss'' ''Ghost EMP is Too Weak''
As a protoss player, I only have to say : ''lol''
- NMHU.
Thank you hmmm Terran cant beat protoss lololol
Emp... Same aoe as storm. Does damage instantly, impossible to dodge also takes energy in aoe / feed back only does 1 unit and costs 2/3rds of the gas. ghosts take 75 gas to tech to. (tech lab n ghost academy) Fuck lets all just play terran!!
Ghosts take 40 seconds to build. High Templar take 5.
Ghosts can only build from a Barracks that has a Tech Lab attached to it. High Templar can build anywhere within a pylon radius.
EMP does a good job against HT tech--if you micro better than the Protoss--while Ghosts are much less useful against builds in which the Protoss gets Colossi sooner. If a Terran tries to get Ghosts, and the Protoss gets Colossi, timing attacks off of two bases can be devastating because there's almost no way that the Terran can have Vikings to deal with Colossi and upgrades to deal with the massive army. High Templar, on the other hand, do very well against everything in the Terran arsenal. Against Ghosts, you have to micro better, but Ghosts are not a "hard counter" to HTs; it all comes down to who controls better (unless Protoss makes a mistake, in which case that's their fault). Not only do Storm and Archon deal well with any sort of bio push, but Feedback devastates all Terran tech. Thors, Banshees, Ravens, Battlecruisers, Medivacs. All of them get demolished by Feedback in the same way that Snipe can demolish Zerg tech late game; the difference: Feedback is a one click wonder that takes next to nothing to do.
EMP targets ground, meaning that in an HT vs Ghost 1v1 fight, while the EMP can hit first, for all intents and purposes the Terran has to control far better and control well. The Protoss just has to click to Feedback the Ghost, then it flies to the Ghost and the second it's in range, the Ghost dies. Plus, if the HT has 150+ energy, then the Feedback is near impossible to stop, even if it does not do the killing blow to the Ghost.
Try putting your High Templar in a Warp Prism; it's not the hardest micro, it's not like controlling a big Chargelot/Colossi ball is that difficult, and frankly it almost guarantees that you will get off some storms. Good storms in conjunction with Chargelots will beat Terran.
LOL high templar take 5 seconds to build MYBIG FAT HAIRY ANUS!... u know protoss have the reverse build time mechanic right???? U still have to macro correctly and wait for your warp ins and cool downs. Yes, ghosts are much less useful against collosi But they require a commitment of 50 gas and 150 minerals to tech to. It is extremely easy to outmicro templar with ghosts if they clump up and if u see weakness emp. If they are being smart and putting an obs over ur army sending out 1 or 2 templar at a time? just snipe or send tiny bits of your army to kill those templar. It's extremely easy to snipe templar without getting fed back u just gotta micro as well as a plat but have diamondish game awareness. ur argument about feed back is invalid... the feed back barely does anything against thors and battle cruisers, but if you're going mass banshee or raven, of course im gonna get templar to counter them... What kind of idiot wouldnt get templar or pheonix to counter mass banshee? thats the point of a counter... And you're saying shit about controlling a chargelot colossi ball being easy.. u know.. protoss and zerg units are much harder to micro than marine marauder ghost viking... 1 marine marauder medivacs, 2 ghosts, 3 vikings. The late game protoss go something like this 1. zeal sentry 2. ht 3. collosus. 4. stalkers. We have to cast forcefields, storms, micro the collosus back run the zealots back when u start kiting. while all u do is scan. emp a move w/ stim step shoot step shoot step shoot step shoot step shoot. You're fuckin conclusion to your post is so stupid as well... Good storms in conjunction with chargelots will beat terran... THANK YOU CAPTAIN FUCKING OBVIOUS. Hmm I bet good macro with good micro and just overall superior mechanics will beat an opponent and I guess good emps with good viking control will also rape a protoss anally. you're a f ucking stupid piece of shit. just saying... last 2 seasons i was top 25 masters toss (this season have been slacking on sc2 because of college so about 50ish). Also mid masters terran and mid masters zerg.
On January 26 2012 06:15 The Final Boss wrote:
On January 26 2012 05:20 flowSthead wrote:
On January 26 2012 04:53 The Final Boss wrote:
On January 26 2012 04:38 meltingmykohchoo wrote:
On January 26 2012 04:34 NMHU. wrote: ''Terran Can’t Beat Protoss'' ''Ghost EMP is Too Weak''
As a protoss player, I only have to say : ''lol''
- NMHU.
Thank you hmmm Terran cant beat protoss lololol
Emp... Same aoe as storm. Does damage instantly, impossible to dodge also takes energy in aoe / feed back only does 1 unit and costs 2/3rds of the gas. ghosts take 75 gas to tech to. (tech lab n ghost academy) Fuck lets all just play terran!!
Ghosts take 40 seconds to build. High Templar take 5.
Ghosts can only build from a Barracks that has a Tech Lab attached to it. High Templar can build anywhere within a pylon radius.
EMP does a good job against HT tech--if you micro better than the Protoss--while Ghosts are much less useful against builds in which the Protoss gets Colossi sooner. If a Terran tries to get Ghosts, and the Protoss gets Colossi, timing attacks off of two bases can be devastating because there's almost no way that the Terran can have Vikings to deal with Colossi and upgrades to deal with the massive army. High Templar, on the other hand, do very well against everything in the Terran arsenal. Against Ghosts, you have to micro better, but Ghosts are not a "hard counter" to HTs; it all comes down to who controls better (unless Protoss makes a mistake, in which case that's their fault). Not only do Storm and Archon deal well with any sort of bio push, but Feedback devastates all Terran tech. Thors, Banshees, Ravens, Battlecruisers, Medivacs. All of them get demolished by Feedback in the same way that Snipe can demolish Zerg tech late game; the difference: Feedback is a one click wonder that takes next to nothing to do.
EMP targets ground, meaning that in an HT vs Ghost 1v1 fight, while the EMP can hit first, for all intents and purposes the Terran has to control far better and control well. The Protoss just has to click to Feedback the Ghost, then it flies to the Ghost and the second it's in range, the Ghost dies. Plus, if the HT has 150+ energy, then the Feedback is near impossible to stop, even if it does not do the killing blow to the Ghost.
Try putting your High Templar in a Warp Prism; it's not the hardest micro, it's not like controlling a big Chargelot/Colossi ball is that difficult, and frankly it almost guarantees that you will get off some storms. Good storms in conjunction with Chargelots will beat Terran.
Sure, it all depends on micro, but the comparison is still ridiculous. Feedback is single use while emp can work on every single one of your High Templar. Snipe against Zerg is better than Feedback against Terran. As a Zerg, you cannot stop Ghosts from sniping you without killing them. There is literally no way to stop them from sniping you unless you kill them. If you lose all of the energy on your Thors/Banshees/Battlescruisers, then Feedback does nothing (obviously Medivacs and Ravens need energy to do anything so Feedback is a good counter to those, but it also means you are microing your Raven poorly if it keeps on getting Feedbacked). See if more Terrans would say EMP their Thors and Battlecruisers, maybe Feedback wouldn't be so powerful against late game Terran tech.
Look at that. I just solved your Feedback problem for half of your race. Try doing the same for Zerg and snipe.
On January 26 2012 05:14 The Final Boss wrote:
On January 26 2012 05:10 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 05:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:38 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
I think it would be a good idea to give Phoenix an upgrade that allows splash instead of a slow ass capital ship I would never build because if I had that much money/time I would just add more templar.
\
Do you understand how much splash protoss already has? Phoenix having splash would be the 4th unit, and one that can move-shoot in a way other units cannot. Protoss doesn't need more splash damage -_-- I know it can seem difficult to grasp from a protoss perspective, but the minute zerg has a unit to control the map, it's ''overpowered''. don't even have lurkers in the game.
Also, no one wants to face a protoss in the GSL. There's a reason for that.
Fine then make Protoss units cost 50% of what they cost now and nobody needs to splash.
Who doesn't want to face P in GSL?
Taeja is one of the top Terran players in the world and he has claimed that he thinks Protoss is the strongest race. Just sayin'... ^^
This is a ridiculous argument. Many players can have many different opinions, but their expertise does not make their opinions true. The fact that Terrans have won the last 3 GSLs and the Blizzard Cup which consisted of 2 TvTs and 2 TvZs should point to the idea that no, Protoss is not the strongest race. Either that or Protoss players suck, but in either case the other races shouldn't have a problem with this.
Banshees need their energy or else they'll get picked out of the sky in no time. And honestly, I understand that you can do that, except that: 1. Thors, Banshees, Ravens, Battlecrusiers, and other tech all happen to be extremely gas intensive. 2. Ghosts cost a lot of gas 3. EMPing Thors is going to take a lot of EMPs since the radius got decreased and Thors happen to be huge. The fact that Terran can do that is different than what I'm saying. I'm merely pointing out that High Templar happen to be extremely good against both Terran bio and Terran tech, while Ghosts are not. I'm not saying that it's some impossible feat to counter, there are plenty of ways (Jjakji used cannons on rocks, which I thought was really clever since most Thor builds result in only a single attack anyways). In the same way, Protoss can just load their High Templar into a Warp Prism and drop them to Storm/Feedback without having to risk getting EMPed. Look at that, I just solved your whole EMP problem (wow that sounded really dumb, just like your post).
Maybe you should read what I was quoting instead of blindly writing something. It wasn't an argument, it was an answer to the question. The guy asked who doesn't want to play Protoss players in the GSL, Taeja doesn't... nice job writing that cute paragraph about how "stupid" I am while making an ass out of yourself.
A little bit off-topic: from a game design's point of view, isn't it kind of stupid that a player is using offensive spells on their own units? Maybe it's just me but that seems like a really stupid thing to have happen.
Banshees and thors will trade cost efficiently with any protoss army unless there is storm and feedback and even then the thor army can trade equally. emping thors is stupid i gotta agree w/ u there. your argument for high templar into a warp prism is fucking awful too... no risk ofgetting empd? oh just risk losing a warp prism and 2-4 high templars without even getting 1 storm off.
Mutas arent over powered.. just accept that you're bad at the game and learn from there... If u cant deal with mutas figure out a way to prevent it. double stargate is really really easy to prevent a quick 3rd be safe from most all ins and force hydras (at least against shitty mid to high masters players). And w/ sentries the void rays will rape the hydras, u just gotta know when and how to transition and that just comes from playing.
pheonix w/ splash is stupid op.. Collosus pheonix balls would be the only thing played in pvt.
You, sir, should be awarded the TASSADAR PRIZE FOR MOST HONORABLE BROTOSS ALIVE.
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
This solves the problem in PvZ, but it creates a new problem in PvT. If the phoenix were to deal splash damage to air units, they would be too good vs vikings, and then Colossus pushes would be so imba.
On January 26 2012 05:45 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On January 26 2012 05:10 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 05:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:38 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
I think it would be a good idea to give Phoenix an upgrade that allows splash instead of a slow ass capital ship I would never build because if I had that much money/time I would just add more templar.
\
Do you understand how much splash protoss already has? Phoenix having splash would be the 4th unit, and one that can move-shoot in a way other units cannot. Protoss doesn't need more splash damage -_-- I know it can seem difficult to grasp from a protoss perspective, but the minute zerg has a unit to control the map, it's ''overpowered''. don't even have lurkers in the game.
Also, no one wants to face a protoss in the GSL. There's a reason for that.
Fine then make Protoss units cost 50% of what they cost now and nobody needs to splash.
Who doesn't want to face P in GSL?
You clearly didn't watch the Code S Ro16 group nominations. No one wants to face toss right now.
Wasn't it also MarineKing during the Group Nominations that said that any Terran that thinks Protoss is imba is just an average Terran? That was a fairly confident statement.
people in gsl nominations tend to troll/joke around with each other.
Haha give carriers air shield, while ground shields suck. That way they would be 2 total different siege units with opposite conters and probably totally op together xD.
But would be nice to see a phoenix buff, i considered the faster build time before imba, so i wouldn't mind as they are on of my favorite units. And that just because people forgot how to fight mutas lol.
About the nydus, just make the network unload fast again then you would see them every lategame after a while. (note not the worm just the network )
Didn't expected less from Blizzard being ontop of everything again and hoping players can solve the problems themselfs. Just their no random thing makes it hard for them to solve things (like different nydus unload times heh)
On January 26 2012 05:45 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On January 26 2012 05:10 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 05:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:38 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
I think it would be a good idea to give Phoenix an upgrade that allows splash instead of a slow ass capital ship I would never build because if I had that much money/time I would just add more templar.
\
Do you understand how much splash protoss already has? Phoenix having splash would be the 4th unit, and one that can move-shoot in a way other units cannot. Protoss doesn't need more splash damage -_-- I know it can seem difficult to grasp from a protoss perspective, but the minute zerg has a unit to control the map, it's ''overpowered''. don't even have lurkers in the game.
Also, no one wants to face a protoss in the GSL. There's a reason for that.
Fine then make Protoss units cost 50% of what they cost now and nobody needs to splash.
Who doesn't want to face P in GSL?
You clearly didn't watch the Code S Ro16 group nominations. No one wants to face toss right now.
Wasn't it also MarineKing during the Group Nominations that said that any Terran that thinks Protoss is imba is just an average Terran? That was a fairly confident statement.
Most of what they say about balance at the Nominations is bullshit anyway. Nestea: "Protoss is really strong, I don't know any way to beat them. But since I have to overcome my weakness, I came here to pick a Protoss. *picks a Zerg*". Really Nestea? /rolleyes
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
This solves the problem in PvZ, but it creates a new problem in PvT. If the phoenix were to deal splash damage to air units, they would be too good vs vikings, and then Colossus pushes would be so imba.
You could just make it so Phoenixes only splash light if this is the only problem.
Coming from a guy who plays like 50/50 Zerg/Protoss on ladder.
The solution to mass Mutas in PvZ is to simply move out and kill zerg. Just double forge and lots of Zealots, Stalkers, and a few sentries. If the Z player tries to base race you he's going to lose, because a well upgraded gateway army puts out a lot more dps than mutalisks do. Not to mention after several warp ins with upgraded stalkers you can eventually hold them off.
