|
On May 06 2012 10:47 TheDraken wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2012 10:31 mousez wrote:
Changing the range of queens from 3 to 5 pretty much kills reaper openings and probably a few others as well. I think that thats such a big change just to fight against the initial 4 hellions because it wont help once it gets more than that. it probably shuts down other early rush strategies as well as making a bunker rush much more difficult. i think it shuts down to many other strategies and doesnt really deal with the issue of hellions, which isnt that much of a threat as it has been around for over a year everything sounds fine to me. blizz making it easy to push back 4 hellions but not many more? isn't that the whole intent?? kill reapers? reapers are kinda already dead. don't neuter a whole race's early game just for your one unit. shuts down other early rush strategies? hm, might have been what they meant to do. makes bunker rush more difficult?? LOL. WHAT A TRAVESTY.
Since when were pro Zergs struggling with reaper openings, reactor hellion, or 2rax? Yes, they die or take damage to it sometimes, but it's not like it's imbalanced. Terrans die to roach/baneling busts, should bunker health be increased to compensate...?
|
|
|
On May 06 2012 10:24 Noruxas wrote:
Idk man, I like using Polts fast medivac build, and thats before upgrades even start. S:
You actually said mid late game though.
|
On May 06 2012 10:55 corpuscle wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2012 10:47 TheDraken wrote:On May 06 2012 10:31 mousez wrote:
Changing the range of queens from 3 to 5 pretty much kills reaper openings and probably a few others as well. I think that thats such a big change just to fight against the initial 4 hellions because it wont help once it gets more than that. it probably shuts down other early rush strategies as well as making a bunker rush much more difficult. i think it shuts down to many other strategies and doesnt really deal with the issue of hellions, which isnt that much of a threat as it has been around for over a year everything sounds fine to me. blizz making it easy to push back 4 hellions but not many more? isn't that the whole intent?? kill reapers? reapers are kinda already dead. don't neuter a whole race's early game just for your one unit. shuts down other early rush strategies? hm, might have been what they meant to do. makes bunker rush more difficult?? LOL. WHAT A TRAVESTY. Since when were pro Zergs struggling with reaper openings, reactor hellion, or 2rax? Yes, they die or take damage to it sometimes, but it's not like it's imbalanced. Terrans die to roach/baneling busts, should bunker health be increased to compensate...?
I like how you're comparing standard openings to all-ins.
|
On May 06 2012 10:55 corpuscle wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2012 10:47 TheDraken wrote:On May 06 2012 10:31 mousez wrote:
Changing the range of queens from 3 to 5 pretty much kills reaper openings and probably a few others as well. I think that thats such a big change just to fight against the initial 4 hellions because it wont help once it gets more than that. it probably shuts down other early rush strategies as well as making a bunker rush much more difficult. i think it shuts down to many other strategies and doesnt really deal with the issue of hellions, which isnt that much of a threat as it has been around for over a year everything sounds fine to me. blizz making it easy to push back 4 hellions but not many more? isn't that the whole intent?? kill reapers? reapers are kinda already dead. don't neuter a whole race's early game just for your one unit. shuts down other early rush strategies? hm, might have been what they meant to do. makes bunker rush more difficult?? LOL. WHAT A TRAVESTY. Since when were pro Zergs struggling with reaper openings, reactor hellion, or 2rax? Yes, they die or take damage to it sometimes, but it's not like it's imbalanced. Terrans die to roach/baneling busts, should bunker health be increased to compensate...?
die or take damage to them SOMETIMES? bro, like 80% of TvZ victories by terran are won with early hellions, a 2rax, or a bunker rush.
terrans don't NEED to successfully bunker rush to win. it's absurd that terrans operate with the mentality that if they can't reliably get a bunker up in the zerg's natural the game is somehow imbalanced.
