|
On February 03 2012 04:13 Lorch wrote:
And let's all hope this will stop Terran from whinning about TvP.
Seems pretty good, I guess ZvP might just be late game being a coin flip and mutas forcing stupid base race situations.
Statistically balanced =! good matchup. Protoss still has it far to easy in TvP, which is what all the whine was about to begin with.
On the ZvP topic. I wonder if a transition from the stalker/colossus force to carrier/voidray/ht with a couple of archons would be the way to go in lategame zvp. The only thing I can see beating that is mass hydra coupled with infestors, and even then it becomes a battle of storms/feedbacks vs fungals and "splitting" hydras"
The issue is how expensive an army like that is, and I guess the way for protoss to do that would be to get 3-4 bases with the standard deathball and turtle up while trading in their standard units while slowly working their way up to 3/3 air and the carrier/voidray switch, sort of how a terran switches to ghost/tank from marine/tank.
|
On February 03 2012 22:29 Dalavita wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2012 04:13 Lorch wrote:
And let's all hope this will stop Terran from whinning about TvP.
Seems pretty good, I guess ZvP might just be late game being a coin flip and mutas forcing stupid base race situations. Statistically balanced =! good matchup. Protoss still has it far to easy in TvP, which is what all the whine was about to begin with. On the ZvP topic. I wonder if a transition from the stalker/colossus force to carrier/voidray/ht with a couple of archons would be the way to go in lategame zvp. The only thing I can see beating that is mass hydra coupled with infestors, and even then it becomes a battle of storms/feedbacks vs fungals and "splitting" hydras" The issue is how expensive an army like that is, and I guess the way for protoss to do that would be to get 3-4 bases with the standard deathball and turtle up while trading in their standard units while slowly working their way up to 3/3 air and the carrier/voidray switch, sort of how a terran switches to ghost/tank from marine/tank.
How is it easy if the percentages are even? If it was easy, wouldn't P have the numbers skewed in their favor? Or is this the good old terrans-are-better-players-argument?
And what would the voidrays do in your example?
|
On February 03 2012 22:29 Dalavita wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2012 04:13 Lorch wrote:
And let's all hope this will stop Terran from whinning about TvP.
Seems pretty good, I guess ZvP might just be late game being a coin flip and mutas forcing stupid base race situations. Statistically balanced =! good matchup. Protoss still has it far to easy in TvP, which is what all the whine was about to begin with. On the ZvP topic. I wonder if a transition from the stalker/colossus force to carrier/voidray/ht with a couple of archons would be the way to go in lategame zvp. The only thing I can see beating that is mass hydra coupled with infestors, and even then it becomes a battle of storms/feedbacks vs fungals and "splitting" hydras" The issue is how expensive an army like that is, and I guess the way for protoss to do that would be to get 3-4 bases with the standard deathball and turtle up while trading in their standard units while slowly working their way up to 3/3 air and the carrier/voidray switch, sort of how a terran switches to ghost/tank from marine/tank.
It has been tried, and it sucked.
The only way to win superlate game PvZ is archon toilet.
Terran has more micro in fights then Protoss yes but that's kinda what you signed up for by playing Terran.
I would love to have an army that becomes 10times stronger if I micro it perfectly.
|
On February 03 2012 22:29 Dalavita wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2012 04:13 Lorch wrote:
And let's all hope this will stop Terran from whinning about TvP.
Seems pretty good, I guess ZvP might just be late game being a coin flip and mutas forcing stupid base race situations. On the ZvP topic. I wonder if a transition from the stalker/colossus force to carrier/voidray/ht with a couple of archons would be the way to go in lategame zvp. The only thing I can see beating that is mass hydra coupled with infestors, and even then it becomes a battle of storms/feedbacks vs fungals and "splitting" hydras"
lol... try building a round of corruptors
there you have your counter to every lategame P there is except for archon toilet and HT (which do way too little dmg on their own)
|
On February 03 2012 11:25 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2012 10:57 Tyrant0 wrote:On February 03 2012 09:29 ticklishmusic wrote:
The thing I don't understand is how the PvZ winrate is so low. PvZ is by FAR my best matchup-- I'm around 70% in it. My PvT is pretty terrible though.
