|
This thread is going nowhere and I'm tired of dealing with it. Either drop the personal attacks and whining and replace it with actual discussion or it'll be closed.
12:09 KST Page 98 |
On June 22 2012 09:39 NAPoleonSC wrote:
I don't know if I can put in anything useful that isn't already said on this thread but... if Tech Reactors(from the campaign) can be made on rax/fact/ports once a Fusion Core has been put down, would it help fix Terran late game?
EDIT: Existing Reactors and Tech labs can also be able to change into Tech Reactors as well.
It guess it could be helpful. You could transition faster with less production facilities and switch what you produce without having to switch addons OR building an ungodly amount of production with techalbs. Its especially annoying with Starports and Factories that cost 100 Gas each.
Wouldn't change anything about the strengh of Terran units though.
|
On June 22 2012 08:12 submarine wrote:
Seriously 2 port banshee is nothing new, and the response from zerg was always queens and spores. It worked when zerg did scout it too late to get the anti air out. In the current meta game with a lot of queens and especially with faster overlords in better positions its more likely that zerg scouts it in time, and he already has the queens. I do not understand how this solves anything especially since the patch. The circumstances for 2 port banshee to work were far better before the patch. And it was not a very good standard build back then. There is quite a lot of shit that can take games of pro players when they play at 50% on ladder. That does not prove anything.
this is a good post. its indicative of much of sc2 balancing. blizzard touches something, all of a sudden players jump on it despite the minimal changes. protoss upgrade "buff" is prime example. queens still do the same dps. the range now just matches marines and hellions.
|
T.O.P.
Hong Kong4685 Posts
TBH, as a zerg player. I would be cool with keeping queen at 5 range, but nerfing infestors so that fungal cost 100 energy. I know infestors are imba based on zvz.
|
On June 22 2012 09:52 a176 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2012 08:12 submarine wrote:
Seriously 2 port banshee is nothing new, and the response from zerg was always queens and spores. It worked when zerg did scout it too late to get the anti air out. In the current meta game with a lot of queens and especially with faster overlords in better positions its more likely that zerg scouts it in time, and he already has the queens. I do not understand how this solves anything especially since the patch. The circumstances for 2 port banshee to work were far better before the patch. And it was not a very good standard build back then. There is quite a lot of shit that can take games of pro players when they play at 50% on ladder. That does not prove anything. this is a good post. its indicative of much of sc2 balancing. blizzard touches something, all of a sudden players jump on it despite the minimal changes. protoss upgrade "buff" is prime example. queens still do the same dps. the range now just matches marines and hellions.
3->5 range isn't really "minimal"
3->4 or so can be however.
|
In my opinion Blizzard does not know how to balance a game. Honestly, I just wish that SC2 would continue to die out and a truly balanced RTS game such as a new COH or Supcom game will be released and take the RTS crown. I also think that asymmetrical balanced is pointless and a game can still be very exciting and unique using symetrical balance where all races are balanced at all parts of the game but just have a different tool set or unique units that balance out.
Right now SC2 is extremely unbalanced in my opinion. One look at Terrans late game in TvZ and TvP a long with the different macro mechanics of the races and its extremely apparent.
Also, to make the game more spectator friendly I'd even suggest getting rid of all macro, most people dont want to wait and see two players build nothing but workers and buildings for the first 6-7 minutes of the game before anything might happen. Make the game more fluid and spectator friendly and SC2 would grow because most spectators watch the game for the big battles and strong micro/positioning that the game requires, not the macro aspect.
|
On June 22 2012 09:36 MrCon wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2012 09:16 Holophonist wrote:On June 22 2012 06:52 Destructicon wrote:On June 22 2012 06:43 Holophonist wrote:On June 22 2012 06:34 Vindicare605 wrote:On June 22 2012 06:23 Holophonist wrote:On June 22 2012 06:17 bLo0d wrote:On June 22 2012 06:07 Holophonist wrote:On June 22 2012 05:58 scypio wrote:On June 22 2012 05:47 Holophonist wrote:
I didn't say when you clean up creep. I'm merely saying that if there's too much creep to attack, don't attack. clean up the creep and go home. I see so many (and play so many) zvts where terrans still TRY to be aggressive, and then cry when it doesn't work. It's not SUPPOSED to work anymore, that was the point of the buff.