|
On May 06 2012 10:45 Kingy604 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2012 10:01 Lokerek wrote:On May 06 2012 08:52 scypio wrote:On May 06 2012 05:05 Creem wrote:
Problem is that for zerg there's not much to gain for holding off the hellion-harass as terran is able to enter mid-game barely dented economically, again due to how cheap helions are to produce. If anything, the zerg is probably behind due to either being forced to make roaches (which are now all but useless) or due to the economical damage the helions inflicted. Nerchio makes a lot of roaches in games vs terrans and he can somehow find them useful. Today in the Ironsquid third-place match Nestea also won his game with roach-ling-bling. So I guess they are not that bad after all... They are terrible because they do not transfer into late game in ZvP and ZvT. If a terran makes marines or protoss makes stalkers which they can do faster than zerg usually gets roach warren, the units are still used as a powerful 3/3 late game unit. However if zerg player decides to keep roaches in late them then they get wrecked by 3/3 marines , upgraded tanks, shredded by colossus and archons, easily split with forcefields. As you said roach ling bling game from Nestea - That is not your late game unit and I haven't seen the game but I can guaranteed that was not a late game, macro game. Stalkers are an awful unit for cost, especially against roaches. And how many protoss players keep enough sentries around for efficient FF versus roaches in the late game. Stalkers advantages lie in their mobility and ability to shoot both air and ground, not in their ability to win a straight-up fight. This is why Stephano style is so strong, because they can annihilate anything a 2 base protoss throws at them aside from mass immortal (which gimps versus anything apart from roaches) and with roach speed you can force the protoss to engage in a place he doesn't want to, not mentioning that roaches are about half the cost of a stalker and about equal in 1v fights, especially where the toss has to engage straight up (such as defending your (insert expletive of choice here) natural from 125 supply of roaches)
You certainly sir have inability to read. Blink stalkers are very good vs roaches but that was not my point. I'm talking about transitioning to late game when roach wont kill archons,motherships, colossi. Stalkers however are used to blink under broodlords and cause severe dmg, sniping them at a good rate.
Stephano build - This is how you can't read before responding to someone's argument. I'm talking about late game with late game units. Not a 12 min around 3 base maxing on roaches with 60~ drones but rather a macro oriented game.
|
On May 06 2012 11:31 Lokerek wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2012 10:45 Kingy604 wrote:On May 06 2012 10:01 Lokerek wrote:On May 06 2012 08:52 scypio wrote:On May 06 2012 05:05 Creem wrote:
Problem is that for zerg there's not much to gain for holding off the hellion-harass as terran is able to enter mid-game barely dented economically, again due to how cheap helions are to produce. If anything, the zerg is probably behind due to either being forced to make roaches (which are now all but useless) or due to the economical damage the helions inflicted. Nerchio makes a lot of roaches in games vs terrans and he can somehow find them useful. Today in the Ironsquid third-place match Nestea also won his game with roach-ling-bling. So I guess they are not that bad after all... They are terrible because they do not transfer into late game in ZvP and ZvT. If a terran makes marines or protoss makes stalkers which they can do faster than zerg usually gets roach warren, the units are still used as a powerful 3/3 late game unit. However if zerg player decides to keep roaches in late them then they get wrecked by 3/3 marines , upgraded tanks, shredded by colossus and archons, easily split with forcefields. As you said roach ling bling game from Nestea - That is not your late game unit and I haven't seen the game but I can guaranteed that was not a late game, macro game. Stalkers are an awful unit for cost, especially against roaches. And how many protoss players keep enough sentries around for efficient FF versus roaches in the late game. Stalkers advantages lie in their mobility and ability to shoot both air and ground, not in their ability to win a straight-up fight. This is why Stephano style is so strong, because they can annihilate anything a 2 base protoss throws at them aside from mass immortal (which gimps versus anything apart from roaches) and with roach speed you can force the protoss to engage in a place he doesn't want to, not mentioning that roaches are about half the cost of a stalker and about equal in 1v fights, especially where the toss has to engage straight up (such as defending your (insert expletive of choice here) natural from 125 supply of roaches) You certainly sir have inability to read. Blink stalkers are very good vs roaches but that was not my point. I'm talking about transitioning to late game when roach wont kill archons,motherships, colossi. Stalkers however are used to blink under broodlords and cause severe dmg, sniping them at a good rate. Stephano build - This is how you can't read before responding to someone's argument. I'm talking about late game with late game units. Not a 12 min around 3 base maxing on roaches with 60~ drones but rather a macro oriented game.
He did not mention Blink Stalkers, only stalkers so it would appear that before you accuse him of an ability to read, you may want to read more closely yourself.
Furthermore, your point earlier was completely wrong when you said roaches "were a terrible and useless unit". If that's not QQ, I'm not sure what is. I offrace Protoss at rank 2 Master and all zergs will do is Mass roach all game, and maybe add some infestors and hive tech. I'm not quite certain how you could claim that a unit as beefy as a roach that costs 75/25 is possibly, as you said, "terrible and useless unit."