I can't even count the number of times I've lost like 30 probes in a game against a 3-4 base zerg and just taken my 2/2 gateway army and killed him. Often times resulting in balance whine that Protoss is OP.
On January 26 2012 05:45 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On January 26 2012 05:10 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 05:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:38 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
I think it would be a good idea to give Phoenix an upgrade that allows splash instead of a slow ass capital ship I would never build because if I had that much money/time I would just add more templar.
\
Do you understand how much splash protoss already has? Phoenix having splash would be the 4th unit, and one that can move-shoot in a way other units cannot. Protoss doesn't need more splash damage -_-- I know it can seem difficult to grasp from a protoss perspective, but the minute zerg has a unit to control the map, it's ''overpowered''. don't even have lurkers in the game.
Also, no one wants to face a protoss in the GSL. There's a reason for that.
Fine then make Protoss units cost 50% of what they cost now and nobody needs to splash.
Who doesn't want to face P in GSL?
You clearly didn't watch the Code S Ro16 group nominations. No one wants to face toss right now.
Wasn't it also MarineKing during the Group Nominations that said that any Terran that thinks Protoss is imba is just an average Terran? That was a fairly confident statement.
people in gsl nominations tend to troll/joke around with each other.
On January 26 2012 05:45 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On January 26 2012 05:10 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 05:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:38 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
I think it would be a good idea to give Phoenix an upgrade that allows splash instead of a slow ass capital ship I would never build because if I had that much money/time I would just add more templar.
\
Do you understand how much splash protoss already has? Phoenix having splash would be the 4th unit, and one that can move-shoot in a way other units cannot. Protoss doesn't need more splash damage -_-- I know it can seem difficult to grasp from a protoss perspective, but the minute zerg has a unit to control the map, it's ''overpowered''. don't even have lurkers in the game.
Also, no one wants to face a protoss in the GSL. There's a reason for that.
Fine then make Protoss units cost 50% of what they cost now and nobody needs to splash.
Who doesn't want to face P in GSL?
You clearly didn't watch the Code S Ro16 group nominations. No one wants to face toss right now.
Wasn't it also MarineKing during the Group Nominations that said that any Terran that thinks Protoss is imba is just an average Terran? That was a fairly confident statement.
Most of what they say about balance at the Nominations is bullshit anyway. Nestea: "Protoss is really strong, I don't know any way to beat them. But since I have to overcome my weakness, I came here to pick a Protoss. *picks a Zerg*". Really Nestea? /rolleyes
I'm aware. I was more pointing out that it wasn't a 100% consensus on Protoss being difficult from every player there. Even if it is a joke/troll, if you say the same thing often enough there must be some amount of truth in it, or at least that seems to be what a lot of viewers think.
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
This solves the problem in PvZ, but it creates a new problem in PvT. If the phoenix were to deal splash damage to air units, they would be too good vs vikings, and then Colossus pushes would be so imba.
You could just make it so Phoenixes only splash light if this is the only problem.
Yes, you could...but it would be a very artificial solution; splash damage doesn't work that way (if vikings were massive unitis, it would make sense, but it makes no sense to say that they don't get splash damage just because they are armored). Maybe the solution is to give the phoenix a bonus damage vs light units, rather than splash damage.
Same old same old.. Doesn't really tell us anything besides which units they are currently looking at >_< Anyways, i think any changes right before HOTS comes out would be a waste, since the meta game and the balance will go up-side-down once beta goes live.
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
I think that would be a good fix but I would make the gravaton beem cost more energy just so you cant spam all your phoenix to lift and have 1 phoenix splash all the workers like 10 times. It'd then become like flying hellions...oh how thatd be fun to play against.
He could just make a blog saying: "We are aware of some balance issues right now and we are planning on fixing them with the release of the Heart of the Swarm".
Seriously, they are using HotS as the answer to all the problems in SC2. T_T At the Blizzcon 2011, it was just "Yeah, we know this is a huge problem right now, but you can wait 6 months, because we are releasing a new unit that will solve your problems".
The biggest problem in tvp is the zealot. Idk y zealots dont take as much shit as rines do. Adding the battle helions now would be a great idea, because in late game tvp toss has like 50 zealots in their army and when 2 200/200 armies r fighting terran has to land emps micro vikings and stutter step back against zealots, while toss only has to land storms and micro collosi and stalkers while they let the zealots a move. This makes tvp so boring for me there is nothing more mind numbing then stutter step micro.
I think battle helions would make tvp alot better cuz terran could a move his army and focus more on ghost and viking micro rather then fuking boring stutterstep for 5 min every battle lol. Also if terran wins a 200/200 battle vs toss, toss will just warp in 15 zealots back home and terran still has to sit there and micro thier balls off in order to not let zealots cut through wats left of their army, while toss is macroing at home and not paying attention to zealots. Batlle helions will allow terran to a move after winning a big battle and still macro up reinforcements back home.
On January 26 2012 07:46 zEnVy wrote: Coming from a guy who plays like 50/50 Zerg/Protoss on ladder.
The solution to mass Mutas in PvZ is to simply move out and kill zerg. Just double forge and lots of Zealots, Stalkers, and a few sentries. If the Z player tries to base race you he's going to lose, because a well upgraded gateway army puts out a lot more dps than mutalisks do. Not to mention after several warp ins with upgraded stalkers you can eventually hold them off.
I can't even count the number of times I've lost like 30 probes in a game against a 3-4 base zerg and just taken my 2/2 gateway army and killed him. Often times resulting in balance whine that Protoss is OP.
Though it depends different scenarios, mutas are generally superior in base trading. I dunno what happens in your games, but Protoss shouldn't be able to base a Zerg comfortably until they're maxed with 4+ bases.
The issue with battle hellion TvP is that they don't fit into the T army at all.
Late game TvP is all about positioning and kiting and minimizing surface area to zealots. Now the T is expected to stand and fight since the hellions can't keep up?
And how will upgrades work? It's not like TvZ where the mech armor doesn't have to be upgraded. Battle hellions will be taking plenty of damage from heavily upgraded P ground. So you do squeeze in 2 more sets of ups on of the bio + air attack?
On January 26 2012 08:38 SeaSwift wrote: Hahahahaha
I found one of Avilo's rants on the B.net forums in the comment section. It is quite funny ^_^
Yah, I saw the rant as well. One of the better ones I have ever read. It is one thing to say someone is bad at their job, it is another thing to publicly demand their firing because you have a difference of opinions on the balance of the game. Avilo is a little bit to extreme but funny nonetheless.
On January 26 2012 08:20 -Duderino- wrote: The biggest problem in tvp is the zealot. Idk y zealots dont take as much shit as rines do. Adding the battle helions now would be a great idea, because in late game tvp toss has like 50 zealots in their army and when 2 200/200 armies r fighting terran has to land emps micro vikings and stutter step back against zealots, while toss only has to land storms and micro collosi and stalkers while they let the zealots a move. This makes tvp so boring for me there is nothing more mind numbing then stutter step micro.
Yeah quite true, really wouldn't want P to receive another buff haha....
the problem with lategame tvp are warpgates, but everyone seems to whine about the deathblob wich with good positioning and micro you can beat just fine. Being able to warp 40 zealots once you start losing units basicly right in the battle if you are playing a good toss with good pylon positioning is the problem with lategame tvp because protoss remaxes their army just so insanely fast. Same thing with the 1/1/1 the problem is the mule, these are the 2 issues that really make this match up a bit dumb imo.
Concerning the carrier, I don't really understand how there is too much overlap between carreir and colossus, but not between ultra and broodlord. At least the carrier can also attack air. The only thing the carrier needs is some way to micro the interceptors in some way, for faster release and target fire, but also for faster docking and repair/shield recharge. That way it becomes a unit with a high skill ceiling and probably would only need very mnor adjustments int he numbers.
And insstead of a battle hellion I would rather see the reaper in a similar role. Turn off jetpack , lose mobility, pistols, grenades and cliff jump, gain a blowtorch and some armor/health. I would hate for terrans to be their mineral dumps even more cost effective and versatile. Not the race with mules.
I really do not think P needs any help. They are very strong now and the game feels more balanced than it was, but slightly buffing P again will tilt the balance.
How about replacing the oracles entomb ability with something similar to the stasis field that the arbiter had in BW. It could have a supply limit on the amount of units it could capture and/or hit-points so it can be broken by damage.
This still works for harassing, the only difference is the workers are trapped instead of the minerals.
Casting stasis field on mutalisks or any other type of harass would provide some more time to get units to defend. The opponent has to decide to break the field to save the units or just kill probes and leave the trapped units behind.
It would provide many more interesting options and would just need the right limits placed on it.
Is David Kim trolling us? He answered the 5 worst and bronze leaguesque questions that could ever been ask. MASS MUTA SO HARD TO BEAT. umm ever hear of anything called storm T.T. Reading this article made me sigh out loud probably 15 times. Ghost EMP too underpowered... Really? EMP is completely fine..
I hope this becomes a constant thing (the QandA, not the website being down >.<) Because it would really help clean up a lot of the idiots in the forums.
On January 26 2012 09:11 GhandiEAGLE wrote: lol the website is down XD
I hope this becomes a constant thing (the QandA, not the website being down >.<) Because it would really help clean up a lot of the idiots in the forums.
No, it would actually make them believe their concerns have weight. They need to actually play the game, not bitch about it on the forums so it's easier for them.
Im really glad they acknowledged the problem of Terran skill level in general being hard compared to P and Z. I disagree with it being only under master league tho. I do think this is an inherent problem with the current game design on both extremes. You have the 400apm koreans who make T look imba all the time. And then you have the non-pros(even master league T's like myself) who feel that difference in the amount of micro it takes to play T in contrast to P. With all of the all-ins aside TvP is bland, and feels near damn impossible unless my oppenant makes huge errors. You simply have to have 400 apm to play bio correctly.
We suspect that the initial complexity of the terran race may be a contributing factor to this, so internally, we’re experimenting with moving some of the new terran units around to make terran slightly more intuitive to play -- at lower levels only. Just as an example, one of the things we’re experimenting with is making the battle hellion available from the factory instead of the normal hellion.
Why does zerg need to be able to "stop" a ffe? FFE can only really be considered too strong on maps where you can't take a third in response which pretty much is the fault of destructible rocks (blizzard mapmakers) not some imbalance in the strategy. Even then, zerg has a number of options, and "imbalance" of the FFE is debatable at best.
Same thing goes for mass muta in zvp. Yeah, it's good, but the second toss sees you up to 15 ish mutas, he knows you're going for a base trade lategame. If he turtles to 200/200 on three bases and gets a mothership he can wait to catch you in a vortex, archon toilette the mutas and just roll out and clear the map.it's really not an invincible style. Toss being given some counter to mutas other than archons, blink, Phoenix, storm and cannons just seems like it's going to reinforce the shitty "zerg has to win by 15 minutes" issue the MU is already plagued with.
OMG! Nice answers David Kim. Please Blizzard PLEASE do not add in the Tempest! No one wants a huge, slow, flying, a-move colossus of the sky to add to the deathball. Just give the phoenix a splash damage upgrade at the Fleet Beacon! Phoenixes are very micro-intensive units that encourage skirmishing, and this would make them useful lategame and make protoss air more prominent in general.
On January 26 2012 05:45 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On January 26 2012 05:10 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 05:07 RogerChillingworth wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:38 Condor Hero wrote:
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
I think it would be a good idea to give Phoenix an upgrade that allows splash instead of a slow ass capital ship I would never build because if I had that much money/time I would just add more templar.
\
Do you understand how much splash protoss already has? Phoenix having splash would be the 4th unit, and one that can move-shoot in a way other units cannot. Protoss doesn't need more splash damage -_-- I know it can seem difficult to grasp from a protoss perspective, but the minute zerg has a unit to control the map, it's ''overpowered''. don't even have lurkers in the game.
Also, no one wants to face a protoss in the GSL. There's a reason for that.
Fine then make Protoss units cost 50% of what they cost now and nobody needs to splash.
Who doesn't want to face P in GSL?
You clearly didn't watch the Code S Ro16 group nominations. No one wants to face toss right now.
You're right I didn't watch group nominations, I watch the actual games.
Then you clearly don't have the information to formulate an argument, while the other person does.
What? How does watching the nominations mean he can make an argument... the results of the games is what matters... People always claim other races are stronger and that they feel weak etc. The main point is which race actually wins. so imo what players said during the nominations means jack shit the games are the important thing to base an argument off of.
So the guy watching the games imo has more information to form an argument then the guy watching the nominations....
We were talking about whether or not the players in GSL felt confident/wanted to play Protoss players. Read. The. Quotes. Before. You. Post.
If blizzard attempts to balance the game so that more protoss players win tournaments specifically -- well I wouldn't know what to think anymore at that point. Protoss really does not need any more "general buffs." If the winrates are fine everywhere else, except in the GSL, chances are it's not a balance issue, but a player issue.
On January 26 2012 10:26 Quotidian wrote: If blizzard attempts to balance the game so that more protoss players win tournaments specifically -- well I wouldn't know what to think anymore at that point. Protoss really does not need any more "general buffs." If the winrates are fine everywhere else, except in the GSL, chances are it's not a balance issue, but a player issue.
=.=
No. See arguments for the past 7 months. GSL balance is the balance to be concerned with. Not foreigner tournaments where low apm players can't accomplish much.
On January 26 2012 10:26 Quotidian wrote: If blizzard attempts to balance the game so that more protoss players win tournaments specifically -- well I wouldn't know what to think anymore at that point. Protoss really does not need any more "general buffs." If the winrates are fine everywhere else, except in the GSL, chances are it's not a balance issue, but a player issue.
=.=
No. See arguments for the past 7 months. GSL balance is the balance to be concerned with. Not foreigner tournaments where low apm players can't accomplish much.
it's a player pool issue, and in the past a tournament structure issue with the GSL (should be fixed now.) The top korean terrans are just better than the top korean protoss players - that's always been the real "balance" issue in that region.