Go home and do what exactly? Buld a couple of thors? Two BCs? Or maybe a bunch of ravens? It is official statement from Blizzard: T has to do early/mid game damage to have a shot at the lategame. And clearing out a couple of tumors will not do the trick. This kind of discussion really isn't helpful at all. The things you have to do to win this game (particularly the later in the game we're talking about), really can't be written out well enough to fully describe the situation. I'm not going to sit here and theory craft with you, as that really doesn't get anybody anywhere. Who would've thought that roaches (even roach drops for heavens sake!) could be a viable counter to stargate play in zvp. You don't think it's feasible to get 3 CC's, start 1/1, get medivacs out and begin to apply pressure using bio? Your first push may get crushed, at the expense of a considerable amount of gas, but bio play on 3 bases can be sustained for a LONG time, giving you a ton of time to trade cost efficiently and while expanding behind it. The point: have some humility and please realize that it may take more than a month for terran to come up with a new playstyle. Do you think it was good for the game to have hellions just plainly parked outside of the zerg natural, denying all creep/ling scouts until speed was done or until you got mutas out? That wasn't good for the game either. Game was perfectly fine before the patch. The period before speedlings, roaches, or mutas were out to push back hellions was Terran's period of map control. After hellions are gone, Zerg has map control with muta and can drone up their third while denying the third of terran. Terrans rarely left their base except possibly with a few drops until they stabilized defenses from muta. On both ends, hellion control and muta control rewarded the player with extended periods of map control. As is, unit control is almost nonexistant in the early game, no amount of hellion control would break through 4 queens, while zerg just has to transfuse. Not only is it broken, it also is very boring. The micro dynamic of the early - mid game with hellions and muta harrass is gone. Also going mutas gave Terran a chance to do damage before a full Hive tech tree was completed. As is, Hive tech at 15 minutes is just the standard and Terran aren't given any time to breathe. With mutas, Zerg had to do some damage to terran and keep him contained long enough to make the mutas worth it, which the best players were able to do. It was a back and forth of defensive vs offensive play. Now, all the burden is on terran all the time. Zerg just deflects attacks as it takes an uninterrupted tech path to Ultra/Brood infestor. ding larva. I understand the point about mutas rewarding the better play moreso than the current metagame does. And I agree that tvz was fine before the patch, for the most part. Long tvz's were often by far the best examples of what sc2 has to offer. The ones that WEREN'T entertaining or impressive were the early wins like marauder hellion, cloak banshee (not so much anymore), etc. And the point of the patch is to get rid of those games. The only question is "can terrans figure out a way to play the matchup that doesn't incorporate as much early aggression/cheese?" If they can't, hopefully blizz will change something to fix that. My point is that we're not at the point yet where we know whether or not they're capable of figuring that out. There's a big difference between giving Zerg tools to hold all ins, and making them immune to early pressure. Zergs were already dealing with Terran aggression pre-patch. Zergs like DRG could slap away any attempt at early pressure while droning safely and his ability to do that was what got him the label as the best Zerg in the world. Now? Any Zerg can do it thanks to the Queens. The beautiful skill that was displayed by DRG in his ability to play as greedy as possible and still survive is completely pointless now. DRG could do it BECAUSE he was the best zerg in the world. And I still think you're missing the point. MAYBE "early pressure" should be looked at differently. Maybe what timing attack you would do before should now just be meant to clean up creep and produce units, rather than trying to deny a third/kill them/whatever. The point is, WE DON'T KNOW YET. Stop being stubborn, nearly 50% win rate in TvZ indicates that the way it used to be was the way it was supposed to be. Simple game mechanics, zerg doesn't have many micro options, but they have strong macro options. Zerg units individually are weak but they scale well in numbers and are cheep. Zerg has larva and injects, this allows them to build lots of units quickly to overcome their individual weakness. Because of injects the zerg can get a huge economy advantage over both protoss or terrans if left alone. To keep the zerg economy in check, terrans