Zerg... at lower leagues it's really good b/c no one knows how to punish overdroning. Charts or balance have almost no effect upon anyone in the ladder who isn't pushing top 50 GM, and even that is sketchy to say the least. I'm saying that since the majority of players are not top GM, the charts are heavily based on how their games work out. It seems to me the fact that zerg can overdrone and get super eco without getting punished for it in the lower leagues explains their high winrate overall. The way it works is that simply Zerg is favored in lower leagues because of their fairly easy macro mechanic, while the strength of other races to attack cannot be utilized at a similar level. Now, if they took say Masters and higher or just GM or some higher tier of players, the results might well be very different. For example, last season, my stats were something like: PvP: 52% PvT: 32% PvZ: 69%
Their games are worked out by what the meta game dictates and what a top player making no mistakes in execution should be expected to play at, a luxury no <GM player is afforded.
The results are entirely inconsequential to lower leagues, and aren't representative at all of any level of masters.
|
Poland3751 Posts
How did you access TLPD to generate this charts, if I may ask?
|
Funny how Terran never looks bad....
Greetings.
|
On February 03 2012 23:28 Mandalor wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2012 22:29 Dalavita wrote:On February 03 2012 04:13 Lorch wrote:
And let's all hope this will stop Terran from whinning about TvP.
Seems pretty good, I guess ZvP might just be late game being a coin flip and mutas forcing stupid base race situations. Statistically balanced =! good matchup. Protoss still has it far to easy in TvP, which is what all the whine was about to begin with. On the ZvP topic. I wonder if a transition from the stalker/colossus force to carrier/voidray/ht with a couple of archons would be the way to go in lategame zvp. The only thing I can see beating that is mass hydra coupled with infestors, and even then it becomes a battle of storms/feedbacks vs fungals and "splitting" hydras" The issue is how expensive an army like that is, and I guess the way for protoss to do that would be to get 3-4 bases with the standard deathball and turtle up while trading in their standard units while slowly working their way up to 3/3 air and the carrier/voidray switch, sort of how a terran switches to ghost/tank from marine/tank. How is it easy if the percentages are even? If it was easy, wouldn't P have the numbers skewed in their favor? Or is this the good old terrans-are-better-players-argument? And what would the voidrays do in your example?
You can add in whatever reasoning you want behind the TvP matchup. Whether it's the good old terran-player-are-better, to terrans all-inning and winning in the midgame to cover up for protoss stupid lategame strengths. I think it's a combination of all of those factors, including some I've forgotten to mention.
Also the voidrays are there to stomp the corruptors/be all around awesome.
On February 03 2012 23:28 Jakkerr wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2012 22:29 Dalavita wrote:On February 03 2012 04:13 Lorch wrote:
And let's all hope this will stop Terran from whinning about TvP.
Seems pretty good, I guess ZvP might just be late game being a coin flip and mutas forcing stupid base race situations. Statistically balanced =! good matchup. Protoss still has it far to easy in TvP, which is what all the whine was about to begin with. On the ZvP topic. I wonder if a transition from the stalker/colossus force to carrier/voidray/ht with a couple of archons would be the way to go in lategame zvp. The only thing I can see beating that is mass hydra coupled with infestors, and even then it becomes a battle of storms/feedbacks vs fungals and "splitting" hydras" The issue is how expensive an army like that is, and I guess the way for protoss to do that would be to get 3-4 bases with the standard deathball and turtle up while trading in their standard units while slowly working their way up to 3/3 air and the carrier/voidray switch, sort of how a terran switches to ghost/tank from marine/tank. It has been tried, and it sucked. The only way to win superlate game PvZ is archon toilet. Terran has more micro in fights then Protoss yes but that's kinda what you signed up for by playing Terran. I would love to have an army that becomes 10times stronger if I micro it perfectly.
When has it been tried exactly?
Also I don't mind terran requiring a lot of micro at all and I wouldn't play it if it didn't. If anything I hope protoss becomes more micro and skill reliant than it currently is
On February 03 2012 23:41 robih wrote:
lol... try building a round of corruptors
there you have your counter to every lategame P there is except for archon toilet and HT (which do way too little dmg on their own)
A maxed void ray/carrier army will stomp corruptors, which is why you mix in the void rays to begin with.
|
On February 03 2012 22:29 Dalavita wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2012 04:13 Lorch wrote:
And let's all hope this will stop Terran from whinning about TvP.