On January 26 2012 10:26 Quotidian wrote: If blizzard attempts to balance the game so that more protoss players win tournaments specifically -- well I wouldn't know what to think anymore at that point. Protoss really does not need any more "general buffs." If the winrates are fine everywhere else, except in the GSL, chances are it's not a balance issue, but a player issue.
=.=
No. See arguments for the past 7 months. GSL balance is the balance to be concerned with. Not foreigner tournaments where low apm players can't accomplish much.
it's a player pool issue, and in the past a tournament structure issue with the GSL (should be fixed now.) The top korean terrans are just better than the top korean protoss players - that's always been the real "balance" issue in that region.
and all orc players are better than those that play undead
On January 26 2012 10:26 Quotidian wrote: If blizzard attempts to balance the game so that more protoss players win tournaments specifically -- well I wouldn't know what to think anymore at that point. Protoss really does not need any more "general buffs." If the winrates are fine everywhere else, except in the GSL, chances are it's not a balance issue, but a player issue.
=.=
No. See arguments for the past 7 months. GSL balance is the balance to be concerned with. Not foreigner tournaments where low apm players can't accomplish much.
it's a player pool issue, and in the past a tournament structure issue with the GSL (should be fixed now.) The top korean terrans are just better than the top korean protoss players - that's always been the real "balance" issue in that region.
and all orc players are better than those that play undead
how is this even relevant? Completely different game
and it's not like terran is dominating outside of Korea.. maybe protoss players should start directing their rage towards zerg instead.
On January 26 2012 10:26 Quotidian wrote: If blizzard attempts to balance the game so that more protoss players win tournaments specifically -- well I wouldn't know what to think anymore at that point. Protoss really does not need any more "general buffs." If the winrates are fine everywhere else, except in the GSL, chances are it's not a balance issue, but a player issue.
=.=
No. See arguments for the past 7 months. GSL balance is the balance to be concerned with. Not foreigner tournaments where low apm players can't accomplish much.
it's a player pool issue, and in the past a tournament structure issue with the GSL (should be fixed now.) The top korean terrans are just better than the top korean protoss players - that's always been the real "balance" issue in that region.
and all orc players are better than those that play undead
how is this even relevant? Completely different game
and it's not like terran is dominating outside of Korea.. maybe protoss players should start directing their rage towards zerg instead.
Terrans aren't even dominating in Korea anymore. But they used to be, and that has had an impact. Even if the races are completely balanced now, balance has still affected our perceptions of every player. For example, many terran players may have been placed on pedestals far higher than they should have been. We have heard of so many more terran players than those of other races, because terrans ran so rampant during the early days of the game. There are so many more terran players that a person can name as strong players, just because of this fact. When someone asks where are the zerg and protoss players that should be replacing terrans in Code S and Code A, you have to realize that many haven't had enough of a chance to become known yet. Those obscure names you hear once in a blue moon could have been household names in another dimension where another race had such a headstart.
On January 26 2012 10:26 Quotidian wrote: If blizzard attempts to balance the game so that more protoss players win tournaments specifically -- well I wouldn't know what to think anymore at that point. Protoss really does not need any more "general buffs." If the winrates are fine everywhere else, except in the GSL, chances are it's not a balance issue, but a player issue.
=.=
No. See arguments for the past 7 months. GSL balance is the balance to be concerned with. Not foreigner tournaments where low apm players can't accomplish much.
likelikelike!! who wins? terran terran terran toss is doing pretty well this gsl though so hopefully anuther toss will win
Some stuff that didn't get addressed and should have been:
- Blizzard maps still suck (no depo on low ground, gold expansions, generally bad layout... ) - Bad scouting early game (many coinflip openings) - Fights are over too quickly (terrible damage syndrome, blob armys)
And generally speaking mechanics do not get rewarded as high as they should be. It's unacceptable seeing pros constantly getting killed in the first 5 minutes of a game due to random luck or players in GM turtleing on 3 bases and doing one big push with their deathball hoping for the best.
Those are just my 2 cents on matters that imo haven't been resolved since release.
I don't know who watched the code s group selections, but all of the zerg players were trying to avoid protoss because they said they can't figure out how to win anymore (nestea specifically). Discussion of a protoss buff at this point, when protoss has been doing perfectly fine recently, scares me.
A lot of these topics are sort of stupid, the SC2 team should seriously question their sources of feedback, I understand they want to cater to everyone not just competitive players, but surely there are much more appropriate issues to discuss than "Terran Can’t Beat Protoss".
On January 26 2012 12:35 TheAntZ wrote: i dont understand the people crying out muta op. If its op why do we not see muta every pro game? Or even every game on certain maps? honestly.
To be fair, in the past 4 GSL tournaments (when only looking at Code S games) there have been about 20 PvZs.
Did you watch Dimaga vs AdelScott on Shakuras during the recent HomeStory Cup? All Dimaga did was make mutas and more mutas, while AdelScott went for a Stalker/Phoenix army composition. Personally I don't agree with the choice of going for Phoenix's against Muta play but that's besides the point.
Another game to consider would be Hero vs CrazingMoving's Code A game last season. CrazingMoving gained a huge advantage against Hero using a Muta-centered playstyle but failed to transition out of it after he had a large enough advantage.
lol at battle helions coming out of factory then making them into helions vs zerg, knowing blizzard its gonna probably take 3sec to make battle helion into normal one. Whats next tank comes out in pieces and terrans have to contruct it via mini game inside sc2?
On January 26 2012 14:36 Empire.Beastyqt wrote: lol at battle helions coming out of factory then making them into helions vs zerg, knowing blizzard its gonna probably take 3sec to make battle helion into normal one. Whats next tank comes out in pieces and terrans have to contruct it via mini game inside sc2?
Better yet, you have to go around and find pieces of the tank on the map and then bring it back to the factory to assemble it.
DA FUQ? I don't understand why DK doesn't derive the bulk of his questions from a place like... oh I don't know... TEAMLIQUID - The largest international starcraft hub available?! I see threadworthy topics every other week concerning SC2 - none of which were addressed in this Q&A
Mass Mutalisks vs. Protoss Carrier Removal in Heart of the Swarm Nydus Worm is Too Inconsistent — Make It More Like the Overlord Transport
All the rest are hardly an issue, some of them even completely wrong. EMP too weak? Not only is EMP still an extremely powerful spell, but it should be researched in my opinion...Protoss has to research storm and Zerg has to research NP, yet ghosts start out with both Snipe and EMP. I'm not whining about IMBA but come on...at the very least EMP sure as hell doesn't deserve to be strengthened anymore.
On January 26 2012 14:58 SwizzY wrote: "terran can't beat protoss"
DA FUQ? I don't understand why DK doesn't derive the bulk of his questions from a place like... oh I don't know... TEAMLIQUID - The largest international starcraft hub available?! I see threadworthy topics every other week concerning SC2 - none of which were addressed in this Q&A
Actually there were multiple threads about terran. one being "fundamental problems with terran" where people discussed how terran is great high level, but low level it kinda sucks. the whole "terran can't beat protoss" thing comes from low level (masters or below) terrans that can't beat the protoss death ball.
On January 26 2012 14:58 SwizzY wrote: "terran can't beat protoss"
DA FUQ? I don't understand why DK doesn't derive the bulk of his questions from a place like... oh I don't know... TEAMLIQUID - The largest international starcraft hub available?! I see threadworthy topics every other week concerning SC2 - none of which were addressed in this Q&A
The fact that he addressed questions like "Terran can't win against protoss" really gives me an aneurysm. Blizzard is so out of touch with the community when they obtain silly questions like that from the spamfest that is battle.net forum.
What a lot of people in this thread fail to realize is that win rates are not the only relevant statement of balance. Certainly a balanced game should probably have a close to even distribution of results at the highest level, but there are many ways to balance a game.
Now I do not claim to have a flawless understanding of the current balance and metagame, but bear with me and view the following as an example (not necessarily correct, clearly exaggerated, and clearly over simplified) designed to illustrate a flaw in the logic of parts of the community.
Consider the case of mass Mutalisk against Protoss:
Suppose that a Mutalisk ball of some critical mass becomes near impossible to defeat by an equally skilled Protoss player. Top level Protoss players realize that in order to beat this strategy they must do an early 2 base timing designed to win outright against a Mutalisk teching Zerg.
Suppose that Zergs doing this Mutalisk strategy have a 50% chance of surviving the timing attack. What happens now? Well the game is effectively decided in this battle. If the Zerg survives then he will get his "unbeatable" muta ball up and surely win the game.
So in this case, PvZ has a 50% winrate and is "balanced", but isn't it dull to know the outcome after the protoss attack? Isn't it dull to spend the next 15 minutes watching the Zerg slowly but inevitably pick the Protoss apart?
So what is the solution in this case (assuming that mutalisk play is desired)?
Somehow give Zerg a minor buff to their early game which makes them much more likely to survive until the late game, but then buff the Protoss response to this lategame option. Done correctly, PvZ is still a 50% game, but it becomes much more dynamic and varied.
I am not going to be so naive to suggest that I know how either race should be changed, but in my opinion, a tier 3 unit that takes years to manufacture, shares no useful tech with the rest of the protoss army, and cannot defend a base because it is too expensive to have more than 2, and too slow to defend multiple locations is definitely not the correct response.
"In fact, zerg is not struggling at any level of play, and their win ratio compared to skill is extremely solid at every skill level."---- finally, someone credible says it....i think pro zerg players know in their hearts their race is not the weakest,otherwise, why rely on zerg for their livelihood.... I notice that it's always the one who loses who complain about balance...yet taht same person you dont hear complaining when he wins. Yes, there are some inconsistencies...but overall, it is a great game. Promote esports, not give it a bad image.
The whole muta situation reveals some of their thought process with balance that makes me hopeful. Really mutas are pretty balanced from the outside looking in. Sure, if they reach a critical mass then it is over for toss but it is always possible to prevent that from happening (barring insanely bad luck on larger maps).
What this change means is that they dont like the idea of an unkillable death ball no matter how difficult it is to get. Players should always have at least some small percent chance of victory until the game is over. IMO this is EXCELLENT.
They hinted at this view with how they dealt with the toss death ball. At the time it almost made me laugh that people were upset when toss couldnt be killed when they had 200/200 all voidrays/collo/mothership/blink stalker. Such an army is impossibly expensive and slow to produce vs any skilled player, but in retrospect that shouldnt matter.
This isnt civilization, there should not be a technology alternate win condition no matter how hard it is to get.
On January 26 2012 15:21 Chengakz wrote: "In fact, zerg is not struggling at any level of play, and their win ratio compared to skill is extremely solid at every skill level."---- finally, someone credible says it....i think pro zerg players know in their hearts their race is not the weakest,otherwise, why rely on zerg for their livelihood.... I notice that it's always the one who loses who complain about balance...yet taht same person you dont hear complaining when he wins. Yes, there are some inconsistencies...but overall, it is a great game. Promote esports, not give it a bad image.
Yes, why does anyone play Protoss for their livelihood, when Kim himself says they're not up to par? -> Poor Argument.
Kim admits that, in Korea, Terrans are winning the most tournaments; this trend has been pretty consistent, Terrans tend to dominate on that stage. It also happens that the Korean scene is recognizably "better" than their foreign competition, only a few select foreigners are capable of competing in Code S level play.
So, when analyzing the highest skilled pool of professional players, Terrans win the most. This is not indicative of total balance, but rather what Kim himself admits earlier, lower ranked Terrans (and to a certain extent, foreigner Terrans) are not good enough to exploit the strengths of their race. When micro is exploited on a much higher level, Terrans tend to win the majority of tournaments.
Most of these questions are shit. The only one I think is legit is the muta zvp, which I believe is an overraction based on a newish trend in the matchup that hasn't fully been adapted to. I believe that alot of these answers are scary. Where do they come up that zerg does the best in foregin tourneys and protoss does the worst? Sure, stephano and Dimaga win a bit, but there have been 3 protoss on top of tlpd for the longest fucking time with protoss almost always on top (foreigners). I don't like them thinking so much about buffing or nerfing based on stuff that happens suddenly.
The Same thing has been happening forever; they patch something right after people start figuring it out. I believe SaSe crushed almost every terran (including probably the best TvP on the planet at that time, STBomber) at one MLG right before the EMP nerf when people were complaining about PvT being "unwinnable" lategame, all with long ass macro games with ghosts involved. We saw HerO start crushing zergs with warp prism harass at a time where every protoss was complaining about the matchup right before a big balance patch.I think the balance right now is good and and I hope they don't overreact and fuck it up, and honestly I feel if there isn't overwhelming data over a very long period of time (around a year), they just shouldn't touch the game balance and just let people figure it out for themselves.
I noticed that some players were worried that we don’t take the community’s feedback into account, and that we only listen to pro players. [...] our player community remains a vital source of feedback about StarCraft II
Well, that just concerns me. They SHOULD only listen to pro players and not some random b.net forum whiner.
On January 26 2012 15:55 Arisen wrote: Most of these questions are shit. The only one I think is legit is the muta zvp, which I believe is an overraction based on a newish trend in the matchup that hasn't fully been adapted to. I believe that alot of these answers are scary. Where do they come up that zerg does the best in foregin tourneys and protoss does the worst? Sure, stephano and Dimaga win a bit, but there have been 3 protoss on top of tlpd for the longest fucking time with protoss almost always on top (foreigners). I don't like them thinking so much about buffing or nerfing based on stuff that happens suddenly.
The Same thing has been happening forever; they patch something right after people start figuring it out. I believe SaSe crushed almost every terran (including probably the best TvP on the planet at that time, STBomber) at one MLG right before the EMP nerf when people were complaining about PvT being "unwinnable" lategame, all with long ass macro games with ghosts involved. We saw HerO start crushing zergs with warp prism harass at a time where every protoss was complaining about the matchup right before a big balance patch.I think the balance right now is good and and I hope they don't overreact and fuck it up, and honestly I feel if there isn't overwhelming data over a very long period of time (around a year), they just shouldn't touch the game balance and just let people figure it out for themselves.