You also generalized the roach to be poor against Terran as well, which once again, is completely wrong. Before making such outlandish statements, it may be best to improve your own play and move passed your clear biases and inadequacies in your own play.
|
I've been finding in ZvT that hellions are really not as big of a problem because of the queen change. I get just as many queens, and now if Terran dares to do drive by they get even more damage done by my queens. It really tweaks the match up so finely that Im sure it will have great effect on larger hellion numbers for pro-games. I think the heavy hellion openings will stop happening as frequently. Maybe Im just over expecting queen buff.
|
On May 06 2012 11:44 zmansman17 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2012 11:31 Lokerek wrote:On May 06 2012 10:45 Kingy604 wrote:On May 06 2012 10:01 Lokerek wrote:On May 06 2012 08:52 scypio wrote:On May 06 2012 05:05 Creem wrote:
Problem is that for zerg there's not much to gain for holding off the hellion-harass as terran is able to enter mid-game barely dented economically, again due to how cheap helions are to produce. If anything, the zerg is probably behind due to either being forced to make roaches (which are now all but useless) or due to the economical damage the helions inflicted. Nerchio makes a lot of roaches in games vs terrans and he can somehow find them useful. Today in the Ironsquid third-place match Nestea also won his game with roach-ling-bling. So I guess they are not that bad after all... They are terrible because they do not transfer into late game in ZvP and ZvT. If a terran makes marines or protoss makes stalkers which they can do faster than zerg usually gets roach warren, the units are still used as a powerful 3/3 late game unit. However if zerg player decides to keep roaches in late them then they get wrecked by 3/3 marines , upgraded tanks, shredded by colossus and archons, easily split with forcefields. As you said roach ling bling game from Nestea - That is not your late game unit and I haven't seen the game but I can guaranteed that was not a late game, macro game. Stalkers are an awful unit for cost, especially against roaches. And how many protoss players keep enough sentries around for efficient FF versus roaches in the late game. Stalkers advantages lie in their mobility and ability to shoot both air and ground, not in their ability to win a straight-up fight. This is why Stephano style is so strong, because they can annihilate anything a 2 base protoss throws at them aside from mass immortal (which gimps versus anything apart from roaches) and with roach speed you can force the protoss to engage in a place he doesn't want to, not mentioning that roaches are about half the cost of a stalker and about equal in 1v fights, especially where the toss has to engage straight up (such as defending your (insert expletive of choice here) natural from 125 supply of roaches) You certainly sir have inability to read. Blink stalkers are very good vs roaches but that was not my point. I'm talking about transitioning to late game when roach wont kill archons,motherships, colossi. Stalkers however are used to blink under broodlords and cause severe dmg, sniping them at a good rate. Stephano build - This is how you can't read before responding to someone's argument. I'm talking about late game with late game units. Not a 12 min around 3 base maxing on roaches with 60~ drones but rather a macro oriented game. He did not mention Blink Stalkers, only stalkers so it would appear that before you accuse him of an ability to read, you may want to read more closely yourself. Furthermore, your point earlier was completely wrong when you said roaches "were a terrible and useless unit". If that's not QQ, I'm not sure what is. I offrace Protoss at rank 2 Master and all zergs will do is Mass roach all game, and maybe add some infestors and hive tech. I'm not quite certain how you could claim that a unit as beefy as a roach that costs 75/25 is possibly, as you said, "terrible and useless unit." You also generalized the roach to be poor against Terran as well, which once again, is completely wrong. Before making such outlandish statements, it may be best to improve your own play and move passed your clear biases and inadequacies in your own play.
It clearly seems you are the one who can't read too.
My whole point was :
"They are terrible because they do not transfer into late game in ZvP and ZvT"
- At late game, stalkers always have blink in PROS game - they are balancing game for the pros.
- Roaches are terrible vs colossi,archon, stalker, mothership deathballs - Late game composition in ZvP
- If you happen to watch ZvT, late game is broodlords, infestors, crack lings - roaches are not present in late game
- Even vs terran mech roaches were only utilized to drops in production bases
- If you are going to claim roach counters mech - then you are talking about MID GAME which is true not LATE GAME
- They mass roaches in ZvP ? How cute ... But in those games you do not get late game unit compositions. The game is decided before that whether protoss defends or zerg wins. AND WE ARE TALKING ABOUT LATE GAME WITH LATE GAME UNIT COMPOSITIONS.