Seems pretty good, I guess ZvP might just be late game being a coin flip and mutas forcing stupid base race situations. Statistically balanced =! good matchup. Protoss still has it far to easy in TvP, which is what all the whine was about to begin with. On the ZvP topic. I wonder if a transition from the stalker/colossus force to carrier/voidray/ht with a couple of archons would be the way to go in lategame zvp. The only thing I can see beating that is mass hydra coupled with infestors, and even then it becomes a battle of storms/feedbacks vs fungals and "splitting" hydras" The issue is how expensive an army like that is, and I guess the way for protoss to do that would be to get 3-4 bases with the standard deathball and turtle up while trading in their standard units while slowly working their way up to 3/3 air and the carrier/voidray switch, sort of how a terran switches to ghost/tank from marine/tank.
Yes, that unit comp is being explored late game.
Imo, it should not be about turtling on 3-4 bases as toss. I'm only diamond but I've been working on reinventing my PvZ lately. I'm having success by trading late game armies with the zerg. If you push out around 170-180 supply to start dealing with the early broods, you can often take a fourth and fifth. I find that blink stalkers are still effective in the late-game comp, partially because the build a lot quicker than Stargate units.
tl;dr I used to think that I needed to win the 200/200 clash of armies but now I just try to trade, expand, and remax as fast as possible while working in some warp prism harass during the remax.
|
On February 04 2012 02:51 How2getMaster wrote:
Funny how Terran never looks bad....
Greetings.
Yes their consistently 50% winrates means they are overpowered. 
|
On February 04 2012 07:38 The KY wrote:Show nested quote +On February 04 2012 02:51 How2getMaster wrote:
Funny how Terran never looks bad....
Greetings. Yes their consistently above 50% winrates means they are overpowered.
I fixed it for you there.
Doesnt mean they are OVERPOWERED but it does hint that they have an advantage..you have to admit that
|
haha idra what a fucking whiner. 'zerg cant beat protoss'!
LOL
|
On February 03 2012 12:35 Enzymatic wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2012 08:12 zdfgucker wrote:
People will adapt. There shouldn't be any nerfs or buffs soon. Zergs complain about ZvP, tosses complain about PvZ, so it's all fine, no? Zergs complain about.... Everything. Working as intended.
Well protoss have been pretty vocal these last months about how they can't win too.
Protoss like to complain more imo. I don't understand how come there is such a % in ZvP, I lose all of them :S
|
On February 03 2012 22:29 Dalavita wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2012 04:13 Lorch wrote:
And let's all hope this will stop Terran from whinning about TvP.
Seems pretty good, I guess ZvP might just be late game being a coin flip and mutas forcing stupid base race situations. Statistically balanced =! good matchup. Protoss still has it far to easy in TvP, which is what all the whine was about to begin with.
Far too easy in the lategame, I'd agree. Chargelots with Archons and Colo don't require as much micro as the Terran and can be really frustrating to deal with. The rest of the game though, it's completely different. I feel like Terran has a huge advantage in the midgame with the aggression they can put and how one mistake can end the game for Protoss. Not to mention various builds that end the game if not scouted early.
But most lower level Terrans aren't active with their units and don't put on any aggression so they just macro to 200/200 and clash armies together.
|
On February 04 2012 07:05 Dalavita wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2012 23:28 Mandalor wrote:On February 03 2012 22:29 Dalavita wrote:On February 03 2012 04:13 Lorch wrote:
And let's all hope this will stop Terran from whinning about TvP.