I really hope you don't talk about the TLPD being a viable source for protoss consistency as there are barely any protoss, not a single one until the 10th slot in the korean standings which is the ONLY standings I will even consider using as evidence. I agree that maybe more time needs to be given for people to figure out how to counteract some builds but as stated before in a post above me, what if A) the zerg's muta ball is really unbeatable B) protoss timing attacking before crit muta mass becomes standard C) It all comes down to that timing attack and after that it is over with (50% chance for each side), the stats may say its balanced, but then this is flawed game design. The reason i bring this up is the problem is we have to figure out if the CHANGE is NECESSARY, not necessarily giving any change x amount of time before implementing it to make it legit. If a change is necessary, then hell I'd implement it asap than wait a grueling year for people to never figure something out.
I noticed that some players were worried that we don’t take the community’s feedback into account, and that we only listen to pro players. [...] our player community remains a vital source of feedback about StarCraft II
Well, that just concerns me. They SHOULD only listen to pro players and not some random b.net forum whiner.
well a lot of pros have proven that they don't have to have a understanding of good balance. there is probably good and bad suggestions in every segment of players.
They could solve the PvZ muta issue by making maps that had no empty space behind the base.
Seriously, I would love to see these maps implemented and watch as everyone's jaws drop at how much a difference it makes. It's so much easier to defend 180 degrees than it is to defend 360 degrees.
EDIT: Incoming balance nerfs as a knee-jerk reaction to new trends in the game that people haven't fully adapted to. Just sayin'.
On January 26 2012 15:55 Arisen wrote: Most of these questions are shit. The only one I think is legit is the muta zvp, which I believe is an overraction based on a newish trend in the matchup that hasn't fully been adapted to. I believe that alot of these answers are scary. Where do they come up that zerg does the best in foregin tourneys and protoss does the worst? Sure, stephano and Dimaga win a bit, but there have been 3 protoss on top of tlpd for the longest fucking time with protoss almost always on top (foreigners). I don't like them thinking so much about buffing or nerfing based on stuff that happens suddenly.
The Same thing has been happening forever; they patch something right after people start figuring it out. I believe SaSe crushed almost every terran (including probably the best TvP on the planet at that time, STBomber) at one MLG right before the EMP nerf when people were complaining about PvT being "unwinnable" lategame, all with long ass macro games with ghosts involved. We saw HerO start crushing zergs with warp prism harass at a time where every protoss was complaining about the matchup right before a big balance patch.I think the balance right now is good and and I hope they don't overreact and fuck it up, and honestly I feel if there isn't overwhelming data over a very long period of time (around a year), they just shouldn't touch the game balance and just let people figure it out for themselves.
I really hope you don't talk about the TLPD being a viable source for protoss consistency as there are barely any protoss, not a single one until the 10th slot in the korean standings which is the ONLY standings I will even consider using as evidence. I agree that maybe more time needs to be given for people to figure out how to counteract some builds but as stated before in a post above me, what if A) the zerg's muta ball is really unbeatable B) protoss timing attacking before crit muta mass becomes standard C) It all comes down to that timing attack and after that it is over with (50% chance for each side), the stats may say its balanced, but then this is flawed game design. The reason i bring this up is the problem is we have to figure out if the CHANGE is NECESSARY, not necessarily giving any change x amount of time before implementing it to make it legit. If a change is necessary, then hell I'd implement it asap than wait a grueling year for people to never figure something out.
Only taking korean records into account is obtuse. We've seen foreigner protoss beat the best TvP available at a time where no korean protoss could.
As to implementing sooner rather than later, you already said, what IF. If is big; we can't know until there's been a long time to support it. People "knew" you couldn't open up spire versus protoss because of the phoeni buff, then the gateway all-in metagame, etc. People "knew" you couldn't beat a protoss deathball with zerg, people"knew" you couldn't be aggressive with small amounts of units versus zerg asprotoss, people "knew" you couldn't go roach/hydra. People "knew" all kinds of shit for a long time that ended up being wrong. After the bisu build protoss win rates were way better than zerg's for like a year and a quarter, and before that zergs were killing protoss for a long ass time. People will find new ways to beat stuff if you give them time. Patching something because you THINK things may end uplike that is a bad reason.
On January 26 2012 15:55 Arisen wrote: Most of these questions are shit. The only one I think is legit is the muta zvp, which I believe is an overraction based on a newish trend in the matchup that hasn't fully been adapted to. I believe that alot of these answers are scary. Where do they come up that zerg does the best in foregin tourneys and protoss does the worst? Sure, stephano and Dimaga win a bit, but there have been 3 protoss on top of tlpd for the longest fucking time with protoss almost always on top (foreigners). I don't like them thinking so much about buffing or nerfing based on stuff that happens suddenly.
The Same thing has been happening forever; they patch something right after people start figuring it out. I believe SaSe crushed almost every terran (including probably the best TvP on the planet at that time, STBomber) at one MLG right before the EMP nerf when people were complaining about PvT being "unwinnable" lategame, all with long ass macro games with ghosts involved. We saw HerO start crushing zergs with warp prism harass at a time where every protoss was complaining about the matchup right before a big balance patch.I think the balance right now is good and and I hope they don't overreact and fuck it up, and honestly I feel if there isn't overwhelming data over a very long period of time (around a year), they just shouldn't touch the game balance and just let people figure it out for themselves.
I really hope you don't talk about the TLPD being a viable source for protoss consistency as there are barely any protoss, not a single one until the 10th slot in the korean standings which is the ONLY standings I will even consider using as evidence. I agree that maybe more time needs to be given for people to figure out how to counteract some builds but as stated before in a post above me, what if A) the zerg's muta ball is really unbeatable B) protoss timing attacking before crit muta mass becomes standard C) It all comes down to that timing attack and after that it is over with (50% chance for each side), the stats may say its balanced, but then this is flawed game design. The reason i bring this up is the problem is we have to figure out if the CHANGE is NECESSARY, not necessarily giving any change x amount of time before implementing it to make it legit. If a change is necessary, then hell I'd implement it asap than wait a grueling year for people to never figure something out.
Only taking korean records into account is obtuse. We've seen foreigner protoss beat the best TvP available at a time where no korean protoss could.
As to implementing sooner rather than later, you already said, what IF. If is big; we can't know until there's been a long time to support it. People "knew" you couldn't open up spire versus protoss because of the phoeni buff, then the gateway all-in metagame, etc. People "knew" you couldn't beat a protoss deathball with zerg, people"knew" you couldn't be aggressive with small amounts of units versus zerg asprotoss, people "knew" you couldn't go roach/hydra. People "knew" all kinds of shit for a long time that ended up being wrong. After the bisu build protoss win rates were way better than zerg's for like a year and a quarter, and before that zergs were killing protoss for a long ass time. People will find new ways to beat stuff if you give them time. Patching something because you THINK things may end uplike that is a bad reason.
I agree wholeheartedly. Unfortunately, Blizzard does not.
They're so rarely used these days (out of games that they could be built, less than carriers even), and it sucks that it's not even on Blizzard's radar.
On January 26 2012 17:52 Dragar wrote: Poor hydralisks.
They're so rarely used these days (out of games that they could be built, less than carriers even), and it sucks that it's not even on Blizzard's radar.
AFAIK they are getting Lair speed upgrade in HOTS, so here's hoping to see them used.
I find the mutas being to strong against protoss debate kind of funny. If anyone played SC1 before BW came out, mutas were ridiculously strong against toss at the time. Air in general was just to good for the time, the game lacked good anti air options. I kind of agree corsairs were a little to good against mutas but their low damage was pathetic against high armor air, "corruptors would be todays equivalent". I don't think anyone thought corsairs were overpowered in BW, considering dragoons weren't great anti air. I'm not sure what blizzard should do to fix the phoenix, but in it's current state it doesn't cut it.
Oh so they are going to buff protoss again since they dont win enough tournements? Wow because death balls aren't great enough as it is. EMP is too weak? Ive seen it almost single handedly win games vs heavy infestor play and its great vs protoss. Its just now they need to have more than like 2 to hard counter everything. Every time I see a statement from blizzard about balance I never see anything I want talked about.
Like how come hydras are so bad? Like hydras should be at least ok vs carriers and phoenix but they rip them apart. Hydras trade in equal numbers with muta too which is a pain since its only them and muta that can properly counter muta. Most times I see pros going hydra against protoss they have a real time limit on how long they are useful. Oh and PS you cant use them against terran because tanks and marines just burn right through.
What about the lack of things that shoot up in T3 for Zerg?
What about the problems with mech at the moment on antiga?
What about map balance on the two new maps, entombed vally where the rush distance for 2 positions is so short it makes 2 rax or 6 pool almost impossible to stop or arid plateau where every game I see on it is some cheese. Entombed vally is the worst when you get placed in the bottom left and the terrran or protoss gets placed in the position right of it since you have no where to get a third that is safe so you have to expand to somewhere further away from your base otherwise you are kinda screwed if they 6 gate.
There are loads of very good questions that I never hear answers to and really id love to hear it.
Overall great answers, but not that good of questions. Glad to see they intend on patching in the future, but some of the complaints seem kind of weak. FFE is mostly annoying when they try to deny a zergs fast expand, but that is still beatable and usually leads to being ahead once denied...
On January 26 2012 02:55 SeaSwift wrote: Some of the replies are pretty hilarious.
It is the battle.net forums after all, I guess.
Edit: as far as the article itself goes, it reassures me that they are keeping in contact with the community. Something I've been interested to know for quite some time is how much they look at TL, compared to other forums and especially Battle.net. Of course, for lower league complaining you'd typically go straight for Battle.net, because that kind of thing is frowned upon here, but I wonder if some unlucky bloke is given the task of trawling through the Balance Discussion Thread and the LR threads every so often.
No answers reek of genius, but all of them seem sensible. I'm happy with it
Blizzard get reports, from hired people lurking the big communitys, about "hot topics" regarding the game. It was talked about on a panel during blizzcon 2010.
I think colossus is the most broken unit in the game. I will admit that im zerg and only diamond. The problem with colossus is that it is so OP untill you get to a very high skill level. I do watch alot of GSL and other tournaments and im aware that pro zergs manage to deal with it, or rather prevent tos from even getting them.
But below pro or gm level i feel that colossus is just way to easy to use compared to the effort required to counter it. Its a huge unit and it walks over units and cliffs, making it extremely easy to micro. Thou due to its massive range you hardly need to micro it. Sitting on 2 base making a colossus "deathball" is just to effective when your opponent doesnt have the apm to hit every single larva inject and count the colossus - stalker ratio and gateways etc. When the counter to colossus is corruptors which is anti air, the problem gets even more complex. So many times as zerg you end up with killing the colossus with corruptors but protoss has 25 stalkers left while your whole ground army is gone.
Im not saying that colossus should be removed and protoss should be weakend overall. Its the colossus design i dont like, and i know many agree. Im disappointed the colossus wasnt commented on in the article.
i played toss before and then i switched to zerg i feel like the problem with the mutas is, is that they need to do dmg otherwise they are garbage, once you want to fight witht them against a solid protoss army ( hts or archons involved ) you lose clearly..but i would agree that the harassment possibilities are just to good for mutas right now, thats why im a bit scared of the muta nerf or protoss buff.
On January 26 2012 02:53 -stOpSKY- wrote: I wouldnt mind seeing some sort of change to muta in pvz. Its very hard to move out or take a third/fourth once zerg is sitting on a mass number of muta on 3-4 bases.
Well as a zerg muta is like the only way we can deny bases and do damage on maps where protoss can get an easy third (which is 90% of the maps) because if protoss gets a third they can reach their 200/200 deathball meaning zerg will need broods and infestors to beat it. Though broods are so immobile they cant deny bases, if you take a forth against broodlord you will have gas to do anything and zerg needs to put most of their supply into broods to beat the army. Going broods isn't reliable either as positioning on some maps like metalopolis or Tal'Darim is hard as you can just run past and base race me and probably win seeing as my army is much more immobile.
I think mass muta in zvp is just a battle of multi tasking and overall zerg players have the upper hand there because protoss are more keen on sitting in their base and not having the same intense playstyle. This is changing thou as protoss are developing their multitasking skills on almost all levels.
I guess blizzard could use an easy solution if they really feel they have to: make cannons only shoot on ground and implement a anti air tower like terran and zerg has.
I don't see how mutas are a problem in ZvP. They're not an end-all answer to the matchup, and fails if faced with proper early pressure. Can mutas snowball? Sure, but so does Terran and Protoss units against Zerg. They'll die in a straight up fight with HT/Archons.
Zerg doesn't have anything else to effectively deny bases on large maps, and a Protoss on three bases is hopeless to deal with until broodlord/infestor (which again, on these large maps, are very immobile and can be circumvented by Protoss mobility like blink stalkers sniping bases etc). Some cannons and a templar at each bases does amazingly against mutas, given that the protoss player pays attention (which they should).
It's a little concerning that the lower level players weigh so heavily on balance decisions when the ladder system makes it so that people generally have a 50% win rate if they're not in the highest league. It always bugged me whenever David Kim claims the balance is good in interviews because the win rates are pretty even across all skill levels in all regions except Korea where it's apparently unusually Terran favoured at the highest levels.
the thing is that Blizz doesnt compensate us carrier lovers or balance whiner with a reasonable unit. So theyr gonna replace iconic/creative/original unit + autocloak/vortex/recall unit with a boring a-move splash air damage one ? I bet they still fall like flies again marines/vikings/corruptors
On January 26 2012 22:27 Quotidian wrote: I really wish David Kim would address the general dislike for the colossus as a unit, even among protoss players...
They did not bother during alpha/previews. They did not bother in Beta. They won't bother now.
Seriously, the Colossus seems to have the bigger Lobby at Blizzard than the Wallstreet in Washington .
On January 26 2012 22:27 Quotidian wrote: I really wish David Kim would address the general dislike for the colossus as a unit, even among protoss players...