- You offrace as rank 2 Master on NA - Congratulations. I'm pretty sure you are the next big thing and going to win all the tournaments and show us all how to play the game. I want to see the mass roaches you meet on ladder to beat korean protosses. This balance talk is about games played by pro, not some scrubs on NA server.
- One guy already proved he can get to GM on EU/NA by 6 pool opening every game. His games are as much of a value to balance as your 2nd rank offracing master.
|
On May 06 2012 11:06 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2012 10:55 corpuscle wrote:On May 06 2012 10:47 TheDraken wrote:On May 06 2012 10:31 mousez wrote:
Changing the range of queens from 3 to 5 pretty much kills reaper openings and probably a few others as well. I think that thats such a big change just to fight against the initial 4 hellions because it wont help once it gets more than that. it probably shuts down other early rush strategies as well as making a bunker rush much more difficult. i think it shuts down to many other strategies and doesnt really deal with the issue of hellions, which isnt that much of a threat as it has been around for over a year everything sounds fine to me. blizz making it easy to push back 4 hellions but not many more? isn't that the whole intent?? kill reapers? reapers are kinda already dead. don't neuter a whole race's early game just for your one unit. shuts down other early rush strategies? hm, might have been what they meant to do. makes bunker rush more difficult?? LOL. WHAT A TRAVESTY. Since when were pro Zergs struggling with reaper openings, reactor hellion, or 2rax? Yes, they die or take damage to it sometimes, but it's not like it's imbalanced. Terrans die to roach/baneling busts, should bunker health be increased to compensate...? I like how you're comparing standard openings to all-ins.
It's called an analogy. The point I was trying to make is "just because people sometimes lose against certain builds doesn't mean there's something wrong with the game."
die or take damage to them SOMETIMES? bro, like 80% of TvZ victories by terran are won with early hellions, a 2rax, or a bunker rush.
terrans don't NEED to successfully bunker rush to win. it's absurd that terrans operate with the mentality that if they can't reliably get a bunker up in the zerg's natural the game is somehow imbalanced.
Terrans don't need to bunker rush to win, no. It makes the game more interesting that they have the option, and I don't see any reason why it should be taken away when good Zergs so rarely lose to it.
And yes, most Terran wins are off of a 2rax, reactor hellion play, or bunker rush. Those are the 3 standard builds in the matchup, you almost never see Terrans doing anything else (I am including 1rax expand into reactor hellion as a variant of a reactor hellion build). It's completely idiotic to say "well most of the time Terran wins, they used a standard build!" I could just as easily say "most of the time Zerg wins, they go 15hatch!"
|
It'd be nice to see Terran get a few small buffs to fix the imbalance (however big or small) in TvP atm. It's sad to see even the most macro-oriented player in the game (IMMvp) have to resort to cheesing a foreign Protoss player in the GSL quarter finals, those are not games I want to watch as a spectator.
Nerf bio, buff another couple of units (maybe add +damage to mechanical to thor or tank?) so that we don't see just pure bio versus a much wider range of units for the Protoss.
The zerg changes are good, zergs are struggling recently.
|
On May 06 2012 12:33 InoyouS2 wrote:
It'd be nice to see Terran get a few small buffs to fix the imbalance (however big or small) in TvP atm. It's sad to see even the most macro-oriented player in the game (IMMvp) have to resort to cheesing a foreign Protoss player in the GSL quarter finals, those are not games I want to watch as a spectator.
Nerf bio, buff another couple of units (maybe add +damage to mechanical to thor or tank?) so that we don't see just pure bio versus a much wider range of units for the Protoss.
The zerg changes are good, zergs are struggling recently.
Nerfing bio would have a huge spill over effect to TvT and TvZ though.
|
On May 06 2012 12:33 InoyouS2 wrote:
It'd be nice to see Terran get a few small buffs to fix the imbalance (however big or small) in TvP atm. It's sad to see even the most macro-oriented player in the game (IMMvp) have to resort to cheesing a foreign Protoss player in the GSL quarter finals, those are not games I want to watch as a spectator.