did certain timings to force more units instead of drones, spines, slow down the expansions and deny creep. If those objectives can't be fulfilled zergs just explode out of control. What you are seeing now is the situation spiral out of control because terran late game is shit, and even if it wasn't, the zerg will still have a huge bank because he has maxed out faster then the terran. You say timings should be to "deny" creep spread and make units? The zerg will just laugh in your face, he will just send his queens back out to put down tumors on area you just cleared or, if it gets to the mid game, he'll just intercept your army and kill it on creep. You can fight to deny his creep all day while he is more then happy to sit back at home, get 3/3, infestors and then his preferred tech choose of either Ultralisks or Brood Lords, which by the way work great with those 6 queens that he kept alive and used in the early and mid game to spread creep. Do you really not realize how absurd you sound? Do you really not see how full of holes your argument really is? Please, stop insulting me and start reading what I say, ok? a 50% winrate says nothing about how the matchup is played. They didn't like how many tvz's ended in some random terran all-in, which is the point of the buff. It's downright moronic to just say a 50% winrate = a completely balanced matchup. So they gave the queen a buff to try and reduce the amount of games like that. If terrans continue to struggle, you'll get your buff/zerg nerf. But 1 month is NOT enough time to say definitively that you need it. You still don't get it (more likely you feign not getting it) What you are saying is before the patch the matchup was balanced but bad. You can't honestly think that. I refuse to think someone can be biased to the point of honestly thinking that. I don't remember seeing a lot of terran allins before the patch. But I see a lot more of terran allins since the patch. The matchup is better ? Oh yeah you think it is, because now you can defend them 99% of the time. I now understand what your definition of a good matchup is. It's obvious you're not in this thread for anything else that provoking people. All your posts are uninformed at best, dishonest at worst.
You seriously need to calm the hell down and start paying more attention This is such a waste of time to reply to somebody like you because it's all just defending myself from shit I never said and trying to get you to calm down and think rationally.
I'm not trying to make the point that the matchup is currently objectively better in the current state it's in.... just like how I never said the matchup is currently ok. And wtf are you even talking about bias? I never said it was imbalanced for terran before, but I do think it was too easy for terran to win in the early game. That shouldn't be. period. end of story. That should be removed from the game. Clearly blizzard felt the same way, so they buffed the queen specifically to change the matchup in that way. I'm also not saying that terran should never get a buff! All I'm saying is give it more than a month or two, for goodness sake. Do you understand?
|
On June 22 2012 10:14 Sovern wrote:
In my opinion Blizzard does not know how to balance a game. Honestly, I just wish that SC2 would continue to die out and a truly balanced RTS game such as a new COH or Supcom game will be released and take the RTS crown. I also think that asymmetrical balanced is pointless and a game can still be very exciting and unique using symetrical balance where all races are balanced at all parts of the game but just have a different tool set or unique units that balance out.
Right now SC2 is extremely unbalanced in my opinion. One look at Terrans late game in TvZ and TvP a long with the different macro mechanics of the races and its extremely apparent.
Also, to make the game more spectator friendly I'd even suggest getting rid of all macro, most people dont want to wait and see two players build nothing but workers and buildings for the first 6-7 minutes of the game before anything might happen. Make the game more fluid and spectator friendly and SC2 would grow because most spectators watch the game for the big battles and strong micro/positioning that the game requires, not the macro aspect.
yet emphasis on macro didn't stop bw and sc2 from being the most popular and most competitive RTS ever
rts just isn't as popular as moba, dumbing it down won't change that
|
The queen buff is obviously part of a plot to re-introduce rocks on all possible third bases. Maybe up their hp/armor a little. Dustin Browder thinks big picture.
|
Canada39254 Posts
|
It might make a lot more sense if the Hatchery stopped producing larva when producing a queen, and the larva inject timer would reset if a queen production was started there, resuming only when the queen finished.