I don't know what you've been drinking, the colossus isn't the problem. The Replicant is and it should not make it into HotS
I'll never understand why they removed something really cool and unique in a mechanical, slow moving slug that shoots scarabs that deal huge amounts of damage that you have to spend minerals to recharge in the reaver.... to add something unoriginal, boring, counter or die unit... the colossus. Reavers were bad without shuttles yeah, but I mean it's a caterpillar... give it the ability to transform into a butterfly and fly around! Reduce its HP in flight mode or something! Man I miss the reaver...
On January 26 2012 06:36 architecture wrote: The reason that Z couldn't just always mass mutas in BW was because
1. irradiate + firebats (so that MM would shit on mass ling so hard that lurkers were necessary) 2. corsairs
Flying around with 20-30 fast units, ignoring terrain is NOT good game design. The entire purpose of a flying unit is to trade strength for mobility. But somehow Blizzard forgot all about how the original game worked.
Dunno why people are not mentioning mobility more.. that is the 'issue' with muta's if there is one. Mobility is something Blizzard have fucked up in the SC2 design from the start imo - reapers and warpgates being the most blatant. The versatility of Terran in terms of mobility is ridiculous (this isn't meant as a balance point just the general design of the race), and did anyone at Blizzard even play PvP before the beta? How do you make a matchup with zero defenders advantage and an early game ability that removes rush distance?
On January 26 2012 18:42 FlukyS wrote: Oh so they are going to buff protoss again since they dont win enough tournements? Wow because death balls aren't great enough as it is. EMP is too weak? Ive seen it almost single handedly win games vs heavy infestor play and its great vs protoss. Its just now they need to have more than like 2 to hard counter everything. Every time I see a statement from blizzard about balance I never see anything I want talked about.
Like how come hydras are so bad? Like hydras should be at least ok vs carriers and phoenix but they rip them apart. Hydras trade in equal numbers with muta too which is a pain since its only them and muta that can properly counter muta. Most times I see pros going hydra against protoss they have a real time limit on how long they are useful. Oh and PS you cant use them against terran because tanks and marines just burn right through.
What about the lack of things that shoot up in T3 for Zerg?
What about the problems with mech at the moment on antiga?
What about map balance on the two new maps, entombed vally where the rush distance for 2 positions is so short it makes 2 rax or 6 pool almost impossible to stop or arid plateau where every game I see on it is some cheese. Entombed vally is the worst when you get placed in the bottom left and the terrran or protoss gets placed in the position right of it since you have no where to get a third that is safe so you have to expand to somewhere further away from your base otherwise you are kinda screwed if they 6 gate.
There are loads of very good questions that I never hear answers to and really id love to hear it.
How carefully did you actually read the post?
About the Protoss buff:
David Kim wrote: With that said, we’re currently discussing whether a minor, more generic buff to bring the protoss more in line with the other races would be appropriate. Please note that we’re not considering a major change, and we’re still carefully analyzing this year’s adjusted ratings data from around the world, as well as major tournaments, to determine if a change is needed at all.
FlukyS wrote: Wow because death balls aren't great enough as it is
They never said the buff would increase the effectiveness of the death ball. Wait and see.
FlukyS wrote: EMP is too weak?
That was the title of the paragraph. Read the entire thing. It even starts with:
David Kim wrote: We aren’t seeing an issue with EMP in the game currently.
FlukyS wrote:Like how come hydras are so bad? Like hydras should be at least ok vs carriers and phoenix but they rip them apart.
How much does it matter that Hydras aren't the best thing, as long as you haven't got huge weaknesses in your race? All races have units that aren't used (much) atm. Carrier and BC mostly, but Hydras are used way more than they are. I find the ineffectiveness of Ultras to be worse imo. And for the record, Phoenixes are good vs Hydra as long as they are in low numbers. Carriers? Who cares, they are never used anyways.
One thing I do agree with you on though. They should talk more about map balance.
On January 26 2012 15:55 Arisen wrote: Most of these questions are shit. The only one I think is legit is the muta zvp, which I believe is an overraction based on a newish trend in the matchup that hasn't fully been adapted to. I believe that alot of these answers are scary. Where do they come up that zerg does the best in foregin tourneys and protoss does the worst? Sure, stephano and Dimaga win a bit, but there have been 3 protoss on top of tlpd for the longest fucking time with protoss almost always on top (foreigners). I don't like them thinking so much about buffing or nerfing based on stuff that happens suddenly.
The Same thing has been happening forever; they patch something right after people start figuring it out. I believe SaSe crushed almost every terran (including probably the best TvP on the planet at that time, STBomber) at one MLG right before the EMP nerf when people were complaining about PvT being "unwinnable" lategame, all with long ass macro games with ghosts involved. We saw HerO start crushing zergs with warp prism harass at a time where every protoss was complaining about the matchup right before a big balance patch.I think the balance right now is good and and I hope they don't overreact and fuck it up, and honestly I feel if there isn't overwhelming data over a very long period of time (around a year), they just shouldn't touch the game balance and just let people figure it out for themselves.
I really hope you don't talk about the TLPD being a viable source for protoss consistency as there are barely any protoss, not a single one until the 10th slot in the korean standings which is the ONLY standings I will even consider using as evidence. I agree that maybe more time needs to be given for people to figure out how to counteract some builds but as stated before in a post above me, what if A) the zerg's muta ball is really unbeatable B) protoss timing attacking before crit muta mass becomes standard C) It all comes down to that timing attack and after that it is over with (50% chance for each side), the stats may say its balanced, but then this is flawed game design. The reason i bring this up is the problem is we have to figure out if the CHANGE is NECESSARY, not necessarily giving any change x amount of time before implementing it to make it legit. If a change is necessary, then hell I'd implement it asap than wait a grueling year for people to never figure something out.
Seriously? I've never seen a korean protoss (MC included) play at the highest highest level CONSISTENTLY (meaning MVP / Nestea / MMA / Leenock / Dongraegu / Jjakji). I'm sorry but, some korean protoss got talent, but they dont perform well during a long tournament, MC did some major mistakes in a lot of games, you never saw Nestea or Mvp do that, they fucked up some games, sure, but frankly there just isnt many Code S protosses when we talk about their skill (even tho they manage to cheese way better players than them sometimes, good for them it's part of the game), it doesnt mean that protoss is bad, it just means that their players arent as talented as the other who are dominating Code S. Guys like Killer, Alicia, Puzzle, play very well of course, i'm just a master on EU it would be stupid to deny that, but the fact is on a progaming level, Protoss are way behind in Korea (still talking about a potential top 10 korea, code A & B are different ofc), and it's not the case in EU or NA, clearly, plus this season in Code S just look how many protoss qualified, and I dont see them as especially talented in most cases... Blizzard wanting to buff protoss is seriously dumb, because if we listen to them, they dont want to unbalance the game at lower level, well guess what, you buff protoss, all leagues under master will get crushed by opponents with 30 apm less than them playing toss (and if it was 160 to 130 would be it ok, but 35 to 65 isnt). Zerg raping protoss at high level? Look at Nestea's and MC interviews after group qualification in Code S, both admitted that no zerg wants to face protoss because the freaking metagame is EVOLVING, and maybe 2 months ago protoss felt helpless, apparently now they feel like superheroes, the confidence showed by MC (even if he always acts confident) was a clear tell that it is always changing, and thats a good thing, but the bad thing is when fucking balance devs are looking at bnet forums and take tournament results blindly without noticing the skill differences between players. Damn that David Kim guy, makes me sad that he's got our game future in his hands
On January 26 2012 22:27 Quotidian wrote: I really wish David Kim would address the general dislike for the colossus as a unit, even among protoss players...
I don't know what you've been drinking, the colossus isn't the problem. The Replicant is and it should not make it into HotS
I'm currently drinking water
the colossus isn't "the" problem.. it's a problem. It's a boring, creatively bankrupt unit that shouldn't be carried over to HOTS. It stereotypes match-ups because you have to over-commit on the "counter" units to combat them. It's waaay too a-move friendly for its position in the tech tree, etc. They've managed to "balance" it by providing very clear counters, but it's still a shitty unit
And it's not like I'm the only one who would like to see the colossus replaced, preferably with a Reaver-like unit.
Phoenix can't have splash damage, it would be crazy. People would just get 8 Phoenixes, lift units with 6 Phoenixes and one-shot all that with the other 2. Don't pay attention to the numbers I'm using, just think about the concept and how it would be ridiculously powerful to harass worker lines, it would be like Mutas in ZvP.
On January 26 2012 22:27 Quotidian wrote: I really wish David Kim would address the general dislike for the colossus as a unit, even among protoss players...
I don't know what you've been drinking, the colossus isn't the problem. The Replicant is and it should not make it into HotS
The... Wha-... Mmf...
The Replicant is not even in the fucking game yet, sir, whether or not it's a problem is 100% pure speculation on your part! On the other hand, the colossus have been a thorn in the side of anyone who has spent more than half an hour with it since the damn beta!
On January 26 2012 22:27 Quotidian wrote: I really wish David Kim would address the general dislike for the colossus as a unit, even among protoss players...
Sure the colossus is boring, but it's retarded to have only storm as AoE. Archons don't count because their splash isn't as great as storm and colossi.
On January 27 2012 00:33 Dauntless wrote: Doesn't that entirely depend on the splash radius? Unless people stack their ground units, that shouldn't be a problem.
Please think before you post.
Terrans stack their marines and marauders all the time, that's why it's called a bioball. And don't be rude next time.
Protoss winrates are actually pretty solid, they just arent winning tournaments....
Great reason to give a "generic buff".... I was thinking that they had started digging themselves a hole with the balance issues, now I'm pretty sure they just don't get it at all
I dont understand why they shy away changing numbers to make carrier viable??? Isn't that what balance about? If a unit is weak compared to its cost you need to buff it. And I don't see any problem carrier having the same function as collosus has, so what? You want to differentiate it? Here is my solution: Give interceptors AoE attack against air so we wouldn't need tempest and you cannot claim its doing same thing with collosus Simple. And when it comes to carriers, the main issue for me is its sentimental value, anyway.
On January 26 2012 12:35 TheAntZ wrote: i dont understand the people crying out muta op. If its op why do we not see muta every pro game? Or even every game on certain maps? honestly.
Another game to consider would be Hero vs CrazingMoving's Code A game last season. CrazingMoving gained a huge advantage against Hero using a Muta-centered playstyle but failed to transition out of it after he had a large enough advantage.
That was on Tal Darim, and CrazyMoving won. I remember distinctly as it was one of the most depressing games I've ever seen as a Protoss.
On January 27 2012 00:33 Dauntless wrote: Doesn't that entirely depend on the splash radius? Unless people stack their ground units, that shouldn't be a problem.
Please think before you post.
Terrans stack their marines and marauders all the time, that's why it's called a bioball. And don't be rude next time.
I ask again. Doesn't it entirely depend on the splash radius?
And that's not stacking, that's clumping. Even so, I don't see Phoenix as a huge threat to neither Marines nor Marauders in the forseeable future. Phoenix have limited energy, and using it to kill a cheap unit like the Marine is almost not worth it. And do you know how many shots it takes for a Phoenix to kill a Marauder?
If splash was introduced to the Phoenix it would most likely be a small one, think Thor AA splash, and that wouldn't be large enough to effectively kill ground units AS THEY DON'T STACK.
On January 26 2012 22:27 Quotidian wrote: I really wish David Kim would address the general dislike for the colossus as a unit, even among protoss players...
Sure the colossus is boring, but it's retarded to have only storm as AoE. Archons don't count because their splash isn't as great as storm and colossi.
no one is suggesting that they take out the colossus and not replace it with anything
On January 27 2012 00:33 Dauntless wrote: Doesn't that entirely depend on the splash radius? Unless people stack their ground units, that shouldn't be a problem.
Please think before you post.
Terrans stack their marines and marauders all the time, that's why it's called a bioball. And don't be rude next time.
I ask again. Doesn't it entirely depend on the splash radius?
And that's not stacking, that's clumping. Even so, I don't see Phoenix as a huge threat to neither Marines nor Marauders in the forseeable future. Phoenix have limited energy, and using it to kill a cheap unit like the Marine is almost not worth it. And do you know how many shots it takes for a Phoenix to kill a Marauder?
If splash was introduced to the Phoenix it would most likely be a small one, think Thor AA splash, and that wouldn't be large enough to effectively kill ground units AS THEY DON'T STACK.
They stack in the air when lifted, which is the whole purpose of lifting them in the first place if Phoenix attack has splash.
I noticed that Avilo made a giant qq post on the Bnet website where this interview was posted. Weird, I always perceived him as an all-in player; no idea how he'd complain about EMP or lategame PvT.
Anyway, honestly, these questions aren't that helpful IMO. The problem with PvT, PvZ and to some extent PvP is the shallowness, not necessarily winrate imbalances. Protoss is incapable of scouting early against Terran, so we basically fast expand every game or all-in. But the fast expand always plays out the same: you can either go fast colossus timing or tech into gateway/templar tech, which is much better IMO. If we all-in, well, it's all-in. PvZ? Same thing. FFE every game into turtle on 3base or all-in. The design of Protoss is just so shallow in this regard that it's almost impossible to be innovative. Stargate and DTs are both blindly countered by Spores and the fast-muta build that's in vogue now.
I don't even think the matchups are imbalanced, but I gotta tell you it's pretty dull to play Blink into HTs every game against Zerg AND Terran.
On January 26 2012 22:27 Quotidian wrote: I really wish David Kim would address the general dislike for the colossus as a unit, even among protoss players...
Sure the colossus is boring, but it's retarded to have only storm as AoE. Archons don't count because their splash isn't as great as storm and colossi.
no one is suggesting that they take out the colossus and not replace it with anything
Yeah it never was clear to me the reasoning blizzard decided to replace the reaver with the colossus when the reaver was AFAIK a much beloved unit by the community and progamers.
But back on topic I don't know if giving Phoenix an AoE would be great due to graviton beam. With a large number of phoenix the AoE could potentially be gamebreaking. It wasn't an issue with corsairs back in the day since they had no mechanic to attack ground units. I don't think anybody wants to see mutas completely useless in the matchup when just a small number of phoenix are out on the field. If they really wanted to beef up the phoenix vs muta matchup, I'd much rather they add add 1 range and/or 1 armor to Phoenixes to make phoenixes easier to micro vs mutas so people could use phoenixes to fend off harass combined with cannons/stalkers/HT but not completely nullify mass muta.