Nerf bio, buff another couple of units (maybe add +damage to mechanical to thor or tank?) so that we don't see just pure bio versus a much wider range of units for the Protoss.
The zerg changes are good, zergs are struggling recently.
I think they could help out Zerg and Terran in one fell swoop by reverting the upgrade cost change, maybe not all the way but increasing the costs by 25/25 or something. It's a tiny bit of help against +1 zealot pressure and +2 blink builds, and obviously nerfs double forge pretty hard.
|
On May 06 2012 12:36 corpuscle wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2012 12:33 InoyouS2 wrote:
It'd be nice to see Terran get a few small buffs to fix the imbalance (however big or small) in TvP atm. It's sad to see even the most macro-oriented player in the game (IMMvp) have to resort to cheesing a foreign Protoss player in the GSL quarter finals, those are not games I want to watch as a spectator.
Nerf bio, buff another couple of units (maybe add +damage to mechanical to thor or tank?) so that we don't see just pure bio versus a much wider range of units for the Protoss.
The zerg changes are good, zergs are struggling recently.
I think they could help out Zerg and Terran in one fell swoop by reverting the upgrade cost change, maybe not all the way but increasing the costs by 25/25 or something. It's a tiny bit of help against +1 zealot pressure and +2 blink builds, and obviously nerfs double forge pretty hard.
Agree - Even as a zerg player, watching TvP is disgusting if you cannot have macro orient but you have to cheese.
|
On May 06 2012 04:34 Xapti wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2012 04:33 convention wrote:
If an all-in has only a 50% win rate when it is unscouted, then no one would ever do it. No. All-in builds are useful because they give lower skill level players a higher chance of winning. Their chances of winning could be down around 10-40% without doing an all-in tactic. That said, it is probably somewhat higher than 50% though. Thing is, there are so many variables when dealing with percentages — the map, the specific all-in, when it's noticed, how good the player is at the all-in, how good the players are in general, etc.. It's pretty much impossible to just take the "average" of all of those values Show nested quote +On May 04 2012 20:42 teamhozac wrote:On May 04 2012 15:52 Wes-Palladini wrote:On May 03 2012 09:01 Jumbled wrote:On May 03 2012 08:57 Toppp wrote:
Pretty sad that they arent in touch with terrans current place.. I feel like they just took those complaints straight from the Battle.net forums.. 50 energy starting queen isn't taking into account late game creep spread which will be godlike and all queens will have a massive useless pileup of energy that will be spent mostly on pure creep tumors, which in return will have everyones creeps pread looking like seals.. In most games, creep spread actually tends to peak around the late midgame. Beyond that, P and T have enough detection and damage wandering around that it becomes hard for Zergs to push the creep out further unless they're really dominating. Agree, adding more starting energy to get an earlier creep tumor is going to do very little for zerg in ZvT. The first 2 hellions will just kill it like usual. Increasing overlord speed is a good idea or please just fix Korhal Compound. As it is right now Terran can get 2 marines out to kill the first overlord before it makes it safely behind the enemies natural. I still think Thors are OP. Too easy for Terran to pump them off of 2 bases, A attack into any zerg composition and just stomp. Please reduce contaminate cost on overseers so at least zerg has a chance to delay thors from coming out. I cant remember the last time I even saw a pro use contaminate. Thor OP? lol youve got to be kidding right? I would actually agree that they are overpowered. You just need to understand what overpowered is, or at least the definition of the person saying it. Thors can be countered at high level play in a fashion that makes them nothing special, but that dosen't instantly mean that they aren't overpowered. Thors can be very hard to counter at lower levels if the opponent just masses them, generally with some hellion support or even tank support, and gets 2-2 or 3-3 upgrades. I've seen this strategy used effectively at masters level, or even professional play. I'm not saying it can't be countered, but it's not simple (unless they clump all the thors into a little ball).
this is exactly why ppl of lower skill should NEVER engage in discussions about balance...... u have no clue what u are talking about bro.
like literally no clue....