Seems pretty good, I guess ZvP might just be late game being a coin flip and mutas forcing stupid base race situations. Statistically balanced =! good matchup. Protoss still has it far to easy in TvP, which is what all the whine was about to begin with. On the ZvP topic. I wonder if a transition from the stalker/colossus force to carrier/voidray/ht with a couple of archons would be the way to go in lategame zvp. The only thing I can see beating that is mass hydra coupled with infestors, and even then it becomes a battle of storms/feedbacks vs fungals and "splitting" hydras" The issue is how expensive an army like that is, and I guess the way for protoss to do that would be to get 3-4 bases with the standard deathball and turtle up while trading in their standard units while slowly working their way up to 3/3 air and the carrier/voidray switch, sort of how a terran switches to ghost/tank from marine/tank. How is it easy if the percentages are even? If it was easy, wouldn't P have the numbers skewed in their favor? Or is this the good old terrans-are-better-players-argument? And what would the voidrays do in your example? You can add in whatever reasoning you want behind the TvP matchup. Whether it's the good old terran-player-are-better, to terrans all-inning and winning in the midgame to cover up for protoss stupid lategame strengths. I think it's a combination of all of those factors, including some I've forgotten to mention. Also the voidrays are there to stomp the corruptors/be all around awesome. Show nested quote +On February 03 2012 23:28 Jakkerr wrote:On February 03 2012 22:29 Dalavita wrote:On February 03 2012 04:13 Lorch wrote:
And let's all hope this will stop Terran from whinning about TvP.
Seems pretty good, I guess ZvP might just be late game being a coin flip and mutas forcing stupid base race situations. Statistically balanced =! good matchup. Protoss still has it far to easy in TvP, which is what all the whine was about to begin with. On the ZvP topic. I wonder if a transition from the stalker/colossus force to carrier/voidray/ht with a couple of archons would be the way to go in lategame zvp. The only thing I can see beating that is mass hydra coupled with infestors, and even then it becomes a battle of storms/feedbacks vs fungals and "splitting" hydras" The issue is how expensive an army like that is, and I guess the way for protoss to do that would be to get 3-4 bases with the standard deathball and turtle up while trading in their standard units while slowly working their way up to 3/3 air and the carrier/voidray switch, sort of how a terran switches to ghost/tank from marine/tank. It has been tried, and it sucked. The only way to win superlate game PvZ is archon toilet. Terran has more micro in fights then Protoss yes but that's kinda what you signed up for by playing Terran. I would love to have an army that becomes 10times stronger if I micro it perfectly. When has it been tried exactly? Also I don't mind terran requiring a lot of micro at all and I wouldn't play it if it didn't. If anything I hope protoss becomes more micro and skill reliant than it currently is Show nested quote +On February 03 2012 23:41 robih wrote:
lol... try building a round of corruptors
there you have your counter to every lategame P there is except for archon toilet and HT (which do way too little dmg on their own) A maxed void ray/carrier army will stomp corruptors, which is why you mix in the void rays to begin with.
Good luck getting a maxxed void ray carrier army. Good zergs will trade armies as soon as they see mass carrier or void ray production, meaning you will never have more than 2-3 on the field at a time.
Compositions like Void Ray/Carrier or Carrier HT are the holy grail in PvZ or even PvT in the latter case. If you ever get there, your army is invincible. But you will never get there. Carrier build times are just too long.
The other problem with air compositions is that there is nothing stopping the zerg from making a ton of ultras/roaches/cracklings and just levelling your production facilities while your void rays and carriers spend a full ten minutes dishing out scratch damage. Giving up ground control for air control is never a good idea as protoss.
|
Looks good overall except for international PvZ.
It almost looks like a patch would be in order (coming from a zerg), blizz have said they are reluctant to make changes before a 60/40 winrate, but this is cutting it close...
|
On February 04 2012 07:05 Dalavita wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2012 23:28 Mandalor wrote:On February 03 2012 22:29 Dalavita wrote:On February 03 2012 04:13 Lorch wrote:
And let's all hope this will stop Terran from whinning about TvP.
Seems pretty good, I guess ZvP might just be late game being a coin flip and mutas forcing stupid base race situations. Statistically balanced =! good matchup. Protoss still has it far to easy in TvP, which is what all the whine was about to begin with. On the ZvP topic. I wonder if a transition from the stalker/colossus force to carrier/voidray/ht with a couple of archons would be the way to go in lategame zvp. The only thing I can see beating that is mass hydra coupled with infestors, and even then it becomes a battle of storms/feedbacks vs fungals and "splitting" hydras" The issue is how expensive an army like that is, and I guess the way for protoss to do that would be to get 3-4 bases with the standard deathball and turtle up while trading in their standard units while slowly working their way up to 3/3 air and the carrier/voidray switch, sort of how a terran switches to ghost/tank from marine/tank. How is it easy if the percentages are even? If it was easy, wouldn't P have the numbers skewed in their favor? Or is this the good old terrans-are-better-players-argument? And what would the voidrays do in your example? You can add in whatever reasoning you want behind the TvP matchup. Whether it's the good old terran-player-are-better, to terrans all-inning and winning in the midgame to cover up for protoss stupid lategame strengths. I think it's a combination of all of those factors, including some I've forgotten to mention. Also the voidrays are there to stomp the corruptors/be all around awesome. Show nested quote +On February 03 2012 23:28 Jakkerr wrote:On February 03 2012 22:29 Dalavita wrote:On February 03 2012 04:13 Lorch wrote:
And let's all hope this will stop Terran from whinning about TvP.