I personally think that a ground-based counter to mass muta is a better way to go in terms of game design, such as how it currently is in TvZ. Mutas are still popular in that matchup, but terran has ground-based tools to fend off harassment. So if blizzard does decide mass mutas is too strong in PvZ (personally I'm not positive if it is even an issue currently), they could buff Protoss' ground-based muta counters such as:
-Tweak storm damage vs. air units: Currently to defend mass mutas it is a micro battle of storm vs dodging storm with mutas. Tweaking this micro battle to favor protoss IMO is one of the easier tweaks that can be done which would IMO not drastically change other match-ups.
-Tweak archon's range/damage vs air: Currently archons are a very poor counter to mutas, even though blizzard's "help" screen indicates they are strong vs mutas. If they increased the range and possibly the damage of archons vs air units it would give the archons a very clearly defined role similar to the thor. Obviously the numbers would have to adjusted quite a bit, i.e. making archons air attack only do bonus vs light similar to the thor, since I don't think anyone wants to see archon toilets become any more powerful vs air units. This is a much bigger game design change, but I also do not see this affecting other match-ups greatly outside of PvP vs phoenix builds (which may be a good thing actually and currently I do not feel protoss has a good way to deal with phoenixes being a phoenix user myself).
-Buff stalker damage vs light air units: Even though mutas are not great in straight engagements, neither are stalkers. With stalkers being protoss' main/basic anti-air unit, it actually does a fairly poor job at it. 1 banshee destroys 1 stalker, and vs medium sized muta balls you need roughly a 1:1 ratio of stalkers to deal with them. In the TvZ matchup however, marines (especially with medivacs) and turrets are far, far more cost-efficient in dealing with mutas than stalkers and cannons. From a basic game design standpoint, Stalkers should be more cost-efficient vs all air units, but currently they are only slightly more cost efficient.
Honestly, Terran having hard time against Protoss in lower league sounds more like trolling from Terran players. Its pretty known that Terran have it fairly easy against Protoss in lower leagues. Mainly cause Protoss have very cost efficient units, they need microing to stay alive and Terran actually start with counter units. Marauders totally annhilate stalkers which forces Protoss to tech to tier 2 units to counter (Immortals).
On January 26 2012 03:08 mTwTT1 wrote: phoenix's deal splash damage to air units. bam problem fixed
give us back disruption web while we're at it
oh and DON'T MAKE THEM FUCKING ATTACK WHILE ON MOVE COMMAND FFS
or at least give us a hold fire command like the ghost has... so god damn tired of revealing my phoenix is halluc'd because it happens to barely get too close to an overlord
I still think the change to make the phoenix not even have any micro and just attack on move command was the single worst change they have ever made to starcraft 2
Hahaha I think he answered the questions in a very political manner; that being said, thank you for posting because every bit of info from an official source is helpful!
On January 26 2012 06:36 architecture wrote: The reason that Z couldn't just always mass mutas in BW was because
1. irradiate + firebats (so that MM would shit on mass ling so hard that lurkers were necessary) 2. corsairs
The reason Z couldn't always mass muta in BW is because you could only have 12 in a control group and had to spend a lot of attention to micro those 12. Mass air was always really strong. There's quite a few games where zergs just go 2 hatch muta into gaurdians (or in some games, just stayed at a badrillion mutalisks) and expanding all over the map with static defense (just like zergs play it now). If you could have 30 mutas in a control group every zerg would have used it and would have been 1 shotting nexus and CC's all over the place.
On January 27 2012 03:09 Avean wrote: Honestly, Terran having hard time against Protoss in lower league sounds more like trolling from Terran players. Its pretty known that Terran have it fairly easy against Protoss in lower leagues. Mainly cause Protoss have very cost efficient units, they need microing to stay alive and Terran actually start with counter units. Marauders totally annhilate stalkers which forces Protoss to tech to tier 2 units to counter (Immortals).
Must be trolling ...
Yes, a huge amount of the terran populations "must be trolling." That makes sense..
"fairly easy" ? Your impression of the game seems really off... even your description of a countering scenario is wrong. Protoss is never forced to tech to immortals to counter marauders - it's one option, sure, but a few sentries and chargelots works as well. A lot of terran players are professing to quitting the game because of tvp (myself included) Even judging by polls on this site, most people consider terran the hardest race after a certain point (plat/diamond and up)
On January 26 2012 22:27 Quotidian wrote: I really wish David Kim would address the general dislike for the colossus as a unit, even among protoss players...
Sure the colossus is boring, but it's retarded to have only storm as AoE. Archons don't count because their splash isn't as great as storm and colossi.
no one is suggesting that they take out the colossus and not replace it with anything
Yeah it never was clear to me the reasoning blizzard decided to replace the reaver with the colossus when the reaver was AFAIK a much beloved unit by the community and progamers.
But back on topic I don't know if giving Phoenix an AoE would be great due to graviton beam. With a large number of phoenix the AoE could potentially be gamebreaking. It wasn't an issue with corsairs back in the day since they had no mechanic to attack ground units. I don't think anybody wants to see mutas completely useless in the matchup when just a small number of phoenix are out on the field. If they really wanted to beef up the phoenix vs muta matchup, I'd much rather they add add 1 range and/or 1 armor to Phoenixes to make phoenixes easier to micro vs mutas so people could use phoenixes to fend off harass combined with cannons/stalkers/HT but not completely nullify mass muta.
I personally think that a ground-based counter to mass muta is a better way to go in terms of game design, such as how it currently is in TvZ. Mutas are still popular in that matchup, but terran has ground-based tools to fend off harassment. So if blizzard does decide mass mutas is too strong in PvZ (personally I'm not positive if it is even an issue currently), they could buff Protoss' ground-based muta counters such as:
-Tweak storm damage vs. air units: Currently to defend mass mutas it is a micro battle of storm vs dodging storm with mutas. Tweaking this micro battle to favor protoss IMO is one of the easier tweaks that can be done which would IMO not drastically change other match-ups.
-Tweak archon's range/damage vs air: Currently archons are a very poor counter to mutas, even though blizzard's "help" screen indicates they are strong vs mutas. If they increased the range and possibly the damage of archons vs air units it would give the archons a very clearly defined role similar to the thor. Obviously the numbers would have to adjusted quite a bit, i.e. making archons air attack only do bonus vs light similar to the thor, since I don't think anyone wants to see archon toilets become any more powerful vs air units. This is a much bigger game design change, but I also do not see this affecting other match-ups greatly outside of PvP vs phoenix builds (which may be a good thing actually and currently I do not feel protoss has a good way to deal with phoenixes being a phoenix user myself).
Mutas arent a problem PvZ it's time to cut the bullshit, when you really think about it, what changed since beta? : Archons got buffed, warpgate timings nerfed (doesnt affect mutas at all), upgrades buffed, hts nerfed (thank god for that one), which still results in an overall better capacity for protoss against mutalisk in theory, archons being the protoss' thors that prevents mutas for doing whatever they want, magic box is cute yeah, but it limits a lot of manouvers and focusing and it's huge, lots of protoss forget about that and dont make archons when they could have. Thing is protosses are whining because they arent used to it, it's new, lots of people switched to that style because they struggled with roach hydra corruptors, and protoss players didnt adapt to it yet. I mean, your first few games as a terran you're going to get raped by mutas, you wont be in the right place, you will send all your marines to the main, he'll go to the natural kill 4 tanks etc. You know the story. But protoss got plenty of tools to counter mutas it's insane how so many people can claim that it's overpowered. Thing is so many protoss players see the match up as "he will throw cheap units, i'll be outnumbered but i'll beat him because my units are cost effective", well, too bad, metagame changed, zergs arent trying 300 food pushes all games anymore, they also try to capitalize on their investment during mid game instead of going for roaches who are worthless late because of the food they take. Just because they clump up doesnt mean they dont cost 100 min 100 gas each, and they can potentially die really quickly for a storm, a huge blink, or clumped up archon shots. I dont see your heavy gas units getting potentially shut down in less than 3 seconds. It takes time, for people to figure out new build order, units placement and composition, to deal with such a new style, because yeah, of course it changes a lot, zergs are already good at it because it doesnt change them much from the multitask of muta ling bling in ZvT, but protoss? they never saw that, they never had to play it 30, 40, 80 games, they simply arent freaking used to it. If they start buffing some of the protoss aoe, or nerf mutalisks (there would be no zergs left), it would be such a huge mistake, I hope they look at it calmly, take the time to realize how normal this is, since mutas didnt get buff, and protoss did get buff, and the archons toilet still work by the way, I'd like to see them work on that, it still feels as a bug more than a game design to aoe units that you made clumped up, you either balance the game in a way that doesnt make that possible, or you're simply confessing that you did a bad job at balancing it and put archon toilet (btw I've almost never seen vortex + storm when it finishes, would be even more destructive, and not that hard to do) because you gave a race a wild card that can turn a game around, especially when an opponent can do nothing about it. As for the "zergs are winning tournament, protoss arent", it's a freaking one and half year old video game, you cant base patch around tournaments results, like I said in a previous posts, protoss in korea arent as good as the terran and zergs, doesnt mean protoss is bad, just means that those protoss are "bad" (they're not but you get the point). And I pray, that they really arent seriously reading battle.net forums and taking advices from silver leagues who just lost to a Z / P / T and are crying about it, I really hope they put that there as a nice decoy saying "dont worry noobies, we listen to you (nah we're not)". It's hard so swallow, but balancing this game must be really fucking slow and patient, and it's frustrating when you think that, we used to play on Steppes of War as zergs vs terrans would could mass speed reapers or bunker rush more efficiently, but we had to wait for them to figure it out...
wonder how many p/z players in the lower leagues had their minds blown when they read this. Anyways, I agree with all the things davidkim covered in the post (although i don't want to see the carrier get removed...).
nydus and overlord drops don't get alot of uses is because zerg units move way too fast. It might be too late, but I think they should drastically reduce zergling move speed and buff hydra/whatever dmg accordingly to compensates
currently facing against zerg is you can't move anywhere out of your base unless you have large enough force, or zergling will rip you apart and there's no escape from that
On January 27 2012 00:33 Dauntless wrote: Doesn't that entirely depend on the splash radius? Unless people stack their ground units, that shouldn't be a problem.
Please think before you post.
Terrans stack their marines and marauders all the time, that's why it's called a bioball. And don't be rude next time.
I ask again. Doesn't it entirely depend on the splash radius?
And that's not stacking, that's clumping. Even so, I don't see Phoenix as a huge threat to neither Marines nor Marauders in the forseeable future. Phoenix have limited energy, and using it to kill a cheap unit like the Marine is almost not worth it. And do you know how many shots it takes for a Phoenix to kill a Marauder?
If splash was introduced to the Phoenix it would most likely be a small one, think Thor AA splash, and that wouldn't be large enough to effectively kill ground units AS THEY DON'T STACK.
They stack in the air when lifted, which is the whole purpose of lifting them in the first place if Phoenix attack has splash.
What are you smoking? How do they stack in the air when lifted? They won't stack any more than they do while on ground. Which is NOT AT ALL. Give it up, man..
On January 26 2012 12:35 TheAntZ wrote: i dont understand the people crying out muta op. If its op why do we not see muta every pro game? Or even every game on certain maps? honestly.
Another game to consider would be Hero vs CrazingMoving's Code A game last season. CrazingMoving gained a huge advantage against Hero using a Muta-centered playstyle but failed to transition out of it after he had a large enough advantage.
That was on Tal Darim, and CrazyMoving won. I remember distinctly as it was one of the most depressing games I've ever seen as a Protoss.
Depressing in the sense that Crazymoving played like a fucking god? well yeah we agree
Protoss AA sucks, well known fact. Of course everyone knew they would struggle with Mutas. This was a problem since the beta before they buffed Phoenix, at which point every Protoss player said fuck this game I'm 5/6/7 gating every game and ensuring that you never go Mutas.
Terran players complaining that they have to work harder for to win are either bad players, or were just not very good at BW. I hear almost zero complaints from the Korean players, because they recognize the fact that in BW, Terran was simply the hardest race to play. Protoss was by far the easiest with easy access to cheese, simple mechanics, etc.
In BW, you had to play like 3x harder than your opponent to win as Terran. You had to be more creative, on top of your macro 100% of the time, you had to aggressively play all the time, etc. etc. etc. You had no choice but to simply excel and become a better player. In BW, you were rewarded however because if you could do all those things, your opponent was almost powerless (watch IloveOOV with his sick as fuck Marine/Medic stim micro in BW where he could split all day versus Lurker/Ling/Defiler, come back and clean up). You are also rewarded in SC2 also. Good control/multi tasking leads to constant harassment and eventually Z/P players folding.
Your day in the sunshine of A-Moving with Stim is over. Alot of Terran players are complaining because of bad habits that they developed because they used to literally be able to constantly pressure for free because of the terrible maps that were being used. The reason why you see only Korean Terran players succeeding right now is because they didn't develop bad habits; they didn't rely heavily on timing attacks as their primary weapon (although they certainly abused it in tournaments if it was overwhelmingly strong, such as the 1-1-1). They knew the game would progress towards a macro style of play, and that's why you still see them posting strong results despite the fact that even foreign Terran players are struggling.
It's good to see that they recognize that mutas are hard to deal with in pvz, but I hope they don't just add another A-move unit to try and fix the problem (ie the tempest). It would make the matchup a hell of a lot less interesting and much more constrained. Somebody mentioned a storm buff agaisnt air units, I think that's a great idea, it means mutas are easier to deal with but at the end of the day it still comes down to your micro vs your opponent's.
As for the carrier I agree that a numbers buff isn't the way to go, I think a range buff or some kind of a micro buff is in order. Something that makes carriers in the right hands just as powerful as they were in BW whilst making them easy to deal with when the protoss player blindly attack moves with them. It's sad to see that they are still considering removing the carrier when it can be fixed with the right adjustments, without braking the game.