|
On May 06 2012 12:28 corpuscle wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2012 11:06 WolfintheSheep wrote:On May 06 2012 10:55 corpuscle wrote:On May 06 2012 10:47 TheDraken wrote:On May 06 2012 10:31 mousez wrote:
Changing the range of queens from 3 to 5 pretty much kills reaper openings and probably a few others as well. I think that thats such a big change just to fight against the initial 4 hellions because it wont help once it gets more than that. it probably shuts down other early rush strategies as well as making a bunker rush much more difficult. i think it shuts down to many other strategies and doesnt really deal with the issue of hellions, which isnt that much of a threat as it has been around for over a year everything sounds fine to me. blizz making it easy to push back 4 hellions but not many more? isn't that the whole intent?? kill reapers? reapers are kinda already dead. don't neuter a whole race's early game just for your one unit. shuts down other early rush strategies? hm, might have been what they meant to do. makes bunker rush more difficult?? LOL. WHAT A TRAVESTY. Since when were pro Zergs struggling with reaper openings, reactor hellion, or 2rax? Yes, they die or take damage to it sometimes, but it's not like it's imbalanced. Terrans die to roach/baneling busts, should bunker health be increased to compensate...? I like how you're comparing standard openings to all-ins. It's called an analogy. The point I was trying to make is "just because people sometimes lose against certain builds doesn't mean there's something wrong with the game." Show nested quote +die or take damage to them SOMETIMES? bro, like 80% of TvZ victories by terran are won with early hellions, a 2rax, or a bunker rush.
terrans don't NEED to successfully bunker rush to win. it's absurd that terrans operate with the mentality that if they can't reliably get a bunker up in the zerg's natural the game is somehow imbalanced. Terrans don't need to bunker rush to win, no. It makes the game more interesting that they have the option, and I don't see any reason why it should be taken away when good Zergs so rarely lose to it. And yes, most Terran wins are off of a 2rax, reactor hellion play, or bunker rush. Those are the 3 standard builds in the matchup, you almost never see Terrans doing anything else (I am including 1rax expand into reactor hellion as a variant of a reactor hellion build). It's completely idiotic to say "well most of the time Terran wins, they used a standard build!" I could just as easily say "most of the time Zerg wins, they go 15hatch!"
See how he said something stupid to respond to your stupid analogy? Yeah, don't say stupid things.
Queen range change seems like a nice fix IMO. Should tone down build order wins (proxy 2rax vs hatch first) by making the standard a little stronger against dedicated rushes, and more solid against pressures (assuming 4queen openers become standard). It also means the things that were possibilities don't change (ie. creep spread is just as fast), it's just harder to respond to it (which forces adaption - good thing!).
The reaper should really be ignored for the purposes of balancing the game - it's already been made 99.99% irrelevant intentionally. The unit just needs a redesign at this point. They can balance around the HotS variant (with health regen and such) later.
The most interesting thing about the new fix is that it doesn't really remove real strategies. You can still micro around 5 range queens so 2rax shouldn't completely die, getting bunkers up will just be harder, as maybe it should be. Ling/baneling attacks will still be super effective, queens will just be better at focusing down banelings. Mass hellion builds will still kill players that don't scout it or sim (or make many queens). Build order wins should go down and scouting ability should go up, giving good players more room to be good.
Seems solid.
|
On May 06 2012 01:38 sieksdekciw wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2012 01:35 teamhozac wrote:
[
How about zerg just starts with 80 drones and three hatches and we play catch up? Apparently that is what they want That's what they are getting. Terran, the race that is 30% less than zerg in ladder and that has no single foreigner that won any tournament but 1, is not being buffed, but zerg and toss, the races with most representation on ladder, aare being buffed. Seems legit.
My last 61 games in Plat EU (since my ~3 month hiatus):
28 ZvZs
24 ZvTs
9 ZvPs
Buff Protoss? Or is that sort of statistic useless, especially for balancing? I'm gonna go with the latter.
|
No, protoss are placed higer in the ladder, thus you don't see a gold or lower protoss because of how easy this race is.