This would solve the problem of the Zerg essentially getting infinite eco at the same time as getting combat units.
EDIT: That video is extremely interesting, wow.
|
I'm not a big fan of putting Naruto's stuff in a balance blog. He's always been one to cry.
I enjoy the new queen, it feels like a legit fighting unit
|
You know, when people actually make a living playing the game rather than playing it for fun, and Blizzard can just literally change their competitiveness (directly impacting their income stream) via constant balance patches, I would imagine that pros must really, really dislike David Kim/Browder, much more than any of the casual players do.
|
I'd just like to say the real problem is Terran's late game is too weak. The Queen buff simply reduced the best chances Terran had to slow Zerg's early economy, exposing Terran's late game problem. I'd be happy to let Queens keep Range 5 (though why not try it at 4) if we could get anything that made BCs and/or HSMs more viable late.
|
I agree with your point. I attended the GESL tournament recently and all the finals and semi finals were all zergs. 6+ hours of zvz's. It was so, boring. -__- Maybe this patch will force sky terran backed up by some siege tanks to be the new norm. The question is, how do we get to that heavy gas fed stage in the game without being overwhelmed in early game by any pressure.
|
tvz srsly needs some sort of fix... either revert patch or give us back science vessle.
|
On June 22 2012 09:39 NAPoleonSC wrote:
I don't know if I can put in anything useful that isn't already said on this thread but... if Tech Reactors(from the campaign) can be made on rax/fact/ports once a Fusion Core has been put down, would it help fix Terran late game?
EDIT: Existing Reactors and Tech labs can also be able to change into Tech Reactors as well.
yeah I also thought about an upgrade, costing 150/150 in the fusion core, that turns every add on into a tech reactor and buildings w/ addons can only build a tech reactor for 50/25 at the building speed of a techlab once the research is complete.
This would give Terran the ability to techswitch way more smoothly in the lategame (you could build raven/bc/banshees from your starport without switching addons, you could build some hellions at a necessary rate without switching addons).
It would make Terran late game much more versatile... Factories and Starports are very expensive, add ons too. Add on switching takes up a lot of actions and time and resets the waypoints of the production facility. In the lategame you are oftentimes very busy with the movement of several troups of units, scouting and fighting.
The possibility with a tech reactor would give terran a lot of options for creativity and usage of very underused units.
|
On June 22 2012 10:41 Shady Sands wrote:
It might make a lot more sense if the Hatchery stopped producing larva when producing a queen, and the larva inject timer would reset if a queen production was started there, resuming only when the queen finished.
This would solve the problem of the Zerg essentially getting infinite eco at the same time as getting combat units.
EDIT: That video is extremely interesting, wow.
this thread is a hilarious expose of people making ridiculous statements like these.
srsly man, in what world does that make sense?
|
On June 22 2012 10:50 Shady Sands wrote:
You know, when people actually make a living playing the game rather than playing it for fun, and Blizzard can just literally change their competitiveness (directly impacting their income stream) via constant balance patches, I would imagine that pros must really, really dislike David Kim/Browder, much more than any of the casual players do.
Yeah I agree. I don't think this level of complaints have been this strong ever since the KA removal.
|
Select, Mvp, and Polt have also stated in various interviews, flat out, that TvZ is essentially unwinnable atm.
|
On June 22 2012 11:20 Blyadischa wrote:Select, Mvp, and Polt have also stated in various interviews, flat out, that TvZ is essentially unwinnable atm.
so unwinnable that terrans are starting to win again
oops!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