On January 26 2012 14:58 SwizzY wrote: "terran can't beat protoss"
DA FUQ? I don't understand why DK doesn't derive the bulk of his questions from a place like... oh I don't know... TEAMLIQUID - The largest international starcraft hub available?! I see threadworthy topics every other week concerning SC2 - none of which were addressed in this Q&A
I think the development crew at blizzard sorta knows what they're doing...
and I'm sure that they take a lot of things into consideration (including TL) when deciding what to focus on. Just because there's a thread on tl with a lot of pages about how ____ needs to be fixed, doesn't mean that blizzard's gonna fix it in the next patch/address it in their next post. They're gonna wait until they get the stats, take sometime to think about it and then act.
On January 27 2012 00:33 Dauntless wrote: Doesn't that entirely depend on the splash radius? Unless people stack their ground units, that shouldn't be a problem.
Please think before you post.
Terrans stack their marines and marauders all the time, that's why it's called a bioball. And don't be rude next time.
I ask again. Doesn't it entirely depend on the splash radius?
And that's not stacking, that's clumping. Even so, I don't see Phoenix as a huge threat to neither Marines nor Marauders in the forseeable future. Phoenix have limited energy, and using it to kill a cheap unit like the Marine is almost not worth it. And do you know how many shots it takes for a Phoenix to kill a Marauder?
If splash was introduced to the Phoenix it would most likely be a small one, think Thor AA splash, and that wouldn't be large enough to effectively kill ground units AS THEY DON'T STACK.
They stack in the air when lifted, which is the whole purpose of lifting them in the first place if Phoenix attack has splash.
What are you smoking? How do they stack in the air when lifted? They won't stack any more than they do while on ground. Which is NOT AT ALL. Give it up, man..
Um, maybe you should try it. If you pick a lot of units with Phoenixes the units picked up don't rearrange themselves in the air so they don't stack, they just simply stack. Seriously, go try it.
"Give it up" like I'm determined to win the argument? I don't give a shit if I win the argument or not, I'm just discussing a hypothetical situation.
i didnt find it interesting because actually he doesnt make any statements if you look closely. Except that nothing, including the carrier (the only real news i remember from the post) is final. Not even worth reading imo.
On January 27 2012 00:33 Dauntless wrote: Doesn't that entirely depend on the splash radius? Unless people stack their ground units, that shouldn't be a problem.
Please think before you post.
Terrans stack their marines and marauders all the time, that's why it's called a bioball. And don't be rude next time.
I ask again. Doesn't it entirely depend on the splash radius?
And that's not stacking, that's clumping. Even so, I don't see Phoenix as a huge threat to neither Marines nor Marauders in the forseeable future. Phoenix have limited energy, and using it to kill a cheap unit like the Marine is almost not worth it. And do you know how many shots it takes for a Phoenix to kill a Marauder?
If splash was introduced to the Phoenix it would most likely be a small one, think Thor AA splash, and that wouldn't be large enough to effectively kill ground units AS THEY DON'T STACK.
They stack in the air when lifted, which is the whole purpose of lifting them in the first place if Phoenix attack has splash.
What are you smoking? How do they stack in the air when lifted? They won't stack any more than they do while on ground. Which is NOT AT ALL. Give it up, man..
Um, maybe you should try it. If you pick a lot of units with Phoenixes the units picked up don't rearrange themselves in the air so they don't stack, they just simply stack. Seriously, go try it.
"Give it up" like I'm determined to win the argument? I don't give a shit if I win the argument or not, I'm just discussing a hypothetical situation.
Sure, but what are the chances of that happening? You might get lucky once in a while, but one can't exactly rely on it. It's just silly to think that this would ever be overpowered.
I have lost pretty much all faith in the SC2 design team at this point. The interview seems as though they're catering to the wrong demographic in SC2 - why make changes for low-level players to get more out of the game when the higher level players are the crowd they should be pandering to. I get that it'll "sell more shit" but it's the crazy, off-the-wall, inventive pro-play that drives most people to stick at the game and get better.
On top of which, they seem to have no read on what units are truly borked, useless, or strong; nor do they appear to have any concrete plan for dealing with such issues.
I don't get the problems. Outside of the GSL we see almost a perfect balance in tournaments. In the GSL terrans are dominating, but name 1 FOREIGN terran that wins a big tournament?
I have lost pretty much all faith in the SC2 design team at this point. The interview seems as though they're catering to the wrong demographic in SC2 - why make changes for low-level players to get more out of the game when the higher level players are the crowd they should be pandering to. I get that it'll "sell more shit" but it's the crazy, off-the-wall, inventive pro-play that drives most people to stick at the game and get better.
On top of which, they seem to have no read on what units are truly borked, useless, or strong; nor do they appear to have any concrete plan for dealing with such issues.
it's a game and a franchise intended to make money, first and foremost. If they alienate most of the customers by making a game only professionals can be good at, they ruin the starcraft brand.
The game needs to be as balanced as possible at all levels of play, and right now that just isn't the case with some of the match-ups.
In terms of global tournament wins overall, we’re seeing zerg win the most tournaments.
-David Kim
Lulz i love it
i really would like to see the data blizzard uses for these reports, because it contradicts what is publicly known
Yeah statistics are obviously less accurate then what the public knows.... It contradicts what YOU know, not what is known publicly, it seems exactly accurate to me.
On January 27 2012 05:20 Snowbear wrote: I don't get the problems. Outside of the GSL we see almost a perfect balance in tournaments. In the GSL terrans are dominating, but name 1 FOREIGN terran that wins a big tournament?
SeleCt Kas there's 2 there are more, but those are the biggest 2 atm
On January 26 2012 22:27 Quotidian wrote: I really wish David Kim would address the general dislike for the colossus as a unit, even among protoss players...
I don't know what you've been drinking, the colossus isn't the problem. The Replicant is and it should not make it into HotS
the colossus isn't "the" problem.. it's a problem. It's a boring, creatively bankrupt unit that shouldn't be carried over to HOTS. It stereotypes match-ups because you have to over-commit on the "counter" units to combat them. It's waaay too a-move friendly for its position in the tech tree, etc. They've managed to "balance" it by providing very clear counters, but it's still a shitty unit
And it's not like I'm the only one who would like to see the colossus replaced, preferably with a Reaver-like unit.
I wish they would actually take a look at how the collosi effects so much of the game. It really creates a domino effect and I don't really see it changing for HotS unless it is fundamentally changed or else nixed. On paper it's an awesome unit and it looks impressive on the battlefield. But there's nothing really impressive you can do it. 'Impressive' collosi control involves backing them up a little bit to avoid getting sniped. But that's more a judgment in timing than rapid reflex.
But the domino effect- Carriers can't be built because (in part) vikings or corrupters are already on the field and are ridiculously strong. Vikings and corrupters are ridiculously strong and already present because they're absolutely essential to counter collosi. And Blizzard themselves have admitted corrupters are a boring unit. The fact that collosi must be hit by air to be balanced will make it difficult for any Protoss air to be viable. Terran and Zerg must be able to hit the collosi with powerful air, so if Protoss has even more powerful air to counter that, you wind up with an imba unit.
And really all those units are more about positioning and getting the right composition then precise response time. I don't see Viking or Corrupter micro like wraith or muta micro- is it even possible with the game engine?
I guess if Protoss's new air unit that could counter Terran and Protoss air through control than composition, then maybe. But the Tempest looks like more of a hard counter composition fix than a control. And that goes back to needing Vikings to be so powerful to counter Collosi- 9 Range for Vikings? Wraiths had 5 and Valkyries and Battlecruisers 6. The ranges just get ridiculous because of Collosi. Everything is balanced in SC2, but there's such a domino effect to make a 1a unit fit into the game.
I like the direction this is going. I have a few suggestions for Nydus Worm which I think will make it more useful:
1. Enable an auto-unload function at any one of the nodes. Obviously you can only have one at a time that will auto unload but this will make it easier to reinforce at a specific location in the heat of battle
2. Tinker with the unloading mechanism of the Nydus worm. One of the biggest drawback is that units unloading from Nydus worm pop out 1 at a time, regardless of whether its a zergling or an ultralisk. I don't claim to know the exact solution, but having units unload 2 at a time or correlate unit size with unload speed might help solve the issue.
3. Unit selection in Nydus worm. To my knowledge, nydus worm operates under first-in first-out principle. It would add strategic depth to the game if you can individually select the units you want to send out in addition to having an "unload all" option.
On January 27 2012 05:51 TheRPGAddict wrote: It sounds like they are trying to balance from the lower leagues. Which really scares me.
Do they? Because if they would, they would buff terran into oblivion. The lower league terrans are suffering hard, but blizzard doesnt buff terran because if would mess up the pro scene. I don't see how they are balancing for the lower levels.
I have lost pretty much all faith in the SC2 design team at this point. The interview seems as though they're catering to the wrong demographic in SC2 - why make changes for low-level players to get more out of the game when the higher level players are the crowd they should be pandering to. I get that it'll "sell more shit" but it's the crazy, off-the-wall, inventive pro-play that drives most people to stick at the game and get better.
On top of which, they seem to have no read on what units are truly borked, useless, or strong; nor do they appear to have any concrete plan for dealing with such issues.
it's a game and a franchise intended to make money, first and foremost. If they alienate most of the customers by making a game only professionals can be good at, they ruin the starcraft brand.
The game needs to be as balanced as possible at all levels of play, and right now that just isn't the case with some of the match-ups.
They need to balance for the tip top players and have players below play up to it, because anything in the lower leagues that may be deemed as "imbalanced" is a result of lack of skill rather than actual game imbalance (assuming said thing does not have any indication of imbalance at high level play).
On January 27 2012 05:51 TheRPGAddict wrote: It sounds like they are trying to balance from the lower leagues. Which really scares me.
Do they? Because if they would, they would buff terran into oblivion. The lower league terrans are suffering hard, but blizzard doesnt buff terran because if would mess up the pro scene. I don't see how they are balancing for the lower levels.
I only said this based on the connotations of the interview.
On January 27 2012 05:51 TheRPGAddict wrote: It sounds like they are trying to balance from the lower leagues. Which really scares me.
Do they? Because if they would, they would buff terran into oblivion. The lower league terrans are suffering hard, but blizzard doesnt buff terran because if would mess up the pro scene. I don't see how they are balancing for the lower levels.
I only said this based on the connotations of the interview.
Can you quote those connotations, because I could only conclude that they are not balancing for the lower leagues.
i think phoenix splash upgrade will fix the muta problem. someone mentioned splash damage pheonix will be game breaking, corsair was against mutas in bw but devour turned it around, scourge in smaller numbers. i would imagine infestor will have the same effect with fungal. before fungal, it would be almost impossible to deal with pheonix with muta/corruptor (move+attack+splash). against ground units? i think thats a non issue.
i think there's no doubt majority of (higher level) sc2 players would like to see tempest(air thor, just as useless) not introduced along with shredder(anti-micro) and colossus removed. i'm curious of what team browder will do.
On January 25 2012 17:00 David Kim wrote: Much as vikings come from the starport in flight mode, hellions would emerge from the factory as battle hellions by default, and players could then opt to transform them into the faster, but more fragile, normal Hellion. One downside is that higher level players have found this frustrating in certain situations, especially when trying to get the jump on zerg opponents, but our general philosophy is that we’re not afraid of making the game more difficult to master at the highest levels.
On January 27 2012 06:24 Ghostface_Killa wrote: Phoenix should deal splash damage to air units.
It's not as if Corruptors won't continue to own them.
It's not as if corruptors own nothing but phoenixes, and splash damage on them would be nonsense
You're kidding me right? Corruptors counter Colossus and can be morphed into Brood Lords.
correction: all zerg ground units suck vs colossi, broodlords come too late, mutas are not strong enough in battle, thus zerg players build corruptors because its the only thing that doesn't get steamrolled by a colossus deathball, do note however, that if you get just 2 corruptors (300 mins/200gas/4supply) per enemy colossus (300mins/200gas/6supply) you will get steamrolled or it will be a close battle depending upon the scale (the more units on both sides the more beneficial for corruptors), thus to be able to fight the colossus (aswell as the mandatory support), the zerg needs to spend roughly equal money on the so-called "counter" than the protoss do on the thing being "countered".
this does not fit my definition of a counter.
besides, you prove the point by listing all uses for corruptors: being good vs phoenix being decent vs colossus morphing into broodlords
and note, the final one is not a boon to the corruptor, its simply: "to be able to get the thing you actually want you need to get a useless pupal-form first, tough luck."
and if a unit can only fill 2 niche-roles then its a bad unit or bad design of the raceas a whole, period.
in short: corruptors are not a counter to colossus, but its the best zerg got, so they build it, and then everyone starts thinking its the counter just cause zergs use it alot vs colossus.
It is indeed hard to take a 3rd/4th with mutas around, but that's sort of the idea with mutas. What bothers me is that during CONSTANT muta-morphing, zergs bank up thousands of minerals which allows them to expand at a sick rate which is very hard to do anything about.
Suggestion: make mutalisks cost 200/100 instead of 100/100!
Awesome that David Kim is answering these questions, no matter how retarded they are, I think it would be fantastic if he did this monthly, the more blizzard invests in the SC2 community the more they will get back from it.
Although I don't really care how strong EMP is, David Kim must be off his rocker if he thinks "EMP is still strong because everyone uses it". Terran uses it because they have to otherwise they're 100% dead against protoss lol wtf?
Another solution to Protoss's mutalisk problem: - Buff Stalker by making the Stalker's attack to light equal to their current attack vs. armour. That means Stalkers will only have 1 attack stat from now. - Give pheonix a special charge like in the beta where they can deal splash damage. - Give phoenix immunity to Mutas's splash damage. So a smaller phoenix pack can counter a larger muta pack.