|
On May 06 2012 12:26 Lokerek wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2012 11:44 zmansman17 wrote:On May 06 2012 11:31 Lokerek wrote:On May 06 2012 10:45 Kingy604 wrote:On May 06 2012 10:01 Lokerek wrote:On May 06 2012 08:52 scypio wrote:On May 06 2012 05:05 Creem wrote:
Problem is that for zerg there's not much to gain for holding off the hellion-harass as terran is able to enter mid-game barely dented economically, again due to how cheap helions are to produce. If anything, the zerg is probably behind due to either being forced to make roaches (which are now all but useless) or due to the economical damage the helions inflicted. Nerchio makes a lot of roaches in games vs terrans and he can somehow find them useful. Today in the Ironsquid third-place match Nestea also won his game with roach-ling-bling. So I guess they are not that bad after all... They are terrible because they do not transfer into late game in ZvP and ZvT. If a terran makes marines or protoss makes stalkers which they can do faster than zerg usually gets roach warren, the units are still used as a powerful 3/3 late game unit. However if zerg player decides to keep roaches in late them then they get wrecked by 3/3 marines , upgraded tanks, shredded by colossus and archons, easily split with forcefields. As you said roach ling bling game from Nestea - That is not your late game unit and I haven't seen the game but I can guaranteed that was not a late game, macro game. Stalkers are an awful unit for cost, especially against roaches. And how many protoss players keep enough sentries around for efficient FF versus roaches in the late game. Stalkers advantages lie in their mobility and ability to shoot both air and ground, not in their ability to win a straight-up fight. This is why Stephano style is so strong, because they can annihilate anything a 2 base protoss throws at them aside from mass immortal (which gimps versus anything apart from roaches) and with roach speed you can force the protoss to engage in a place he doesn't want to, not mentioning that roaches are about half the cost of a stalker and about equal in 1v fights, especially where the toss has to engage straight up (such as defending your (insert expletive of choice here) natural from 125 supply of roaches) You certainly sir have inability to read. Blink stalkers are very good vs roaches but that was not my point. I'm talking about transitioning to late game when roach wont kill archons,motherships, colossi. Stalkers however are used to blink under broodlords and cause severe dmg, sniping them at a good rate. Stephano build - This is how you can't read before responding to someone's argument. I'm talking about late game with late game units. Not a 12 min around 3 base maxing on roaches with 60~ drones but rather a macro oriented game. He did not mention Blink Stalkers, only stalkers so it would appear that before you accuse him of an ability to read, you may want to read more closely yourself. Furthermore, your point earlier was completely wrong when you said roaches "were a terrible and useless unit". If that's not QQ, I'm not sure what is. I offrace Protoss at rank 2 Master and all zergs will do is Mass roach all game, and maybe add some infestors and hive tech. I'm not quite certain how you could claim that a unit as beefy as a roach that costs 75/25 is possibly, as you said, "terrible and useless unit." You also generalized the roach to be poor against Terran as well, which once again, is completely wrong. Before making such outlandish statements, it may be best to improve your own play and move passed your clear biases and inadequacies in your own play. It clearly seems you are the one who can't read too. My whole point was : "They are terrible because they do not transfer into late game in ZvP and ZvT" - At late game, stalkers always have blink in PROS game - they are balancing game for the pros. - Roaches are terrible vs colossi,archon, stalker, mothership deathballs - Late game composition in ZvP - If you happen to watch ZvT, late game is broodlords, infestors, crack lings - roaches are not present in late game - Even vs terran mech roaches were only utilized to drops in production bases - If you are going to claim roach counters mech - then you are talking about MID GAME which is true not LATE GAME - They mass roaches in ZvP ? How cute ... But in those games you do not get late game unit compositions. The game is decided before that whether protoss defends or zerg wins. AND WE ARE TALKING ABOUT LATE GAME WITH LATE GAME UNIT COMPOSITIONS. - You offrace as rank 2 Master on NA - Congratulations. I'm pretty sure you are the next big thing and going to win all the tournaments and show us all how to play the game. I want to see the mass roaches you meet on ladder to beat korean protosses. This balance talk is about games played by pro, not some scrubs on NA server. - One guy already proved he can get to GM on EU/NA by 6 pool opening every game. His games are as much of a value to balance as your 2nd rank offracing master.
Roaches are not an endgame unit, they are a midgame unit. If you're still on Roach tech vs P/T when you're both maxed, then you were really far behind all game or you just decided to make a bad late game unit composition.
They're certain not "bad". They are ridiculously cost effective in the midgame and as long as you keep the game in a midgame stage, they'll always be good.
|
For a full year of struggling protoss many said that people should just wait and let the protoss adapt. Now that protoss are winning everyone is quick to spout NERF THAT S**T. I think that we should have patience and let Terran adapt this time. It's good to not be the owning race every once in a while. Maybe patches will come, maybe they won't, but let's give terrans some time to adapt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