Seems pretty good, I guess ZvP might just be late game being a coin flip and mutas forcing stupid base race situations. Statistically balanced =! good matchup. Protoss still has it far to easy in TvP, which is what all the whine was about to begin with. On the ZvP topic. I wonder if a transition from the stalker/colossus force to carrier/voidray/ht with a couple of archons would be the way to go in lategame zvp. The only thing I can see beating that is mass hydra coupled with infestors, and even then it becomes a battle of storms/feedbacks vs fungals and "splitting" hydras" The issue is how expensive an army like that is, and I guess the way for protoss to do that would be to get 3-4 bases with the standard deathball and turtle up while trading in their standard units while slowly working their way up to 3/3 air and the carrier/voidray switch, sort of how a terran switches to ghost/tank from marine/tank. It has been tried, and it sucked. The only way to win superlate game PvZ is archon toilet. Terran has more micro in fights then Protoss yes but that's kinda what you signed up for by playing Terran. I would love to have an army that becomes 10times stronger if I micro it perfectly. When has it been tried exactly? Also I don't mind terran requiring a lot of micro at all and I wouldn't play it if it didn't. If anything I hope protoss becomes more micro and skill reliant than it currently is Show nested quote +On February 03 2012 23:41 robih wrote:
lol... try building a round of corruptors
there you have your counter to every lategame P there is except for archon toilet and HT (which do way too little dmg on their own) A maxed void ray/carrier army will stomp corruptors, which is why you mix in the void rays to begin with.
lmao I thought you were having some seriously good ideas but then turn out to be mass carriers/VRs hahaha. Oh god the irony. Have fun in bronze where Zerg let you mass VRs/Carriers and attack you at 30 mins mark I guess.
|
And Zergs wonder why I 6gate all in at all..
Because Mutas are the most retarded unit in the game pretty much. I proposed this idea before, but Mutas need to have 3 supply. They are WAY too effective for 100/100 2 supply.
|
On February 03 2012 11:54 Drowsy wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2012 08:22 Jermstuddog wrote:
Stargates would appear to be the area with the most room for improvement. Phoenixes are already plenty effective vs mutas (though protoss players inexplicably think otherwise) unfortunately they suck vs pretty much everything else.
So... where do you apply the fix? The only realistic place I can see is the Void Ray, but that is calling for a whole redesign from the ground up. And considering the things Blizzard has shown in their HotS interview, they're not looking forward to reworking existing units...
If trends continue, Blizzard may have already written themselves into quite the corner. No, they do suck against mutas. They require huge resource commitments that make any tech switches complete death and to add insult to injury they barely trade efficiently against mutas on a resource basis because the glaive bounce becomes so powerful when the groups are large. If you want to blindly open 2 star to not have to deal with mutas, you can find 10 phoenixes annihilated in a short period of time by 3-4 infestors. Add splash damage upgrade for phoenixes (vs light only or something) at the cybernetics core. But honestly I still think pvz is the most fun matchup to play for me personally and it's my best other than the mirror.
That is exactly what I would like to see them try and see if it helps solve the issue. Blink and Storm and Cannons are useful, but unless the zerg decides to overcommit or sit in a storm, you dont usually get more then one or two.
If the protoss could reactively build up phoenixes with the upgrade to actually help try and dwindle the numbers might work. But it has to not be to poweful, mutas are a vital part of ZvP.
But it would be nice if the toss could get their third and fourths up, besdies doing some 2 base/1 base timing and hope it pays off, or forcing a base trade.
But PvZ isn't really unbalanced, so if blizzard to do anything, it should be subtle.
|
There isn't imbalanced races, only imbalanced players.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