Regarding the Protoss carrier: - Blizz need to stop the hate and should try going all out to buff the carrier before trying to remove it! I hate how David Kim is saying "oh we could buff it but we don't think it will solve the problem". Well I think that is BS! Why can't they just implement the major buffs for carrier and have it in Public Test Roomto see if the carrier will improve! If not then proceed differently. I really hate how David Kim can be so dismissive of the most obvious suggestions while pretending to care about the community's opinion. - Also, how much influence does Kim has in the game design anyway? I am quite sick and tired of his endless half hearted answers while major balance problem remain - HOTS cannot be relied on to balance everything since HOTS is a different game. Blizzard should stick to their word and keep WOL alive through patches and improvements and allow players the chance to play 2 balance games separately (HOTS and WOL)
Phoenix splash is I think by far the best solution, because it would be virtually meaningless against anything other than Mutas in large numbers, which is precisely the problem.
What I hear David saying is Toss is damn OP at lower levels and UP at higher levels especially tippy top Koreans. Good luck fixing that David. LOL.
As far as pheonix.. Please no splash YUKKY less micro. Like we need less micro. Just make them fire like marines or +1 range and watch the awesome kiting begin.
On January 27 2012 11:28 sd_andeh wrote: It is indeed hard to take a 3rd/4th with mutas around, but that's sort of the idea with mutas. What bothers me is that during CONSTANT muta-morphing, zergs bank up thousands of minerals which allows them to expand at a sick rate which is very hard to do anything about.
Suggestion: make mutalisks cost 200/100 instead of 100/100!
That's pretty dumb. One of the more exciting interactions in this game is the muta/ stim marine battles, cat and mouse, why ruin it with a muta nerf for a Protoss weakness. Best way to address a weakness is to address the weakness w/o hurting other matchups let alone unrelated matchups like ZvT.
The number one thing I wish they would consider changing in HOTS is the collosus. Not that it's overpowered or anything, just that its a boring unit. A unit so boring that actually attack-moving with it is superior to target firing because of its damn long animation.
So then everyone says, bring back the reaver. Except that is still a problem because you can't hold your reavers inside a warpprism, since vikings will just shoot it down with their ridiculous range. Just wish the viking and the collosus never made it into this game, such boring units.
In my opinon, I think protoss in WOL is just too unstable. Gateway units generally suck before getting any upgrades (speedlots, blink), which make a lot of attacks hard to hold off. We then rely on mechanics that are seemingly overpowered to counter that underpowered status (collos-forcefields?). If I think of Protoss from BW, the gateway units never felt weak, they always felt beefy and stable. In sc2, every gate unit feels tremendously fragile.
About the muta stuff, while phoenixes are good counter, mutas can come just as a tech switch, while P cant do the same. So if you didnt open phoenix, switching tech to phoenixes is gonna be hell once mutas are out. Remember, z can make every larvae a muta, while P can make 1 phoenix at a time froma single stargate. It feels very fragile as well.
The problem with TvP is that toss has at least 3 ways to force a transition out of terrans.. Therefore, if terran fails to switch their comp based on that, its over. Period.
Colossi -> vikings Templars -> ghosts Zea Archon -> mass mariens with ghosts
THe problem is that terrans don't have that same ability... to FORCE toss to do something...
Oh he's making thors?? More zealots... or more Colossi.. or let me feedback them....
etc etc.. u get the point??
toss doenst have the "oh shit he's making THIS, i'd better do THAT and pray he doesn't push now and kill me" moment
On January 28 2012 04:18 xTrim wrote: The problem with TvP is that toss has at least 3 ways to force a transition out of terrans.. Therefore, if terran fails to switch their comp based on that, its over. Period.
Colossi -> vikings Templars -> ghosts Zea Archon -> mass mariens with ghosts
THe problem is that terrans don't have that same ability... to FORCE toss to do something...
Oh he's making thors?? More zealots... or more Colossi.. or let me feedback them....
etc etc.. u get the point??
toss doenst have the "oh shit he's making THIS, i'd better do THAT and pray he doesn't push now and kill me" moment
Stim timings? Drops? 1-1-1? Once Terrans get a lot of vikings or ghosts it actually does force Protoss to switch back to the other.
On January 28 2012 04:18 xTrim wrote: The problem with TvP is that toss has at least 3 ways to force a transition out of terrans.. Therefore, if terran fails to switch their comp based on that, its over. Period.
Colossi -> vikings Templars -> ghosts Zea Archon -> mass mariens with ghosts
THe problem is that terrans don't have that same ability... to FORCE toss to do something...
Oh he's making thors?? More zealots... or more Colossi.. or let me feedback them....
etc etc.. u get the point??
toss doenst have the "oh shit he's making THIS, i'd better do THAT and pray he doesn't push now and kill me" moment
You do realize that the switches do happen on both sides right? Toss doesn't only switch tech because he is like "lol lets hope he makes too much x" but also because at a certain point colossi start to just melt away if you keep making them and T keeps making Vikings, you gotta stop at some point, so yes certain masses of vikings actually force P into making ht as an example. Also stim + medivacs forces splash damage units because P has no other way of dealing with it otherwise. Once the ghost count is to damn high you will want to have colossi. Now we could both probably go on about this forever, but to say that toss is forcing only while terran has to react all the time is just straight up wrong and shows that you only see the matchup from the terrans pov, which is in my opinion why most players opinion of balance is just way to biased anyways.
It scares me when he says that they base their balance decisions on the 'player community'. Balancing should only be based on the absolute top pro players imo; the average player doesn't need a more balanced game, if he/she's not a pro it's probably because some aspect of his/her play is lacking, not because of imbalance.
The game needs a bit more time to be figured out and for new strategies to be developed, you can't try to force this by patching the game every few months with diamond-level balance :/
On January 28 2012 04:45 Kergy wrote: It sacres me when he says that they base their balance decisions on the 'player community'. Balancing should only be based on the absolute top pro players imo; the average player doesn't need a more balanced game, if he/she's not a pro it's probably because some aspect of his/her play is lacking, not because of imbalance.
The game needs a bit more time to be figured out and for new strategies to be developed, you can't try to force this by patching the game every few months with diamond-level balance :/
I very much agree with you. If you read b.net forums, or hell even TL forums you'll find threads on EVERYTHING being OP. from funny/terrible ones like "mutas are OP "roaches are OP" "stalkers are OP" to pathetic ones like "queens are OP" and even more pathetic threads such as "I'm stuck in gold because my race is too weak." The community should not be trusted on anything balance related, because the community as a whole is full of whiny crybabies who don't know shit about the game but convince themselves that they do. I really think balance should just be balanced at the top level, because if it's balanced at the top then it will be balanced below as well since the way for a lower level player to get to a more balanced point will be to just get better.
On January 28 2012 04:18 xTrim wrote: The problem with TvP is that toss has at least 3 ways to force a transition out of terrans.. Therefore, if terran fails to switch their comp based on that, its over. Period.
Colossi -> vikings Templars -> ghosts Zea Archon -> mass mariens with ghosts
THe problem is that terrans don't have that same ability... to FORCE toss to do something...
Oh he's making thors?? More zealots... or more Colossi.. or let me feedback them....
etc etc.. u get the point??
toss doenst have the "oh shit he's making THIS, i'd better do THAT and pray he doesn't push now and kill me" moment
You do realize that the switches do happen on both sides right? Toss doesn't only switch tech because he is like "lol lets hope he makes too much x" but also because at a certain point colossi start to just melt away if you keep making them and T keeps making Vikings, you gotta stop at some point, so yes certain masses of vikings actually force P into making ht as an example. Also stim + medivacs forces splash damage units because P has no other way of dealing with it otherwise. Once the ghost count is to damn high you will want to have colossi. Now we could both probably go on about this forever, but to say that toss is forcing only while terran has to react all the time is just straight up wrong and shows that you only see the matchup from the terrans pov, which is in my opinion why most players opinion of balance is just way to biased anyways.
This is not the point. I agree that terrans can keep building their MMM and if toss doesnt do something else besides gateway units (apart from dts and temps, ofc) they will lose. But what I'm saying, and it's quite true, it is considered an all-in to tech to ghosts in two bases, while teching to colossi/storm/etc is considered standard play.
Get the point??
If terran gets its only viable AOE unit without it being for a specific counter, it is all-in.
On January 28 2012 04:18 xTrim wrote: The problem with TvP is that toss has at least 3 ways to force a transition out of terrans.. Therefore, if terran fails to switch their comp based on that, its over. Period.
Colossi -> vikings Templars -> ghosts Zea Archon -> mass mariens with ghosts
THe problem is that terrans don't have that same ability... to FORCE toss to do something...
Oh he's making thors?? More zealots... or more Colossi.. or let me feedback them....
etc etc.. u get the point??
toss doenst have the "oh shit he's making THIS, i'd better do THAT and pray he doesn't push now and kill me" moment
You do realize that the switches do happen on both sides right? Toss doesn't only switch tech because he is like "lol lets hope he makes too much x" but also because at a certain point colossi start to just melt away if you keep making them and T keeps making Vikings, you gotta stop at some point, so yes certain masses of vikings actually force P into making ht as an example. Also stim + medivacs forces splash damage units because P has no other way of dealing with it otherwise. Once the ghost count is to damn high you will want to have colossi. Now we could both probably go on about this forever, but to say that toss is forcing only while terran has to react all the time is just straight up wrong and shows that you only see the matchup from the terrans pov, which is in my opinion why most players opinion of balance is just way to biased anyways.
This is not the point. I agree that terrans can keep building their MMM and if toss doesnt do something else besides gateway units (apart from dts and temps, ofc) they will lose. But what I'm saying, and it's quite true, it is considered an all-in to tech to ghosts in two bases, while teching to colossi/storm/etc is considered standard play.
Get the point??
If terran gets its only viable AOE unit without it being for a specific counter, it is all-in.
Did you seriously just say that building a ghost academy while having 2 bases is an allin? Really? If you truly do believe that than I'd probably have a hard time explaining you anything about the game, wow I think for the sake of my look upon humanity I'll just call you a troll and leave it at that. What you think of going ghost is in reality a strong timing push, you know doing a 2 base colossi timing is also a lot more on the allin side, so is rushing to psi storm to hit a certain timing.
I think your problem is that terran can't go "lol I'll just a build these dudezzz and don't care what my opponnent does", at the same time there are a lot of similiar situations with protoss where you can't just build whatever you want while ignoring what terran does. I guess you think protoss can do whatever they want and you are mad that you actually have to scout and react accordingly in this game? Guess I should start bitching that I can't do a 3 immortal push when Terran goes for very quick medivacs.
Thanks for putting the link up, would have completely missed the back-pedaling. Nice to know they're examining the performance level of race-matchups at all skill levels. So hard for bad Terran to beat bad Toss. [i would know sadly...]
On January 28 2012 04:18 xTrim wrote: The problem with TvP is that toss has at least 3 ways to force a transition out of terrans.. Therefore, if terran fails to switch their comp based on that, its over. Period.
Colossi -> vikings Templars -> ghosts Zea Archon -> mass mariens with ghosts
THe problem is that terrans don't have that same ability... to FORCE toss to do something...
Oh he's making thors?? More zealots... or more Colossi.. or let me feedback them....
etc etc.. u get the point??
toss doenst have the "oh shit he's making THIS, i'd better do THAT and pray he doesn't push now and kill me" moment
You do realize that the switches do happen on both sides right? Toss doesn't only switch tech because he is like "lol lets hope he makes too much x" but also because at a certain point colossi start to just melt away if you keep making them and T keeps making Vikings, you gotta stop at some point, so yes certain masses of vikings actually force P into making ht as an example. Also stim + medivacs forces splash damage units because P has no other way of dealing with it otherwise. Once the ghost count is to damn high you will want to have colossi. Now we could both probably go on about this forever, but to say that toss is forcing only while terran has to react all the time is just straight up wrong and shows that you only see the matchup from the terrans pov, which is in my opinion why most players opinion of balance is just way to biased anyways.
This is not the point. I agree that terrans can keep building their MMM and if toss doesnt do something else besides gateway units (apart from dts and temps, ofc) they will lose. But what I'm saying, and it's quite true, it is considered an all-in to tech to ghosts in two bases, while teching to colossi/storm/etc is considered standard play.
Get the point??
If terran gets its only viable AOE unit without it being for a specific counter, it is all-in.
Interesting... So, despite the fact that I can produce ghosts from 4 barracks when on 2 bases, producing them off 1, maybe 2 barracks is all-in? Wow, this is groundbreaking.
"changing the protoss phoenix seems like it could be the best approach. Still, due to the significant impact it could have on all protoss match ups, we’re being very careful." I feel like it would be ok...
On January 28 2012 04:18 xTrim wrote: The problem with TvP is that toss has at least 3 ways to force a transition out of terrans.. Therefore, if terran fails to switch their comp based on that, its over. Period.
Colossi -> vikings Templars -> ghosts Zea Archon -> mass mariens with ghosts
THe problem is that terrans don't have that same ability... to FORCE toss to do something...
Oh he's making thors?? More zealots... or more Colossi.. or let me feedback them....
etc etc.. u get the point??
toss doenst have the "oh shit he's making THIS, i'd better do THAT and pray he doesn't push now and kill me" moment
I'm sorry, but this is stupid.
If terran opens ghosts (like puma) then HT tech and immortals and sentries are all bad juju and the protoss player is "forced" to go colossus. If there was any point in terran opening vikings then protoss would be forced to get HT archon/zealot and avoid colosus.
The biggest problem is there are only 2 tech options that worth anything at all for protoss, HT and colosus. If protoss don't get one or the other they just lose, so no matter what protoss are going to want to get 5-ish colosus, 9 or so HT and a regular death ball of stalker/zealot/archon.
Unfortunately protoss air units are almost universally bad vs marines/vikings in a macro game, so you're going to get robo/templar every game.
On January 30 2012 07:54 MinimalistSC2 wrote: "changing the protoss phoenix seems like it could be the best approach. Still, due to the significant impact it could have on all protoss match ups, we’re being very careful." I feel like it would be ok...
Pheonix are pretty strong as a PvP opener. Maybe make their air attack stronger but the lift cost more energy with a starting energy increase from fleet beacon? Shouldn't be too hard to balance...
EPT
.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/J6qFKh.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/XII8Mh.png)
.
